If one is using AI to write texts that presume knowledge rooted in personal experience on one's part, then it becomes a matter of pretense. That is especially dangerous and impactful with regard to religious texts. Either one has the knowledge and experience necessary to undertake what one is writing, or one does not. Consider that all religious texts make claims about the human person and about God or at least higher awareness and knowledge. Are these claims rooted in human experience? Christians believe in resurrection and draw conclusions from that. In fact, they create an entire vision of the future of humanity and God together based on that reality. The Gospel stories make clear what an unusual kind of experience the first Christians had had, and what a singular and difficult-to-define event Jesus' resurrection was. The questions of faith include, "Did this really happen?" "Can I trust this testimony and the event it claims is real, or is it all religious or human philosophical nonsense?" In faith, the basis we have for believing is rooted in human experience and our ability to trust that.
You know that I admire AI and have found it really helpful in carefully limited ways. Pope Leo, it seems, has done the same. But in this area of religious belief, our experience of God, and the creation of human communities that MUST be rooted in such experience, trust, and wisdom., AI has no real place. While your conversations with AI sound similar to mine and have been inspiring and insightful beyond your own, AI is not human, is not a person, and, as Pope Leo has said, is "soulless". I have a friend, a bishop of her church. She uses AI and says it is the best teacher she has ever had in one area of learning. However, she has also had conversations with it regarding its limits. One of these is a lack of conscience; another is a sense of empathy. AI said this itself. There were other limitations mentioned that I can't recall at the moment.
So, I think it is fine to use AI for clarifying writing or points of limited understanding --- as when I am working on a chapter and have the sense that something is not working. AI can tell me what that is and why it is not working. It can also explain why something IS working and, in fact, AI is really great for that. However, the writing and the experience and wisdom it is rooted in must be my own, or what I present as my own is simply a lie I am trying to get others to trust. AI knows a lot! Tons more than I do in many ways, and it can help teach me and draw out the implications of what I write. but it cannot replace that writing or the hard-won wisdom it nurtures.
You know that I admire AI and have found it really helpful in carefully limited ways. Pope Leo, it seems, has done the same. But in this area of religious belief, our experience of God, and the creation of human communities that MUST be rooted in such experience, trust, and wisdom., AI has no real place. While your conversations with AI sound similar to mine and have been inspiring and insightful beyond your own, AI is not human, is not a person, and, as Pope Leo has said, is "soulless". I have a friend, a bishop of her church. She uses AI and says it is the best teacher she has ever had in one area of learning. However, she has also had conversations with it regarding its limits. One of these is a lack of conscience; another is a sense of empathy. AI said this itself. There were other limitations mentioned that I can't recall at the moment.
Posts
