Unmitigated Technological Growth Distorts Experience of Embodiment and Knowledge
Image by Evynjct.
By Colten Maertens-Pizzo
On February 20, 2023, Pope Francis gave a speech to the Pontifical Academy for Life encouraging the organization to reflect more deeply on its present theme of the relationship between the person, emerging technologies, and the common good. He describes the present situation as a “delicate frontier” where faith must serve to guide mankind to better understanding. However, faith may—and should, he argues—be supported with interreligious dialogue.
Although the academy functions primarily as a study and research body, its purpose aims beyond mere reflection. Francis calls the academy to expand its considerations about the relationship between the person, technology, and the common good and to be cognizant of three challenges unique to our times: “the changing conditions of human life in the technological world; the impact of the new technologies on the very definition of ‘man’ and ‘relationship’ … and the concept of ‘knowledge’ and the consequences that derive from it.”
The first challenge emerges from the transformation of the environment with the goal of improving the conditions of life. Our intelligence does not justify any technological advancement whatsoever but instead “speaks to us of the great responsibility we have towards creation.” Stewardship has always been effortful, but its difficulty is becoming increasingly unmanageable today as the acceleration of technological interventions is “producing significant changes … both in the environment and in human living conditions.” Too often we find ourselves desperate to solve problems born of our technological prowess. This is exacerbated, as Francis warns, by the fact that it becomes increasingly difficult to predict the effects our technology has on the natural world, including the recent pandemic and climate crisis. Importantly, he does not bemoan technology like a luddite but instead calls for greater responsibility in technological endeavors.
The second challenge arises from the fact that “the technological form of human experience is becoming more pervasive every day.” In other words, according to Francis, “It is becoming increasingly difficult to discern what is proper to humans and what is proper to technology.” For example, he cites the dangers of mediating most of human contact with technical interfaces that replace face-to-face contact. The temptation is “ugly,” as he describes it, because the person behind the screen can be easily forgotten. Blurring the lines between face-to-face and technologically mediated contact has proven to be an intensifying problem. People often forget themselves and their own humanity, as evidenced by research on the influence of social media usage on the minds of teenagers. People can also be forgotten by others who reduce them to numbers in a conglomerate, a temptation we see in health care. Stranger still, some people want to hide behind technology for purposes of confidentiality and individual rights.
Francis recognizes this last problem in the sensitivity that people have about their personal data. Many people see this information as an extension of their personhood and defend it as such. However, as Francis warns, holding too tightly makes it difficult to “[reconcile] the confidentiality of personal data with the sharing of information that affects the interest of all.” In other words, technology can encourage people to forget that they belong to a human community.
The third challenge, then, reminds us that all our ways of knowing do in fact have a moral dimension. Francis explains that knowledge is especially dangerous where it concerns mankind’s self-understanding. It is a contradiction, he explains, “when referring to technologies that enhance an individual’s biological functions, to speak of an ‘augmented’ person if one forgets that the human body is related to the integral good of the person.” People end up confusing an act of reduction for an act of augmentation, thus truncating their understanding of the human person.
Drawing from Evangelii gaudium and Laudato si’, Francis exhorts the Academy to always remember the right context of our knowledge about the human person, including principles such as “the whole is greater than its parts” and “everything in the world is connected.” People are not isolated monads but instead thrive from contact with one another. The right relationship between science, technology, and society cannot be maintained when people fail to understand themselves and one another as being more than bits of knowledge. Knowledge is lived rather than merely held. In other words, a truth cannot remain a mere fact, or else it will threaten the life of the knower of that truth, as, for example, when a dogma of faith becomes isolated from its context in the life of the faithful and stands before them as a mere rule.
Francis uses this point to justify a call for greater dialogue between peoples of different faiths and worldviews, noting that “it would be good for theology to move beyond mainly apologetic approaches, in order to contribute to the definition of a new humanism and to foster reciprocal listening and mutual comprehension between science, technology and society.” He appeals to Wisdom 11:26 to justify his call for interreligious dialogue regarding better understanding of the relationship between persons and technology. Several meetings held by the Pontifical Academy for Life on the end of life and artificial intelligence have served this purpose. Francis encourages further meetings of this sort. However, the encouragement also speaks to all Christians. Responsible technological growth is an obligation for all human beings.
Colten Maertens-Pizzo works for the Archdiocese of Chicago Catholic School System.