NEWS: August 5, 2026
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Bird’s Eye View of the News
MAGNIFICA HUMANITAS, PROS & CONS - IV –
After wandering through themes unnecessary for evaluating Artificial Intelligence, Magnifica humanitas – MH – finally enters the matter. I will summarize its content to help Catholics to know what is worthwhile about Artificial Intelligence in this Encyclical. My plan is to address: 1. The definition of AI; 2. The criteria to judge it; 3. Its advantages b; 4. Its risks; 5. The ideal solution to avoid these risks; 6. The measures to attain this solution; 7. What is missing in the papal analysis.
/bev321_AI.jpg)
In the list below, I will only indicate the valid points according to common sense. The other points, deeply stained with Progressivism – socialist, ecologist and inclusive criteria, attacks on inequalities, defense of revolutionary liberty, fraternity, human rights etc. – I considered already rebuffed in my three previous articles on MH.
1. What AI is
When Pope Leo XIV in MH starts to analyze Artificial Intelligence, he writes:
/bev321_Obs.jpg)
“All of us, including those who design them, possess only a limited understanding of their actual functioning. Indeed, current AI systems are more ‘cultivated’ than ‘built,’ for developers do not directly design every detail, but instead create a framework within which the intelligence ‘grows.’ As a result, fundamental scientific aspects – such as the internal representations and computational processes of these systems – remain, at present, unknown. There thus emerges an urgent need for a twofold commitment: on the one hand, a deepening of scientific research; on the other, the exercise of moral and spiritual discernment” (§98).
If the origin of AI is unknown and those who operate it are just taking advantage of its effects rather than explaining its causes, why does the Pope not raise the possibility that an intelligence more perfect than the human intelligence revealed it to some men, who now “cultivate” it? Yes, I raise the possibility that an angelic mind, that is, a devil, built AI and then gave it to men, without explaining its cause.
/bev321_WOF.jpg)
I am not the only one who raises this possibility. “Prophets” of AI such as Yuval Harari (here and
here), Geoffrey Hinton and
Anthony Levandowski consider that AI and particularly the AGI – Artificial General Intelligence – are superior intelligences proper to angels or even God.
When MH analyzes transhumanism and posthumanism (§§115, 172, 232), it certainly considers implants of chips in the human brain to enhance our human nature – transhumanism – and the possibility of merging man with machines – posthumanism.
But MH avoids entering the heart of the question, which is to know whether the invention of AI is the product of a human mind or of the intelligence of a fallen angel.
It is a remarkable omission for a Pope who, in principle, is the Vicar of Christ and should be tending the flock so that the wolf does not enter.
Magnifica humanitas takes a position on AI
1. What AI is
- AI is essentially a way of processing data; its “learning” is just statistic adaptation (§99); its data reflect the cultural, moral & ideological assumptions of those who designed it (§§100, 102).
- Although it surpasses some human capacities, it is not comparable to the human being. It does not understand what it generates & does not have a moral conscience, or responsibility or human feelings (§99).
- The criteria do judge AI are the principles of the Gospel (§24); which include the dignity of the human person as an image of God (§§37, 45, 46, 51-53, 68, 96, 104), the principle of solidarity (§§39, 45, 74, 82, 96, 183) & the principle of subsidiarity (§§68-72, 82, 83, 87, 96, 183).
- The principles of the Natural Order, which include the common good of society (§§44, 59-62), the well-being of future generations (§§82, 83, 85); social justice (§§46, 80, 82, 96), & especially the protection of the most vulnerable (§96).
- The principles of those who designed AI & its platforms (§§102, 104, 105).
/bev321_Dar.jpg)
The light & the dark side of AI
- AI contributes to human development (§93, 100), & the care for environment (§93); it offers benefits in many fields (§99) as for instance, it speeds & facilitates information (§100) & may alleviate suffering & unlock new possibilities (§126).
- AI is often against human dignity (§§104, 112, 131); considers human person only in terms of efficiency (§§51, 94, 150, 172); exploits & instrumentalizes human persons (§§51, 92), forces workers to adapt to the speed of a machine (§150); produces rapid reduction of jobs, inactivity & impoverishment (§§151, 154); doing this it undermines the foundation of social peace (§154).
- It manipulates information (§§102, 110, 132), promotes misinformation (§132) & constructs distorted narratives (§§132, 135, 136); it is misleading in its imitation of reality (§100).
- It violates privacy (§102); it allows invasive surveillance of the user (§80), & favors censure & discrimination (§§80, 85, 95, 171).
- It creates dependance & servitude (§§172, 173), encourages an excessive reliance of the user, weakens his creativity & judgment (§§100, 146); it is designed to take his time & attention (§170); it atrophies his sociability (§§100, 132), promotes fragmented knowledge (§146), fosters hyper-stimulation which produces fatigue & apathy for truth (§139), renders human thought superfluous (§140), & creates easy access to hypersexualized material (§141).
- It is monopolized by a small elite with ideological/moral interests (§§39, 70-72, 95, 102, 106-109, 133, 135, 161, 172, 181); favors a growing dominance of the technocratic paradigm (§92, 93), propitiates a disproportional accumulation of wealth (§83); creates a super-state (§§71, 95); & degrades ecosystems (§§84, 101, 110).
- It grows faster than the processes to control it (§106).
/bev321_Hin.jpg)
Geoffrey Hunten, the ‘Godfather of AI’ calls it an alien being & warns against its risks
- “A more moral AI is not enough if that morality is determined by a few. What is needed is a more active political involvement that is capable of slowing things down when everything is accelerating, and of protecting the opportunities for communities still to be able to participate and ask questions” (§107, cf. §§87, 93, 94, 106, 108).
- “In practical terms, in the age of AI and robotics, ensuring that the economy favors human dignity means adopting certain criteria for firm action.
“First, transparency and accountability: When data and algorithms influence credit distribution, personnel selection or access to services and opportunities, it is necessary that decisions be understandable, contestable, and subject to oversight, so that individuals are not reduced to mere profiles.
“Second, inclusion and access: The benefits of innovation must be paired with investments in skills, infrastructure and essential services to ensure that technology does not widen the gap between those who have and those who have not.
“Finally, measures to ensure equity: Taxation, social protection and industrial policies must correct the imbalances created by the concentration of wealth and power. Indeed, these criteria do not constitute a curb on innovation; instead, they make it civilized and humane” (§164, cf. §240).
- AI must be controlled by human intelligence (§97); must not have a decision-making role (§§101-103, 183), must protect employment (§152), & must protect minors (§170).
- Public institutions & families must unite to oppose platform agendas (§142), schools & teachers must reevaluate their roles & methods to face AI (§§ 137, 145, 155-159).
- The Church & the State must rethink the nature of work and its connection with citizenship (§§154-159).
- Designers must be responsible for AI decisions (§105).
When Pope Leo XIV in MH starts to analyze Artificial Intelligence, he writes:
Leo XIV missed important points in his analysis
If the origin of AI is unknown and those who operate it are just taking advantage of its effects rather than explaining its causes, why does the Pope not raise the possibility that an intelligence more perfect than the human intelligence revealed it to some men, who now “cultivate” it? Yes, I raise the possibility that an angelic mind, that is, a devil, built AI and then gave it to men, without explaining its cause.
Way of the Future is a church to adore AI as a deity
When MH analyzes transhumanism and posthumanism (§§115, 172, 232), it certainly considers implants of chips in the human brain to enhance our human nature – transhumanism – and the possibility of merging man with machines – posthumanism.
But MH avoids entering the heart of the question, which is to know whether the invention of AI is the product of a human mind or of the intelligence of a fallen angel.
It is a remarkable omission for a Pope who, in principle, is the Vicar of Christ and should be tending the flock so that the wolf does not enter.
- When Leo XIV criticizes transhumanism, he biasedly “forgets” to mention one of the most perverted aspects of it, which is transgenderism. I say that he biased because the Conciliar Popes and principally Francis gave great scandal supporting such monstrosity. Therefore, he covers up for this scandal. Further, Magnifica humanitas asks for “inclusiveness” in society as a measure of justice (§§41,144,163, 164). Now then, everyone knows that “inclusiveness” is a code name to accept LGBT. Thus, omitting to attack transgenderism Leo XIV covers for himself as well.
______________________
______________________
 Volume I |
 Volume II |
 Volume III |
 Volume IV |
 Volume V |
 Volume VI |
 Volume VII |
 Volume VIII |
 Volume IX |
 Volume X |
 Volume XI |
 Special Edition |