By Amer Youhanna
In this second insight of a special three-part series for The Record, University of Notre Dame Senior Chaplaincy Officer Amer Youhanna writes that human dignity does not depend on intelligence, productivity, or decision-making capacity.In the first reflection, I explored Pope Leo XIV’s vision of dialogue, truth, and human dignity.
The next question is how these principles apply to artificial intelligence and the technological changes that increasingly shape our lives.
One of the recurring themes in Magnifica Humanitas is that human fulfilment cannot be reduced to efficiency, productivity, or technological advancement.
Fulfilment Is Not Perfection
In a world increasingly driven by optimisation and constant improvement, Pope Leo offers a quiet but important challenge.
“True fulfilment is not achieved by eliminating weakness but through harmonious growth.” (Magnifica Humanitas, n. 12).
I found this insight particularly helpful because modern culture often assumes that fulfilment and perfection are the same thing.
Modern culture often treats every limitation as a problem to be solved. The promise of technology is frequently presented as freedom from inconvenience, weakness, or dependence.
The encyclical offers a different perspective. Human flourishing is not found in unlimited control or unlimited access. It is found in living meaningfully within the reality of human life itself.
Weakness, vulnerability, and dependence are not mistakes. They are part of what it means to be human. If every limitation is viewed as a defect, we risk losing sight of the relationships, acts of care, and experiences of compassion that often emerge precisely through our vulnerability; in other words, we risk losing our humanity.
Keeping the Whole Together
Another important insight concerns the relationship between the principles of Catholic Social Teaching: dignity, solidarity, subsidiarity, the common good, and justice. These principles do not operate independently of one another.
Their strength lies in their interconnection and their grounding in the Gospel.
When separated, they can easily become ideological slogans.
When held together, they provide a coherent vision of human flourishing that keeps the dignity of the human person at the centre.
This becomes particularly important when considering new technologies that affect individuals, communities, and entire societies.
Technology and the Risk of Dehumanisation
The encyclical makes it clear that artificial intelligence is not morally neutral.
AI systems inevitably reflect the assumptions, priorities, and limitations of those who design and deploy them.
Pope Leo highlights this reality when he writes: “It will always be human intelligence, with its conscience and freedom, that guides technical innovations and responsibly determines their use and limits” (Magnifica Humanitas, n. 97).
I find this to be one of the most important observations in the entire document.
AI can process information, identify patterns, and assist decision-making. What it cannot do is exercise conscience.
The deeper concern raised by Pope Leo is not rapid technological advancement itself, but the possibility that human beings slowly surrender responsibilities that properly belong to them.
Human dignity does not depend on intelligence, productivity, or decision-making capacity. It belongs to every person because each person is created and loved by God.
Yet the exercise of moral judgment remains one of the ways that dignity is recognised and protected in social life.
When decisions are delegated uncritically to automated systems, something distinctly human is diminished. The loss affects both the process of decision-making and the outcomes that follow. Without genuine moral discernment, there is a greater risk that the dignity of the person will be overlooked or insufficiently protected.
For this reason, Pope Leo insists: “We cannot consider AI to be morally neutral” (Magnifica Humanitas, n. 104).
The Courage to Slow Down
One of the most surprising themes in the encyclical is the invitation to slow down.
At first glance, this seems counterintuitive. Most technological developments promise speed, efficiency, and convenience.
Nonetheless, the capacity to pause, reflect, and discern is essential if we are to arrive at sound moral judgments.
Technology can either accelerate decision-making to the point where reflection becomes impossible, or it can create space for more thoughtful and responsible choices.
Used wisely, AI may free us from repetitive tasks and allow greater time for reflection, discernment, and meaningful human relationships (n. 14).
Slowing down is therefore not an obstacle to progress. It is one of the conditions that make genuinely human progress possible.
The question is not whether artificial intelligence will continue to develop. It will. The question is whether human beings will continue to exercise the moral responsibility that belongs to them.
In the final reflection, I will explore Pope Leo’s teaching on work, economic life, justice, and peace, and consider what kind of future we are building together.