QUESTION : We are living in an era of Artificial Intelligence. Will AI take the place of human beings in future? How does the Church address this issue? – Ralph Wilfred

ANSWER: Saji Mathew Kanayankal CST

The Church tries to address the challenges of AI on various occasions. The latest attempt of the Church can be seen in a recent document, Antiqua et Nova, published jointly by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Dicastery for Culture and Education, on 28 January 2025. This note reflects on the current challenges and opportunities posed by scientific and technological advancements, particularly by AI. It is firm in saying that the Church encourages all developments in science and technology because all ‘human abilities and creativity come from God’ and if used rightly, it glorifies God. However, the present experiments of AI threaten human beings in various ways. A proper understanding of Human Intelligence will facilitate our engagement with AI creatively.

Artificial Intelligence A Challenge to Human Beings?

The concept of intelligence in AI, which describes the behaviours of machines like human beings, has evolved taking ideas from different disciplines. From the initial simple tasks, AI has developed into more complex sophisticated forms. Now AI can ‘predict’ outcomes and propose new approaches, mimicking some cognitive processes typical of human problem-solving. “Together, these technologies enable AI systems to respond to various forms of human input, adapt to new situations, and even suggest novel solutions not anticipated by their original programmers.” While using it we have to be very conscious, because of its capacity to ‘supersede humans’. Many scientists claim that one day it may achieve the state of ‘superintelligence,’ surpassing human intellectual capacities, or contribute to “super-longevity” through advances in biotechnology. Thus, the eclipse humanity can be a remote possibility.

Though AI’s advanced features give it sophisticated abilities to perform tasks, it does not have the capacity to think. This distinction is crucially important, as the way ‘intelligence’ is defined, inevitably shapes how we understand the relationship between human thought and this technology.

This document uses the differentiation between Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Human Intelligence (HI), as a key to deepen the present discourses on AI. HI “is a faculty that pertains to the person in his or her entirety”, whereas in the context of AI, ‘intelligence’ should be understood “functionally, often with the presumption that the activities characteristic of the human mind can be broken down into digitized steps that machines can replicate.” In the case of AI, intelligence is limited to the performance of specific intellectual tasks, whereas for a human person, the acts of intellect are a comprehensive expression of “the full breadth of human experience, which includes abstraction, emotions, creativity, and the aesthetic, moral, and religious sensibilities.” In AI, the “intelligence” of a system is evaluated not only methodologically, but also reductively, based on its ability to produce appropriate responses. Though AI’s advanced features give it sophisticated abilities to perform tasks, it does not have the capacity to think. This distinction is crucially important, as the way ‘intelligence’ is defined, inevitably shapes how we understand the relationship between human thought and this technology.

The Wider Horizons of HI

The in-depth analysis of HI in the third part of the document within the parameters of philosophical and theological legacies of the past centuries, offers a more nuanced vision of HI. The most important element in HI is its relationality. Aristotle explained this relationship in terms of knowledge. By nature, all humans have the “desire to know,” and this capacity sets them apart from the animal world. Thomas Aquinas explained it in terms of “intellect and reason”. For Aquinas, these are “two modes in which the same intelligence operates”. “The term intellect is inferred from the inward grasp of the truth, while the name reason is taken from the inquisitive and discursive process.” Intellectus refers to the intuitive grasp of the truth, whereas ratio pertains to reasoning properly; the discursive, analytical process that leads to judgment. The term ‘rational’ encompasses all capacities of the human person, including those related to “knowing and understanding, as well as those of willing, loving, choosing, and desiring; it also includes all corporeal functions closely related to these abilities,” For the proper operation of the human being, these two faculties function together.

The dimension of embodiment, the composition of spirit and matter is another key specificity of humans. They are not “two natures united, but rather their union forms a single nature.” “The soul is not merely the immaterial ‘part’ of the person contained within the body, nor is the body an outer shell housing an intangible ‘core.’ Rather, the entire human person is simultaneously both material and spiritual.” Although the bodily existence of human beings is fundamental, they transcend the material world through the soul, which touches eternity and time. The human spirit does not exercise its normal mode of knowledge without the body. By using the scriptural concept of Imago Dei and the mystery of incarnation, Antiqua et Nova deepens the mystical and transcendental dimensions of humans. These scriptural insights help us to understand the self-possessed freedom of a human person. S/he can transcend the spatio-temporal realm and touch the ultimate. The noble spiritual experiences and the rich traditions of mysticism are various expressions of these multifaceted dimensions.

The interpersonal communicative ability, one of the inevitable aspects of the human person opens up wider and operative discourses on HI. By the very fact of relationality, human beings possess the capacity to know one another, to give themselves in love and to enter into communion with one another. “Human intelligence is not an isolated faculty but is exercised in relationships, finding its fullest expression in dialogue, collaboration, and solidarity.” This relational orientation of human beings is grounded in the ‘eternal self-giving of the Triune God’, which further leads them to love one another. As the document rightly points out, “love of God cannot be separated from love for one’s neighbour.”

Human intelligence, gifted with intellect and reason, explores reality beyond the domain of senses or utility and thus keeps always a quench for truth. “The desire for truth is part of human nature itself. It is an innate property of human reason to ask why things are as they are.” Moving beyond the limits of empirical data, human intelligence can “with genuine certitude attain to reality itself as knowable.” With this capacity, HI is open to realities that transcend the physical and created world and all truths attain their ultimate and original meaning in God. We have to understand the rationale behind ‘one’s total commitment to God’ from this perspective. Entrusting oneself to God is a “fundamental decision that engages the whole person.” In this way, the human person becomes fully what he or she is called to be.

All the more, responsibility towards creation is fundamental to human beings. The various developments of science and technology should be seen as the enhancement of imago Dei, for through their creative activities God is glorified. “In a proper relationship with creation, humans, on the one hand, use their intelligence and skill to cooperate with God in guiding creation toward the purpose to which he has called it. On the other hand, creation itself, … helps the human mind to ascend gradually to the supreme Principle, who is God.”

AI lacks many aspects of HI. It is unable to replicate moral discernment or it cannot establish authentic relationships. Since AI relies solely on technology, it cannot offer fullness of understanding as against HI which encompasses the physical, emotional, social, moral, and spiritual dimensions of life. Unlike HI, which actively engages in all dimensions of reality, and is capable of surprising insights, AI completes only the functional tasks.

Finally, a comprehensive view of HI is very important to understand it properly. HI is an integral faculty by which the whole person engages with reality. This engagement embraces the full scope of one’s being: spiritual, cognitive, embodied, and relational. This document explains HI as a harmonious interplay of different realities in the life of a human person. In this broader sphere, poetries, drams, culture, civic cognition, indigenous wisdom etc., have their own role to play. “This engagement with reality unfolds in various ways, as each person, in his or her multifaceted individuality seeks to understand the world, relate to others, solve problems, express creativity, and pursue integral well-being through the harmonious interplay of the various dimensions of the person’s intelligence.” Here HI is to be understood as “the integration of truth into the moral and spiritual life of the person.” In this wider frame, HI should not be reduced to the mere acquisition of facts or the ability to perform specific tasks. Instead, “it involves the person’s openness to the ultimate questions of life and reflects an orientation toward the True and the Good.”

AI can indeed stimulate aspects of human reasoning and perform specific tasks with incredible speed and efficiency, but its computational abilities represent only a fraction of the broader capacities of the human mind. AI lacks many aspects of HI. It is unable to replicate moral discernment or it cannot establish authentic relationships. Since AI relies solely on technology, it cannot offer fullness of understanding as against HI which encompasses the physical, emotional, social, moral, and spiritual dimensions of life.  Unlike HI, which actively engages in all dimensions of reality, and is capable of surprising insights, AI completes only the functional tasks. As Pope Francis observes, “the very use of the word ‘intelligence’ in connection with AI ‘can prove misleading’ and risks overlooking what is most precious in the human person.