At the intersection of theology, philosophy, and futures studies, Andrew Proudfoot examines of the potential for genuine encounter between humans and hypothetically conscious artificial intelligence (CAI) from the perspective of Barthian theology. The author utilizes Karl Barth’s fourfold schema of encounter, which includes address, response, assistance, and gladness, as a framework for this exploration. The article’s premise is the hypothetical existence of CAI, which, for the sake of argument, is assumed to lack capax Dei, or the capacity for God.
In the first part of the article, the author discusses the initial two aspects of Barthian encounter—address and response. The author speculates that a CAI, with its presumed self-awareness and rationality, could engage in verbal discourse with humans, thus fulfilling these two aspects. However, the author emphasizes the importance of maintaining a clear distinction between humans and AI, even if the AI appears to be human-like. This delineation is crucial to ensure that the encounter is authentic and not misleading or manipulative.
Next, the author delves into the third and fourth stages of Barthian encounter—assistance and gladness. While a CAI cannot provide the same depth of assistance as a human or divine entity, it could provide help commensurate with its abilities. The author also postulates that a CAI could exhibit a form of formal gladness, equivalent to non-Christian eros love, if it is designed with an intrinsic desire for social interaction. However, the lack of capax Dei limits the CAI’s pastoral role and the depth of its encounters with humans.
The article’s philosophical significance lies in the way it prompts us to examine the nature of encounter, consciousness, and authenticity in a world where AI technologies are becoming increasingly advanced. It asks us to rethink the nature of interaction and relationship in a context that transcends the human sphere. The author uses Barthian theology as a lens to explore these themes, but the implications extend beyond this particular theological framework, touching upon broader philosophical discussions about selfhood, otherness, and the ethics of AI.
The research article paves the way for several future research directions. One such direction could involve a more in-depth exploration of the ontological and metaphysical commitments needed to support the notion of a conscious computer within a Christian theological framework. Another potential avenue could be an investigation into the relationship between consciousness and capax Dei, contemplating whether the latter could emerge from the former or if it necessitates divine intervention. Finally, the author’s suggestion that non-human personas might be more beneficial for AI poses an intriguing question for future research, prompting us to reflect on the nature of deception and authenticity in AI-human relationships. The article thus not only contributes to our understanding of potential AI-human encounters but also opens the door to myriad further explorations in the field.
Abstract
Could Artificial Intelligence (AI) play an active role in delivering pastoral care? The question rests not only on whether an AI could be considered an autonomous agent, but on whether such an agent could support the depths of relationship with humans which is essential to genuine pastoral care. Theological consideration of the status of human-AI relations is heavily influenced by Noreen Herzfeld, who utilises Karl Barth’s I-Thou encounters to conclude that we will never be able to relate meaningfully to a computer since it would not share our relationship to God. In this article, I look at Barth’s anthropology in greater depth to establish a more comprehensive and permissive foundation for human-machine encounter than Herzfeld provides—with the key assumption that, at some stage, computers will become conscious. This work allows discussion to shift focus to the challenges that the alterity of the conscious computer brings, rather than dismissing it as a non-human object. If we can relate as an I to a Thou with a computer, then this allows consideration of the types of pastoral care they could provide.
Could a Conscious Machine Deliver Pastoral Care?