In my post two weeks ago on Pope Leo’s apology for the Church’s stand on slavery over the centuries, I promised to discuss his much-anticipated encyclical, or
formal papal pastoral letter, on artificial intelligence. That time has
arrived.
When you
consider the upcoming stakes for AI (one analyst I heard this past said it had
greater potential to affect humanity than space exploration), there has been
precious little time devoted to how to ensure it serves rather than degrades
humanity.
By
reminding tech lords, legislators, and ordinary citizens of that basic
principle, Leo’s examination of this new force in our lives can potentially
kick-start and even frame the debates that should be taking place now in the
public square.
Fully
cognizant of AI’s potential benefits, Leo is anything but a technological
Cassandra. (Though predictably, the Murdoch-owned Wall Street Journal
has turned up its nose at the pope’s urging to install brakes on the runaway
technology, with op-ed contributor Louise Perry snidely asking, “Does the Pope Use Air Conditioning”?)
At the
other end of the political spectrum, some have written that Leo has not gone
far enough in denouncing the ills now becoming apparent in AI.
But his
caution only enhances his case that this new technology cannot develop
without safeguards that rest on human morality, and in particular on the
Catholic Church’s notions on the market economy, technology, and social justice
dating back to the groundbreaking encyclical of his predecessor and namesake
Pope Leo XIII, Rerum Novarum (1891).
Leo XIV
has called for measures ensure the dignity of work in the face of
AI, including regulating private companies’ AI development and retraining
workers whose jobs are threatened. He has also advocated for critical thinking
education about the technology.
It’s not
just the danger to livelihoods that concerns the Vatican, however, but also
AI’s potential misuse for modern warfare:
“The
growing ease with which autonomous weapons systems can be deployed makes war
more ‘feasible’ and less subject to human control. This violates the principle
that armed force should be used only as a last resort in cases of legitimate
self-defense. For this reason, the development and use of AI in warfare must be
subject to the most rigorous ethical constraints, to guarantee respect for
human dignity and the sanctity of life and to avoid a race to develop such
arms.”
In
addition, the encyclical raises the alarm about transhumanism, or
enhancing human beings through technologies, and posthumanism, which,
imagines “a hybrid of human beings, machines and the environment.”
The
ultimate impact of these two forces, according to the encyclical, could be to
make it “easier to accept that some lives are less useful, less desirable or
less worthy…placing the burden on the most vulnerable in pursuit of a supposed
optimization of the species.”
As Fordham Univ. papal expert David
Gibson’s op-ed last month in The New York Times observed, Magnifica
Humanitas has arrived at a “propitious moment,” when “The
disruptions of the post-liberal world and the threats posed by A.I. have led
many cultural conservatives to make economic justice a priority.”
Even
President Trump, who early in his second term likened placing limits on high
tech to restricting the growth of a baby, felt compelled to sign an executive order early this month calling for AI companies to voluntarily provide the federal government access to “covered frontier models” for a cybersecurity review up to 30 days before their planned release to “other
trusted partners.” It came amid sudden alarm that some powerful AI models
autonomously identify and exploit hidden vulnerabilities in real-world
software.
It will be
up to the tech barons whether they will enter into dialogue with the pope and
other advocates for a more deliberate, regulated AI pace or if they will
continue to proceed with no guardrails. But Leo has spelled out the moral
stakes in no uncertain terms.
No comments:
Post a Comment