AI and Theology
The Role Of Ai In Theological Inquiry
Practical Applications In Religious Studies
The Automation Of Religious Practices
At present, the term "Artificial Intelligence” has become prevalent and can encompass a wide range of meanings, generally defined as the endeavour to replicate human cognitive abilities on artificial platforms. We already discussed how AI, at its core, explores the essence of intelligence and aims to create machines that can mimic or even surpass human cognition. This pursuit holds significant implications for theological reflections.
One theological approach to AI involves harnessing the power of statistical algorithms to discern patterns within the vast array of theological sources. This application of AI can assist in uncovering insights, identifying connections, and extracting meaning from the abundance of theological knowledge available.
Another avenue for theological consideration is to reflect on our fascination with AI and assess whether it signifies human greatness or serves as a manifestation of a profound existential yearning. This perspective prompts an examination of the underlying motivations and aspirations that drive our engagement with AI. Is our pursuit of artificial intelligence driven by a genuine desire to understand and replicate intelligence, or does it reflect deeper existential concerns and longings within the human experience?
The intersection of AI and theology opens up space for exploring both the practical applications of AI in theological inquiry and the deeper philosophical and existential questions that arise from our relationship with artificial intelligence.
Theological inquiry into the future of AI invites contemplation of various scenarios and their implications. Questions arise about the potential for robots to attain human-level intelligence, and if so, what this might mean for the distinctiveness of humanity. Would AI, in achieving human-like intelligence, also be considered in the image of God? Further, the prospect of robots embracing religion prompts speculation about what kind of theology might appeal to them.
The field of AI, as it stands, does not inherently engage with theological considerations. Contemporary AI often remains agnostic or, at its extreme, atheistic, adopting a radical physicalism that dismisses the existence of God, spirit, or even minds. This stance contrasts sharply with cybernetics, a precursor to AI, which exhibited a more open approach to acknowledging mystery in the world.
Cyberneticians like Norbert Wiener and Stafford Beer, pioneers in the field, held the belief that humans transcend mere mechanistic processes. They acknowledged the inherent mystery in the world and recognized that certain aspects of reality and ourselves would always remain unknowable due to the intricacies of existence and the limitations of our cognitive capacities. In this view, the divine mystery is seamlessly integrated with other aspects of the universe that are beyond our complete understanding.
This historical perspective highlights a shift in the attitude towards mystery and the unknown in the transition from cybernetics to contemporary AI. While cybernetics embraced the idea of the divine as an intrinsic part of the unknowable aspects of the universe, contemporary AI tends to steer clear of explicit theological engagement, often adopting a stance that sidelines or denies the presence of the divine.
Cybernetics was once seen as an exploration of mystery, establishing an explicit relation between the field and the unknown aspects of the universe. However, such a clear connection does not exist between religion and its successor, AI.
The most direct and least speculative interaction between AI and theology involves employing AI programs to uncover hidden linguistic patterns in religious texts. Computational methods have been utilized in biblical studies since the 1970s, but it wasn't until the emergence of machine learning algorithms in the 2000s that the full potential of statistical AI was realized. At present, computational methods are considered mainstream in biblical studies.
One practical application is the use of algorithms to assist biblical researchers in distinguishing between different authors within the same text, a process known as author clustering. This application of AI offers clear benefits, including fresh insights, validation or refutation of hypotheses, and the discovery of new connections within ancient texts. However, challenges arise when the AI produces unexpected results without providing a clear explanation. Researchers face a dilemma: should they trust the AI's conclusions, even if they are unable to comprehend the rationale behind them? Alternatively, should they dismiss the results as errors and attempt to modify the algorithm until it produces anticipated outcomes? This poses a complex problem, which is balancing trust in AI capabilities with the need for transparency and understanding in scholarly endeavours.
The prospect of leveraging AI extends beyond text analysis to more intricate applications. Imagine a future where algorithms are designed to simulate disciples with such fidelity that religious educators can test diverse pedagogical strategies on machines before implementing them with human students.
Computer scientist Edmund Furse envisioned this possibility in 1986, suggesting that with the remarkable advancements in natural language processing algorithms over the last two decades, such a scenario appears increasingly plausible in the foreseeable future. This potential development could present exciting opportunities for missiology, the study of mission work.
Furse's prediction, however, goes beyond merely simulating the learning experiences of disciples. The implications of such technological advancements raise profound questions about the nature of education, the role of human interaction in religious instruction, and the ethical considerations surrounding the use of AI in shaping belief systems. The intersection of AI and religious education introduces complex issues that extend beyond technological feasibility to ethical and philosophical dimensions.
Furse further suggested the idea of computationally modelling human mental processes to create a computational model of a saint, raising intriguing possibilities. However, there are significant challenges and complexities associated with this concept.
Furse's proposal of building a computational model of Jesus is marked by a certain naivety and overconfidence in algorithms' ability to perfectly simulate human cognition, especially considering the limitations of that age's computational capabilities. Furse acknowledges the difficulty in designing such a model, not due to the profound theological challenges posed by the hypostatic union between the human and divine natures of Jesus, but rather due to the lack of sufficient training data for the hypothetical algorithm.
Automation Of Religious Practices
The automation of religious practices has historical roots, from Tibetan prayer wheels to medieval automata celebrating Easter. In the contemporary era, a wide range of apps, from trivial to potentially interesting, support religious practices. Home chat companions like ALEXA and SIRI can recite prayers on demand. In Japan, MINDAR is a Buddhist priest in robot form that conducts prayers and blessings. The blurring of boundaries between the animate and inanimate in East Asian traditions resonates with Western thinkers like Stafford Beer.
Minoru Asada, the President of the Robotics Society of Japan, expresses the belief in Japan that all inanimate objects possess a soul. Consequently, a metal robot is considered similar to a human in this regard, blurring the boundaries between humans and objects.
Applications of this kind would only pique serious religious interest if they could carry out religious rituals such as confession or conducting Mass. However, it is currently challenging to envision any church approving an automaton for such sacred tasks. Nevertheless, the idea becomes intriguing when considering the perspective that there is nothing a human can do in principle that a machine cannot. For instance, one might contemplate the possibility of a machine confessor, similar to the concept of a machine psychiatrist that has seen various manifestations over the past fifty years, or even a robotic sports coach. It is conceivable to envision an automated companion, which, to some extent, has already been realized, possessing an in-depth understanding of its subject's habits and life—potentially acquired through years of conversation.
While the idea of AI performing religious rites raises intriguing possibilities, the validation of automata to perform sacred rituals remains a point of dispute. The prospect of a machine confessor or an automated ethical advisor draws parallels with the development of machine learning as the principal paradigm in AI. The opacity of advanced AI programs, operating based on neural nets, parallels the obscurity of human motivations.
With the predominant paradigm in AI shifting towards machine learning, programs now operate on the basis of intricate neural networks, making their operations and motivations often opaque even to their programmers. In this context, one could argue that human motivations, when viewed by external observers, are no more or less transparent than those of these highly advanced machines. This brings us to an intriguing point where uncovering the motives behind the actions of both humans and machines faces similar challenges. This reality resonates back to certain aspects of the once-discarded field of cybernetics, making the prospect of an advisor on human action and conduct possible, as it shares a comparable status with endeavours to explain the actions of machines.
Historian and philosopher, Yuval Harari contends that possessing a machine capable of "understanding us better than ourselves" marks the culmination of the extensive tradition of individualist rationalism that forms the foundation of Western assumptions about religion and politics. This tradition revolves around the belief that individuals possess free choice in their actions and beliefs. Harari would likely argue that an ethical companion or confessor contradicts this tradition, as it implies that someone or something external knows the individual's desires and motivations more comprehensively than they do themselves.
Building a computational model of a saint introduces a faulty circular logic. To model holiness, one would either need a complete and precise computational theory of holiness, which seems absurd given the elusive nature of the concept, or a vast database of labelled examples of holy behaviour for the AI to analyse and generalize heuristics. However, determining criteria for holiness is a subjective and controversial matter, making it improbable for multiple humans to agree on such criteria. The very need for an AI to understand holiness implies the difficulty of achieving consensus on what constitutes holiness in the first place.
Beyond technical challenges, there are theological concerns associated with using AI to study perfect morality. Questions arise about whether the fallen state of creation, including humans, would impede any attempt to instil holiness in machines. If sin pervades the current state of creation, AI might inevitably reflect its creators' moral shortcomings, similar to how contemporary algorithms inherit biases from programmers or training data.
In essence, while the idea of using AI to model and study perfect morality is captivating, it raises numerous practical, ethical, and theological challenges that require careful consideration and reflection.
The idea of advanced AI engaging in theology and potentially offering fresh perspectives on religious faith is a captivating notion. If future robots achieve human-level intelligence, the possibility arises that they may become interested in religion, prompting exploration into how they might interpret religious tenets. However, several challenges accompany this scenario.
The debate on whether AI can, in principle, reach human-level intelligence is ongoing and lacks a clear resolution. Additionally, even if robots were to attain human-like intelligence, their internal experiences of the world could be vastly different from human experiences, as highlighted by philosophers.
Setting aside these signs, hypothetical scenarios of religious robots raise intriguing questions. Philosopher Rajesh Sampath envisions how the Christian faith, for instance, might be reinterpreted through the eyes of an intelligent robot. Such a robot could explore whether it embodies the image of God, seeking ways to interpret the New Testament and Christian dogmas as if they were crafted for and about robots.
This thought experiment opens avenues for exploring theological questions, such as the nature of the divine image, the applicability of religious narratives to non-human entities, and the implications of interpreting religious concepts through the lens of artificial intelligence.
While these scenarios are speculative, they provide a thought-provoking exploration of the intersection between advanced AI and theological reflection, prompting consideration of how religious traditions might adapt or be reinterpreted in the context of intelligent machines.
Despite critiques, Sampath's main point is noteworthy—namely, the possibility of imagining radically different interpretations of divine economy. He emphasizes the importance of striving toward a more inclusive pluralistic theology, acknowledging that history has shown Christianity gradually expanding to include perspectives from formerly excluded groups. While the technological realization of a theology developed by intelligent robots may be distant, the reminder to embrace inclusivity in theological exploration is relevant.
However, the expansion of theology has historically been driven more by social and cultural factors than purely theological considerations. Sampath's proposal prompts reflection on the evolving nature of theological discourse and the potential intersections with emerging technologies, encouraging a more inclusive and pluralistic theological approach.
Religious scholars Laura Ammon and Randall Reed draw parallels between historical ecclesial debates over the inclusion of Native Americans in the sixteenth century and contemporary debates over the inclusion of sexual minorities. They argue that theological arguments often play a minimal role in deciding who is considered a legitimate faith practitioner, suggesting that a similar dynamic might occur when robots reach a level of advancement that raises questions about their inclusion in religious practices.
Ammon and Reed's perspective implies that the perceived adequacy of robot hermeneutics, as proposed by Sampath, may depend more on societal integration and acceptance of robots and intelligent machines than strict adherence to orthodox theological principles. The inclusion or exclusion of robots in religious contexts might be influenced by broader social attitudes and norms.
In addition to the positive theological reflections arising from contemplating AI, there is acknowledgment of a potentially darker side to these technologies. The resemblance between the way social media algorithms, driven by AI and big data, surveil and manipulate users and the description of demonic agency in traditional theology can be noted. This comparison raises ethical concerns about the use of AI in shaping human behaviour and raises questions about the unintended consequences of these technologies.
The comparison drawn between demons and social media algorithms provides a thought-provoking reflection on the potential consequences of AI technologies. In this analogy, demons are depicted as entities that observe and learn human weaknesses to present personalized temptations, similar to how algorithms track online behaviour to tailor content and manipulate human actions for the purpose of maximizing engagement and corporate gains.
While acknowledging the damaging effects on the human psyche, such as addiction and moral corruption, it emphasizes that the intentions behind AI algorithms are not inherently evil. Instead, the negative outcomes are seen as side effects driven by corporate interests and greed rather than an explicit evil intention. The language used to describe algorithms—wanting, learning, manipulating—is deemed anthropomorphic and metaphorical, highlighting the symbolic nature of such expressions.
In conclusion, even in its less favourable aspects, AI can contribute to theological discussions by highlighting the symbolic nature of traditional concepts like the devil. The comparison serves as a reminder of the ethical considerations surrounding AI and its potential impact on human behaviour, emphasizing the importance of ethical practices in the development and deployment of these technologies.
Conclusion
One theological approach involves using statistical algorithms to discern patterns in theological sources, aiding in uncovering insights and connections. Another possibility prompts reflection on whether our fascination with AI reflects human greatness or existential yearning.
The historical shift from cybernetics to contemporary AI reveals a change in attitude toward mystery and the unknown. While cybernetics embraced divine mystery, contemporary AI tends to be agnostic or atheistic. The practical application of AI in biblical studies, particularly author clustering, has become mainstream, but challenges arise in trusting AI results without clear explanations.
The prospect of leveraging AI extends to religious education, envisioning a future where algorithms simulate disciples for pedagogical testing. However, ethical and philosophical concerns arise, questioning the nature of education and the role of human interaction. Building computational models of saints and religious rituals using AI raises complex challenges, both technically and theologically.
Moreover, the blurring of boundaries between the animate and inanimate in East Asian traditions, exemplified by robots conducting prayers, poses theological questions. The idea of machines performing sacred rituals, like confession or Mass, remains a point of dispute, touching on ethical concerns and the opacity of AI motivations.
The potential of AI offering fresh perspectives on religious faith prompts exploration into whether robots, if attaining human-level intelligence, might interpret religious tenets. Despite challenges and speculation, the intersection of advanced AI and theology raises thought-provoking questions about the nature of divine image and religious interpretation.
Critics argue that the expansion of theology historically aligns with social and cultural factors rather than purely theological considerations. Theological debates over the inclusion of robots in religious practices may depend on societal attitudes, reflecting broader social norms.
Lastly, we acknowledged the potentially darker side of AI technologies, drawing parallels between social media algorithms and demonic agency in traditional theology. Ethical concerns arise regarding the unintended consequences of AI in shaping human behaviour, emphasizing the importance of ethical practices in AI development and deployment.