‘Magnifica Humanitas’ and the human future of Artificial Intelligence

In May this year, Pope Leo XIV published the papal encyclical Magnifica Humanitas: On Safeguarding the Human Person in the Time of Artificial Intelligence. It is a significant contribution to discussions about AI and its impact on society.

As the encyclical states in its introduction:

"Each generation inherits the task of shaping its own era, of guiding history to become a place where the dignity of every person is safeguarded, justice is promoted, and fraternity is made possible. Yet every era also runs the risk of creating an inhumane and more unjust world."

An interesting review of the encyclical by Melbourne front-end developer Marco 'Borracciablu' was recently featured on Hacker News. The review raises many of the questions that came to mind when I learned the encyclical had been published.

It is hardly surprising that a papal encyclical, written by the head of the Catholic Church and grounded in Christianity, contains extensive scriptural and religious reasoning. As a secular humanist, however, I have little difficulty reconciling my own philosophical position with many of the aims expressed in the document.

That is because the encyclical is not simply about matters of faith. In strong terms, it explores what it means to be a person and the responsibilities people share towards one another. It also examines what happens when institutions and systems become increasingly dehumanized, replacing compassion and human judgement with automated processes and administrative logic.

This is not a short document. The central argument is not only about technology itself, but also about power, responsibility, and human dignity. We are witnessing private interests pursuing advantage during a period of growing dependence on computing, networks, and AI. The lack of effective governance in this space is a concern for many. There are also strong reasons to believe these developments are affecting social cohesion and influencing attitudes at scale. The impact of AI-driven social media algorithms on younger people is particularly concerning.

The examples that concern me sit along the same - the growing delegation of human judgement to computational systems. Whether the task is determining what information people see online, assessing eligibility for public services, or identifying military targets, decisions that were once made by people are increasingly influenced, mediated, or delegated to machines.

We are already living in a world where autonomous systems can identify and attack people in both offensive and defensive military roles. This development alone raises profound ethical and political questions about accountability, agency, and the value of human life.

At the same time, governments are deploying algorithmic assessment systems to help manage rising health and social support costs. These systems increasingly affect access to services for some of the most marginalized members of society. In some cases, decisions once made by people are being delegated to opaque computational processes whose reasoning is not visible to those affected.

Viewed in isolation, these developments may appear to be separate issues. Considered together, however, they reveal a broader shift in the relationship between people, institutions, and technology. The risk is not simply that AI systems may make mistakes. The deeper concern is that societies could become accustomed to removing human accountability, discretion, empathy, and moral judgement from decisions that directly affect people's lives.

These issues are already here, and the decisions made today will shape the society that follows. We must actively create the future we want to see.

The following passage captures what I consider to be the encyclical's central concern - the concentration of technological power and the need for societies to exercise agency in directing technological change towards the common good.

"5. It now falls to us to face the challenges of our time with clarity of thought and responsibility…"

The encyclical argues that regulation alone is not enough. It calls for a broader process of collective reflection on the values and assumptions that shape technological development. In doing so, it challenges us not merely to respond to technological change, but to decide what ends technology should serve and what kind of society we wish to build.

As Section 6 concludes:

"For this reason, it is necessary to begin a shared discernment process to identify the spiritual and cultural roots of ongoing transformations…"

These questions are also becoming increasingly important in Internet governance and digital public policy. The Internet's infrastructure, protocols, platforms, and emerging AI systems are no longer simply technical artefacts. They shape how people communicate, participate in society, access information, and exercise agency. As debates about digital public infrastructure, platform governance, data sovereignty, and AI regulation continue, the challenge is not merely to build more capable systems, but to ensure they remain accountable to the people and communities they are intended to serve.

I encourage readers to take the time to read the encyclical, consider the issues it raises, develop their own views, and bring those perspectives to the policy discussions taking place around the world.

The views expressed by the authors of this blog are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of APNIC. Please note a Code of Conduct applies to this blog.