With Artificial Intelligence (AI) poised to take over the world (according to Big Tech companies, investors, world leaders, technology gurus and futuristic philosophers), the Vatican has just released a much-needed pause button in the form of a document entitled: “Antiqua et Nova” (“Ancient and New”), subtitled, “Note on the Relationship Between Artificial Intelligence and Human Intelligence.” 

There are serious ethical considerations about AI, and Antiqua Nova ably addresses the frontiers AI is broaching. We humans tend to dive into whatever is “new” and promises to make our lives “better”— often without weighing new against old, whether or not we need the new thing, and what constitutes a “better” life.

Can we resist AI taking over the world? In theory, yes. But what happens if governments and corporations jointly fund the takeover (happening as we speak), handing over millions of human jobs to computer software and robots? What if the tracking aspects of AI are surreptitiously embedded in everyday products, or worse, into our bodies? Surveillance from space, CCTV cameras, hidden cameras, etc., are already a reality—privacy laws be damned…or changed.

Advertisement

To say: “I’ll never opt to use AI,” might be aspirational, even praiseworthy, but it might not be possible if you have a smart phone, smart TV, tablet, if you ever use a computer, car or a credit card. 

AI is everywhere, working behind the scenes. We can, however, choose not to use advanced chatbots like ChatGPT, GenAI or Gemini, and instead do the “hard” work of sifting through for ourselves what a search engine offers us, or flipping through physical books to find information. We can choose not to allow AI to create “art,” videos, or manipulate a photo for us, but instead, do it ourselves: create, scan, upload an actual piece of artwork, or find one online, taking care to credit the artist or source. We can draw lines in the sand.

Advertisement

Are AI and transhumanism connected? Indeed. It seems there are roughly three camps of AI enthusiasts, the third of which are transhumanists. 1.) Those who see a place for AI in aiding humans; but the humans will always be in charge, not the machines. 2.) Those who envision AI subjugating humans, as it takes over almost all fields of industry, agriculture, education, healthcare, etc. 3.) Those who want humans to be enhanced by manipulating genes and melding biology (including brain function) with technology. 

 “But we’ve always used technology to aid the body! What about pacemakers and hearing aids?” Pacemakers and hearing aids are moral means to use because they “do what the body does.” The heart is made to beat, and it’s okay if it needs a little help to do that. Ears are for hearing, and it’s OK to get an assist. 

As a moral theologian priest said: “There’s nothing as natural as a prosthetic arm.” There’s no problem with it being “artificial,” because if someone lost an arm in an accident, an artificial arm will do what the natural arm was supposed to do. The problem with so-called “artificial intelligence,” is that “intelligence” is spiritual, and the province solely of persons (God, angels and humans). Since intelligence is spiritual and of the soul, it is also individual and personal as well. As “Antiqua et Nova” says: “A proper understanding of human intelligence cannot 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 to the true and the good.” 

Since human beings, not machines, make moral decisions, the “…ultimate responsibility for decisions made using AI rests with the human decision-makers, and…there is accountability for the use of AI at each stage of the decision-making process.” Furthermore, AI will never be conscious or sentient—it can only imitate humans (often with amazing verisimilitude) due to its programming, objectives, and analyzing capacities.

Advertisement

There is nothing essential or inevitable about “The Singularity,” i.e., Artificial Intelligence running the world. We don’t have to give over billions of human jobs/skills/avocations and declare the replaced humans “not needed,” “useless” as Bill Gates and Yuval Noah Harari say.

As Marshall McLuhan once warned: “We form our tools and then they form us”…but only if we let them.