Tag: artificial intelligence

Posted on

Technology and ‘moral discernment’

Fresno Bee, November 16, 2025

Pope Leo XIV’s important warning on ethics of AI and new technology

It’s a long way from Silicon Valley to the Vatican, but the journey may be enlightening. Recently, Pope Leo XIV addressed a conference on artificial intelligence in Rome, where he emphasized the need for deeper consideration of the “ethical and spiritual weight” of new technologies. The pontiff said, “Every design choice expresses a vision of humanity,” and called upon technologists “to cultivate moral discernment as a fundamental part of their work — to develop systems that reflect justice, solidarity and a genuine reverence for life.”

Some tech-wizards responded to this pontificating (pun intended) with a disdainful shrug. Engineers and entrepreneurs are focused on building cool stuff, and some don’t think it is their responsibility to worry about ethics or spirituality.

A sophisticated way of saying this is to claim that technology is morally neutral or “value-free.” A version of this idea is found in the motto, “guns don’t kill people, people do.” Defenders of this approach to technology point out that tools do not have a fixed meaning or purpose. Rockets and airplanes can kill people, or we can use them for peaceful purposes. Moral judgment, from this perspective, should focus on what people do with their tools — not on the tools themselves.

A different conception views tools as “value-laden.” From this perspective, technological innovation expresses some set of values. Machines reflect the values of their creators — individuals who build them, after all, with some purpose or function in mind. Guns are made for killing, as are nuclear weapons.

The value-laden conception of technology suggests that new technologies reflect or embody the web of cultural and economic values that supports their creation. New technologies also create new forms of culture, as we are witnessing in the era of social media and artificial intelligence.

Some critics of technology reject the whole modern world. So-called “primitivists” worry that we are stuck in a technology-driven doom loop involving fossil fuels, nuclear weapons, advanced biotech and super-intelligent machines. In response, “techno-optimists” argue that technological development has allowed humanity to thrive in previously unimagined ways.

Furthermore, advocates of technological “acceleration” suggest that the solution to technological problems is more advanced technology — they hope that smarter machines will solve the problems created by the previous generation of tools.

We have just scratched the surface here with regard to the complex issues discussed in the philosophy of technology. This begins with the insight that human beings are tool-using animals. Tools extend and amplify our operational power, and they can also either enhance or undermine who we are and what we care about.

Whether we are enhancing or undermining our humanity ought to be the focus of moral reflection on technology.

This is a crucial question in the AI-era. The AI-revolution should lead us to ask fundamental questions about the ethical and spiritual side of technological development. AI is already changing how we think about intellectual work, such as teaching and learning. Human beings are already interacting with artificial systems that provide medical, legal, psychological and even spiritual advice. Are we prepared for all of this morally, culturally and spiritually?

Our tools influence how we understand ourselves and the world. Before telescopes and microscopes, we had no idea of the vastness of the cosmos or the wonders of cellular life. Before the printing press, only elites had access to written knowledge. And the cyber-era has changed how we think about friendship, information and entertainment.

The idea of value-free technology ignores all this. It seems fairly obvious that tools express and influence what we value. That’s why we must employ critical moral judgment — what the pope called “moral discernment,” as we develop new technologies. At the dawn of the age of artificial intelligence, we need a corresponding new dawn of critical moral judgment.

Now is the time for philosophers, theologians and ordinary citizens to think deeply about the philosophy of technology and the values expressed or embodied in our tools. It will be exciting to see what the wizards of Silicon Valley will come up with next. But wizardry without wisdom is dangerous.

Read more at: https://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/readers-opinion/article312903757.html#storylink=cpy

Posted on

AI and Education: Wonder and the Desire to Learn

Fresno Bee, August 24, 2025

Education is useful in many ways: People need to learn to read and write, and we must also learn social and emotional skills that help us navigate the complexities of life. But education is also intrinsically valuable. It is a fundamental good for thinking beings.

We forget this in a world that views education as a mere means to obtaining a degree or credential, and the prestige that comes with them. When viewed in this way, cheating is tempting — a shortcut to the desired result. Today, the siren song of AI offers another way to avoid the hard work of learning.

Teachers and professors have always fretted about cheating. Now, artificial intelligence poses further challenges. AI can be a useful tool, but when it’s a substitute for genuine thought, it corrupts education.

It is important to prevent shortcuts to genuine thinking and learning. Cheating is wrong because it is dishonest. And it’s unfair to those who don’t do it. But the main problem is that the cheater has not learned anything.

Some discussions of this topic devolve into a cat-and-mouse game of detection and evasion. As teachers try to prevent unethical behavior, cheaters try to avoid getting caught. But this is not enough: Curiosity and wonder are not produced by obedient rule-following. The deeper problem is the general view of education as a mere means to some other end.

This instrumental view of education is typical in contemporary conversations about schools and universities, where folks talk about education in purely economic terms. This approach asks, what is the return on investment? Or, how does education contribute to economic growth?

Those are relevant questions. But the worth of education is not merely its cash value. More important is the way that education transmits culture and meaning. Education facilitates social and moral development. It leads young people to become decent adults and responsible citizens.

Education also directs our minds toward higher things, including the big questions of justice, beauty and truth. To be fully human is to learn to think critically about these perennial questions: What is good? What is beautiful? And what is true?

In wrestling with these questions, we also discover the power and joy of thought itself. Human beings have an innate desire to think and learn. We are curious beings, with brains that seek stimulation. We wonder about ourselves and the world around us. We explore and create. The love of learning makes us fully human.

An education that does not stimulate wonder is mere training — it may be fit for slaves and animals, but it’s not adequate to the nobility of the human spirit.

The sages of the world have noted that people are often as confused about the purpose of education as they are about the meaning of life. Business-minded folks think life is all about profit. Others focus on pleasure and amusement. But the sages suggest that the best life is spent cultivating the mind.

Aristotle celebrated “intellectual enjoyment in leisure.” An example he discusses is music: The music industry generates profits, and music can be pleasantly amusing. But the study of music leads to deeper things — music stimulates the mind and leads to fundamental questions about sound, ratio, creativity and the meaning of aesthetic experience.

The same expansive form of thinking occurs in the proper study of mathematics, literature, history, religion or science. These studies are useful for citizens and workers. But they are also valuable for their own sake, as sources of intellectual enjoyment.

And this is what cheaters and those who instrumentalize education misunderstand: The goal of education is education itself, not the outcome of a grade or a degree. Artificial intelligence is similarly confusing. Machines can quickly distill information. But the joy of thinking is only available to spiritual beings like ourselves. Human beings are driven to learn by our innate curiosity, our passionate creativity and our sense of wonder.

As we return to classrooms this fall, let’s recall the intrinsic value of thinking. Authentic and humane education should stimulate the human spirit. One might suppose that education satisfies a desire for knowledge. But the love of learning is never satisfied. Curiosity is open-ended and insatiable. Education does not merely shed light, it also kindles a fire.

Read more at: https://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/readers-opinion/article311796031.html#storylink=cpy

Posted on

What Artificial Intelligence Cannot Do

Self Reflection

Fresno Bee, April 5, 2025

Artificial intelligence is already changing the world. But will it change our humanity?

Bill Gates recently predicted that AI will soon be widely employed to supplement and even replace a lot of labor that currently requires human experts. This may include accountants, teachers, doctors and computer programmers. Any profession that requires repetitive information processing and rule-following expertise can be supplemented or replaced by AI.

This may free up human intellect to engage in more creative and imaginative tasks. It may also leave humans with more time to focus on interpersonal and relationship-based work. But there are also AI “therapists” and “friends” available online. AI companions are always available. The AI friend, Replika, touts itself as “always here to listen and talk. Always on your side.”

The convenience and efficiency of AI will lead to its widespread use. AI never sleeps — it never tires, or becomes fed up or impatient, unlike real human companions.

As AI development increases, it will be used to create even more powerful technology. This technological acceleration has led some experts to predict that artificial general intelligence will soon be created (something akin to human thinking but faster, tireless and not prone to laziness, procrastination or daydreaming). Others think the creation of artificial general intelligence is decades off; some say it is impossible.

As AI transforms into artifical general intelligence, it could be applied (or apply itself) to generating even more intelligent machinery. Some fear the creation of artificial super intelligence, a fear fueled by fictional sci-fi dystopias in which artificial super intelligence takes over and kills or enslaves humans.

Leaving that nightmare aside, there is no doubt that AI is already changing the meaning of a variety of human tasks. This will continue to happen as the technology becomes so efficient that resistance is futile. This may sound ominous, but it happens all the time as technologies improve.

The inexorable efficiency of technology explains why we prefer to ride rather than walk. It’s why we send texts instead of writing old-fashioned letters. The efficiency imperative will likely lead us to replace inefficient human beings with efficient AI in many parts of life. Why bother to write a report if AI can do it for you faster and better? Why bother to wake a real friend in a crisis in the middle of the night when AI is there to chat?

Of course, some people still write letters or walk. And there is a kind of pleasure to be found in completing your own tax form, or in writing computer code. But those quaint human activities are now a matter of choice. They represent a kind of boutique curiosity, chosen not for efficiency but for some other reason.

This is where the human element returns. Many things are valuable not because they are efficient, but because they are good, beautiful, intellectually challenging or uniquely human.

Friendship is like that: An AI-companion may be more efficient at giving advice in difficult times, or at keeping us entertained. But real human friendship is valuable for other reasons. Human friendship is not simply a one-sided exchange in which we use the other person for our benefit. Rather, friends make demands upon us. Their impatience reminds us to slow down. Their needs give us reason to look beyond our own.

The demands that other humans make upon us are infinitely more valuable than the cult of efficiency can imagine. Other human beings are part of who we are. When a friend or family member triumphs, we swell with pride for them. When they suffer, we suffer with them. And when they die, they take a part of us away with them.

AI will never replace the deeply inefficient existential reality of love, suffering and mortality. AI is fast, convenient and always available. But it cannot supplant the difficult experiences and troublesome relationships that make us fully human. Efficiency is a machine-based good. But human life is not mechanical. The wonder of existence is found in the tragic and often beautiful mess that is human nature.

To be human is not to be efficient. Rather, it is love, suffer and die. And that’s what no machine can ever do.

Read more at: https://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/readers-opinion/article303416756.html#storylink=cpy

Posted on

The Ghost of Christmas Future: Artificial Intelligence, Santa Claus, and Holiday Magic

Artificial intelligence is now part of the magic of Christmas and it’s sweetly weird

Fresno Bee, Dec. 15, 2024

Artificial intelligence is now part of the magic of Christmas. I recently made a video call to an AI Santa. Santa sat by a roaring fire and chatted with me about reindeer, elves and his penchant for cookies and cocoa. I asked him to bring world peace for Christmas. He told me I was kind to ask for such a wonderful thing.

This was fun and charming — and a little weird. But this cute example is just the tip of the AI iceberg. In the future, we may routinely call AI friends, coaches and advisors. This will put real people out of business. It is much easier to visit AI Santa than to fight the masses at the mall. Virtual Santa may leave portly white-bearded men out of work.

Beyond the immediate ramifications of AI Santa are deeper questions about imagination and belief — a great Christmastime topic. Christmas calls for the “voluntary suspension of disbelief.” A common theme in Christmas movies is that for Christmas to happen, you must choose to believe.

This is mostly harmless: We suspend belief quite often in culture and the arts. We choose to believe when we enter the world of a novel, a movie or a theater production. At Christmas, voluntary suspension of disbelief kicks into high gear. The imagination’s ability to jump into a fantasy world is what allows art and AI to happen.

When you chat with an AI avatar, you enter the world inside the screen. AI makes this easier and more realistic than cinema or theater. By responding in real time to your presence, AI lures you into an imagined world. As this technology improves, some people could end up mistaking artifice for reality.

Christmas also involves what scholars call “motivated belief,” something we believe because we want it to be true. At some point, kids start to suspect that Santa isn’t real. But kids may play along because they want the Christmas goodies. The myths of Christmas encourage this, telling children that their belief in Santa is part of the process.

We all do this from time to time: Despite the evidence, we believe things that support our desires or preconceptions. It is often benign. But conspiracy theories, cults and superstitions also work this way. These beliefs are supported by an elaborate network of rationalization and confabulation. When they are challenged, the motivated believer explains away the counter-evidence and accuses the challenger of spreading fake news.

At Christmas, the imagination is beguiled by a network of trickery and tomfoolery. To support the Santa story, we make a big show of pretending that all kinds of phony stuff is real — from flying reindeer to elves. Parents construct an elaborate ruse involving the Elf on the Shelf, letters to Santa and a trip to the mall to visit Santa (or a trip to the computer to chat with AI Santa). It all leads up to a big Christmas Eve finale and the magic of Christmas morning.

This is all good fun. But the season of believing opens lots of questions about culture and belief, myth and magic. A culture is, after all, an elaborate game in which we all collaborate. In a sense, culture is “artificial,” a kind of art and artifice in which we construct meaning. Artificial intelligence is the latest and most sophisticated example of how this works.

As long as we understand the difference between what is real and what is phony, it is amusing to play along. But we should worry that in the AI era some people will confuse artifice with reality. It would be tragic if people mistook artificial friendship for the real thing. And it is dangerous when fake news seems as true or real as actual facts.

We need to do our best to keep all of this straight. And perhaps Christmas can help. In this magical season, take time to enjoy the show. Try out AI Santa, or make a wish for world peace. But when the show ends, ask what you’ve learned about the human imagination and about the difference between wishful thinking and the truth.

Read more at: https://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/readers-opinion/article296998234.html#storylink=cpy

Posted on

Social Media Warnings and Education

Fresno Bee, June 23, 2024

Surgeon General Vivek Murthy’s recent call for warning labels on social media is a good idea. He notes that children who spend significant time on social media are at risk for mental illness. Murthy concludes, “The moral test of any society is how well it protects its children.”

But how best should we protect kids? Murthy recognizes that a warning label is a simple solution to a complex problem. Last year, his office issued a more detailed report noting that schools, parents, policymakers, and technology companies have a role to play in protecting kids. And long-term solutions depend upon education.

There is probably also a role for prohibitions. Smartphones have been banned in schools in Fresno and recently in Los Angeles. This week, Governor Newsom called for a statewide smartphone ban in California schools. Social media and smartphones are not the same thing. However, a school ban on smartphones is effectively a ban on social media during school time.

Tools and technologies can be employed in good or bad ways. A hammer can be used to build or to destroy. Prohibitions are justifiable when the risks are obvious and severe, and when the purported benefits of a tool are unclear. And with kids, their relative immaturity matters. A ban on social media access for kids might be justifiable and there is some wisdom in prohibiting smartphones at school. But at this point, a ban on these technologies is akin to closing the proverbial barn door once the horse has already galloped off.

People disagree about the risks and benefits of various technologies. One might argue against these bans by claiming that these technologies are more beneficial than dangerous. These tools help us stay connected, access the news, and conduct business. Of course, these tools also provide instant access to cyberbullying, exploitation, scams, and disinformation. But there is some truth to the claim that with smartphones and social media, it’s not the tool that is to blame, but how it is used.

Some technophobes are opposed to any innovative tool. Calculators were once viewed with skepticism, as was the Internet. These days technophobes are worried about artificial intelligence. But skeptics often adapt to new technologies, when their safety and usefulness are proven.

Hard-core libertarians resist every effort at prohibition. The recent Supreme Court case allowing “bump stock” weapons is worth mentioning here. The decision depends upon a technical matter involving trigger mechanisms. But the bigger question, not decided in this case, is whether there should be limits on dangerous weapons or whether individuals have a right to own even very dangerous weapons.

Social media and smartphones do not seem as dangerous as machine guns. So, it is easy to imagine a libertarian argument against Newsom’s proposed ban. Furthermore, social media is useful for kids. It’s how they socialize, organize clubs and teams, and how they communicate with each other and even with their parents. Smartphones can be useful in education when used properly to access information.

An outright ban may take away useful tools. And a school ban will have no impact on after-school usage. But there is no doubt that education is part of the solution. Teenagers must take driver’s ed and pass a licensing test to drive. Perhaps a similar training course and qualifying exam could be created for social media and smartphones.

Kids need critical lessons about cyberbullying, peer pressure, the bandwagon effect, and the power of misinformation and exploitative algorithms. They also need frank examples of the dangers of social media and smartphone addiction. They would benefit from a training course that includes lessons in “digital citizenship,” “ethical A.I.,” and “virtuous virtual reality” that encourage best practices online and good moral habits in cyberspace.

A Surgeon General’s warning is only a starting point for a broader conversation. We need to continue this conversation. A ban at school might help. But the social media and smartphone horse is already out of the barn. Kids need to be taught the skills and virtues that are required to ride that horse without getting hurt.

Read more at: https://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/article289421636.html#storylink=cpy