Search
Close this search box.

Category: Imagination

Looking at how AI and other emerging technologies spark new avenues of meaning for Christian theology and practice.

What Will Online Religion Look Like In The Metaverse?

The Internet is not to be understood merely as a tool. It is a specific extension of a complex environment instead. Contemporaries live on (or in) the Internet as well as in the physical landscapes of this world. Besides, such a mode of living in the world continues to intensify. Always more human activities are being moved into the online environment which changes them a lot. Just think of how rapidly the activity of shopping has changed during, let’s say, the last decade. Three decades ago, shopping was a completely different experience than it is nowadays, as the Internet became an everyday reality.

Regardless of these considerations, it would be a mistake to see the Internet only as a kind of parallel reality. As a complex phenomenon, the Internet touches all spheres of human life, including the sphere of religion – the religious life. At this place, a crucial question might be asked: What is the relation between religion and the key technical medium of the internet?

In general, we may consider 3 dimensions of such a relationship. It is (1) religion online, (2) online religion, and (3) online religious experience. The first two dimensions were studied and well defined by Canadian sociologist and anthropologist of religion, Christopher Helland. The third was added a few years ago by new media and media theory experts from the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, Menahem Blondheim, and Hananel Rosenberg. The concept they suggested raises serious questions, but at the same time, it touches on the limits of what is presently possible. In any case, all phases (if we look at the problem from the perspective of development as Christopher Helland), or dimensions (if we consider the fact that the first two categories often exist in parallel or in different combinations) might be described as follows.

taken from Pixabay.com

The Initial Stages of Internet Religion

Religion online describes a static presence of religion on the internet. Typically, good examples of this are the websites containing information about different religious communities and their activities. In the Christian religious tradition, we can point out websites of parishes or church communities. According to Helland, this relationship between religion and the internet belongs to the past, which was characteristic of slow internet connection and technically undeveloped, static, access devices (e.g., heavy personal computers), which some of us may remember from the 1990s. At that time, the internet was understood by religious communities merely as a tool for their presentations. With time, websites, as well as social networks with religious content, became an integral part of life for a great number of religious communities. They will likely continue to serve, as such, even in times when the internet offers new possibilities.

In online religion, the Internet has become a tool for developing religious practice online with the improvement of the connection speed and improved access technologies. Online prayer groups, religious rituals, or services set and performed in an online environment might be mentioned as examples. This form of interaction between religions and the internet encountered its unprecedented boom during the last two years in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. With governmental restrictions and lockdowns, religious life in its traditional communitarian form stopped practically overnight and religions were forced to move a large part of their activities to the online environment. The internet was naturally used as a tool to handle this change. Soon, however, it was understood that it is not only a tool but also a new environment for religious practice from now on.

This is of course not without theological problems. Perhaps, one of the crucial questions refers to the online religious experience. Is it possible to speak about online religious experience at the level of online religion? Is online religious experience real or rather “just” virtual (and thus not real)? Blondheim and Rosenberg open this question and argue for a new dimension of the relationship between religion and the internet because, in their opinion, it is possible to encounter authentic religious experiences in cyberspace.

Photo by ThisisEngineering RAEng on Unsplash

The Next Frontier

It is disputable if online religious experiences are already present phenomena or if they are an uncertain matter of the future. In the latter form, they would only be considered at a level of a vision for the future. Some suggest that something like an online religious experience is principally not possible at all. However, theoretically speaking, the increasing speed of connection and response of largely personalized and omnipresent access devices (e.g., smartphones), quickly advancing the datafication of human lives, virtual reality development, and interaction with artificial intelligence, bring serious questions into the realm of religion.

The internet is becoming a true environment; something that becomes more transparent like a borderline between cyberspace and real space in which our bodies dwell. It slowly fades away. Consequently, cyberspace should neither be labeled as a “consensual hallucination” as it once was by its conceiver William Gibson, nor as a kind of utopia, or place “nowhere-somewhere” (Kevin Robins). Contemporary people live in digital landscapes as they do in physical ones. These two traditionally separated spaces manifest themselves, today, as one hybrid space.

The age of the internet of things is slowly coming to its end, and the era of the internet of everything is setting in. Quickly advancing mobile technologies are playing a key role in the hybrid space interface. Thanks to them, people are practically connected to the internet non-stop. They can create digital-physical landscapes and perceive how they become digital-physical hybrid entities as they live in hybrid (real-virtual) spaces they create for themselves. To put it bluntly, what is happening on the world wide web, is happening in the real world, and vice versa. Everything might be online, and to a large extent, it already is.

Photo by Diana Vargas on Unsplash.com

Religion in the Metaverse

Let’s assume that in such an environment (such as the metaverse) it is possible to have an authentic religious experience. In other words, let’s presume that from this perspective, the encounter with the Sacred in cyberspace has the same characteristics and qualities as in the physical landscapes of this world. An imaginary wall between real and virtual is still perceivable. However, with the emergence of the metaverse, it is becoming more transparent and more permeable. Yet, if it ever will disappear remains a question. In each case, we can already speak of religious experience in cyberspace concerning some computer games as World of Warcraft, for instance (Geraci, Gálik, Gáliková).

Recent research on Neo-Paganism suggests that a relatively high number of its adherents consider their online religious activity equivalent to that in the physical world. Some of them even stated that their religious activity in cyberspace is on a higher level than that in real life. We may also speak of online religious experiences concerning the phenomena of virtual pilgrimages (cyber-pilgrimages or e-pilgrimages). Further, platforms like the one with the meaningful name Second Life make it possible to live a religious life in a completely online environment.

Blondheim and Rosenberg believe that online religious experience in the digital world is “emerging from the breakdown and collapse of all entrenched conventions and narratives in the digital world, and the opening of a chaotic abyss can (…) serve as a prelude to a fresh new theological start.” Unfortunately, they do not say anything about how this new theological start they propose should look. But, right now, it is not that important because it may stimulate our imagination and thoughts on the transformations of faith in the digital age.

What would be your reflection on this matter?

An earlier version of this text originally appeared in the Christnet online magazine in Czech (https://www.christnet.eu/clanky/6592/nabozenstvi_on_line_on_line_nabozenstvi_a_on_line_nabozenska_zkusenost.url); published 22nd September 2021. English translation published with the permission of the Christnet magazine. Translated by the author.

František Štěch is a research fellow at the Protestant Theological Faculty of Charles University. He serves as coordinator of the “Theology & Contemporary Culture” research group. Previously he worked at the Catholic Theological Faculty of Charles University as a research fellow and project PI. His professional interests include Fundamental theology; Ecclesiology; Youth theology; Religious, and Christian identity; Intercultural

Get to know our Advisory Board

How can Machine Learning Empower Human Flourishing?

As a practicing Software Product Manager who is currently working on the 3rd integration of a Machine Learning (ML) enabled product my understanding and interaction with models is much more quotidian, and at times, downright boring. But it is precisely this form of ML that needs more attention because ML is the primary building block to Artificial Intelligence (AI). In other words, in order to get AI right, we need to first focus on how to get ML right. To do so, we need to take a step back and reflect on the question: how can machine learning work for human flourishing?

First, we’ll take some cues from liberation theology to properly orient ourselves. Second, we need to understand how ML models are already impacting our lives. Last, I will provide a pragmatic list of questions for those of us in the technology field that can help move us towards better ML models, which will hopefully lead to better AI in the future. 

Gloria Dei, Vivens Homo

Let’s consider Elizabeth Johnson’s recap of Latin American liberation theology. To the stock standard elements of Latin American liberation theology–preferential option for the poor, the Exodus narrative, and the sermon on the Mt –she raises a consideration from St. Irenaeus’s phrase Gloria Dei, vivens homo. Translated as “the glory of God is the human being fully alive,” this means that human flourishing is God’s glory manifesting in the common good. One can think of the common good not simply as an economic factor. Instead, it is an intentional move towards the good of others by seeking to dismantle the structural issues that prevent flourishing.

Now, let’s dig into this a bit deeper –what prevents human flourishing?  Johnson points to two things: 1) inflicting violence or 2) neglecting their good. Both of these translate “into an insult to the Holy One” (82). Not only do we need to not inflict violence on others (which we can all agree is important), but we also need to be attentive to their good. Now, let’s turn to the current state of ML.

Big Tech and Machine Learning

We’ll look at two recent works to understand the current impact of ML models and hold them to the test. Do they inflict violence? Do they neglect the good? The 2020 investigative documentary entitled (with a side of narrative drama) The Social Dilemma (Netflix) and Cathy O’Neil’s Weapons of Math Destruction are both popular and accessible introductions to how actual ML models touch our daily lives. 

Screen capture of Social Dilemma

The Social Dilemma takes us into the fast-paced world of the largest tech companies (Google, Facebook, Instagram, etc.) that touch our daily lives. The primary use cases for machine learning in these companies is to drive engagement, by scientifically focusing on methods of persuasion. More clicks, more likes, more interactions, more is better. Except, of course, when it isn’t.

The film sheds light on how a desire to increase activity and to monetize their products has led to social media addiction, manipulation, and even provides data on the increased rates of sucide amongst pre-teen girls.  Going even further, the movie points out, for these big tech companies, the applications themselves are not the product, but instead, it’s humans. That is, the gradual but imperceptible change in behavior itself is the product.

These gradual changes are fueled and intensified by hundreds of daily small randomized tests that A/B change minor variables to influence behavior. For example, do more people click on this button when it’s purple or green? With copious amounts of data flowing into the system, the models become increasingly more accurate so the model knows (more than humans) who is going to click on a particular ad or react to a post.

This is how they generate revenue. They target ads at people who are extremely likely to click on them. These small manipulations and nudges to elicit behavior have become such a part of our daily lives we no longer are aware of their pervasiveness. Hence, humans become commodities that need to be continuously persuaded. Liberation theology would look to this documentary as a way to show concrete ways in which ML is currently inflicting violence and neglecting the good. 

from Pixabay.com

Machine Learning Outside the Valley

Perhaps ‘normal’ companies fare better? Non-tech companies are getting in on the ML game as well. Unlike tech companies that focus on influencing user behavior for ad revenue, these companies focus on ML as a means to reduce the workload of individual workers or reduce headcount and make more profitable decisions. Here are a few types of questions they would ask: “Need to order stock and determine which store it goes to? Use Machine Learning. Need to find a way to match candidates to jobs for your staffing agency? Use ML. Need to find a way to flag customers that are going to close their accounts? ML.” And the list goes on. 

Cathy O’Neil’s work helps us to get insight into this technocratic world by sharing examples from credit card companies, predictions of recidivism, for-profit colleges, and even challenges the US News & World Report College Rankings. O’Neil coins the term “WMD”, Weapons of Math Destruction for models that inflict violence and neglect the good. The three criteria of WMD’s are models that lack transparency, grow exponentially, and cause a pernicious feedback loop, it’s the third that needs the most unpacking.

The pernicious feedback loop is fed by biases of selectivity in the original data set–the example that she gives in chapter 5 is PredPol, a big data startup in order to predict crime used by police departments. This model learns from historical data in order to predict where crime is likely to happen, using geography as its key input. The difficulty here is that when police departments choose to include nuisance data in the model (panhandling, jaywalking, etc), the model will be more likely to predict new crime will happen in that location, which in turn will prompt the police department to send more patrols to that area. More patrols mean a greater likelihood of seeing and ticketing minor crimes, which in turn, feeds more data into the model. In other words, the models become a self-fulfilling prophecy. 

A Starting Point for Improvement

As we can see based on these two works, we are far from the topic of human flourishing. Both point to many instances where ML Models are currently not only neglecting the good of others, they are also inflicting violence. Before we can reach the ideal of Gloria Dei, vivens homo we need to make a Liberationist move within our technology to dismantle the structural issues that prevent flourishing. This starts at the design phase of these ML models. At that point, we can ask key questions to address egregious issues from the start. This would be a first for making ML models (and later AI) work for human flourishing and God’s glory. 

Here are a few questions that will start us on that journey:

  1. Is this data indicative of anything else (can it be used to prove another line of thought)? 
  2. If everything went perfectly (everyone took this recommendation, took this action), then what? Is this a desirable state? Are there any downsides to this? 
  3. How much proxy data am I using? In general proxy data or data that ‘stands-in’ for other data.
  4. Is the data balanced (age, gender, socio-economic)? What does this data tell us about our customers? 
  5. What does this data say about our assumptions? This is a slightly different cut from above, this is more aimed at the presuppositions of who is selecting the data set. 
  6. Last but not least: zip codes. As zip codes are often a proxy for race, use zip codes with caution. Perhaps using state level data or three digit zip code levels average out the results and monitor results by testing for bias. 

Maggie Bender is a Senior Product Manager at Bain & Company within their software solutions division. She has a M.A. in Theology from Marquette University with a specialization in biblical studies where her thesis explored the implications of historical narratives on group cohesion. She lives in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, enjoys gardening, dog walking, and horseback riding.

Sources:

Johnson, Elizabeth A. Quest for the Living God: Mapping Frontiers in the Theology of God (New York: Continuum, 2008), 82-83.

O’Neil, Cathy. Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy (New York: Broadway Books, 2017), 85-87.

Orlowski, Jeff. The Social Dilemma (Netflix, 2020) 1hr 57, https://www.netflix.com/title/81254224.

What would a Theology of AI Look Like?

The influence of secular thinking in our global society is powerful enough to make a project like a “theology of Artificial Intelligence” appear to be a doomed enterprise or a contradiction in terms at best, and sheer nonsense at worst. Is there a theology of the microchip? The integrated circuit? The Boolean gates?  And even if one happened to think that God is closer to software than hardware – is there a theology of AI or machine learning?

Put so plainly and abruptly, these questions can easily lead to the conclusion that such a theology is impossible to make sense of. Just as a secular opinion (surreptitiously powerful even among adherents of religions) often hastens to declare that “religion and science simply cannot go together”, the same would be assumed about theology and modern technology – it is like yoking a turtle and a jaguar together.

Moreover, if one approached the incongruence between “theology” and “artificial intelligence” by transposing it to the field of anthropology, one would again face the same problem on another plane. What does a human being practicing religion – a homo religiosus – have to do with a human being – perhaps the very same human being – as a user of artificial intelligence? Is it not the case that historical progress has by our days left behind not only the relevance of religion but also the very humanism that used to enshrine the same human being in question as sacred? Is secular humanism in our day not giving way to things like the “transhuman” and the “posthuman”? 

YouTube Liturgies

But this secular-historical argument is not difficult to turn upside down. When it comes to human history, it is the nature of the things of the past that they are still with us and, what is more, religious forms of consciousness that many would deem atavistic today not only stay present but can also come across with new vigor in the contemporary digital environment. They might strike many as hybrid forms of consciousness, in which the day before yesterday stages an intense and perplexing comeback.

Photo by Pixabay.com

Take the example of Christian devotion in an online environment like YouTube. Assisted, surrounded, and finally motivated by the artificial intelligence of YouTube, a Christian believer will soon find herself in the intensifying bubble of her own religious fervor. Her worship of Jesus Christ in watching devotional videos is quickly and easily perceived by YouTube’s algorithms which will soon offer her historical documentaries, testimonies, Christian talk shows, subscriptions to Christian channels, and the like. In the wake of this spiraling movement, her religious consciousness will be very different and, in a sense, more intense than that of a premodern devotee of Christ – a consciousness steeped in a medium orchestrated by artificial intelligence.  

It follows from the pervasive presence of artificial intelligence in today’s society in general and in what we call “new media” in particular that, the same way as any other kind of content, any positive religious content may also invite an inquiry into the nature of AI. But a note of caution is in order here. The terms “religious” and “religion” in this context must include much more than the semantics of mainstream religious traditions like Christianity.

An online religious attitude includes much more than any cult of personality and may extend to the whole of online existence.

For instance, the above example of artificial intelligence orchestrating Christian experience, after all, is perfectly applicable to any online cult of personality. A teenager worshipping Billie Eilish will experience something very similar to Christian worship on YouTube whose algorithms do not make any methodical distinction between a pop singer and a Messiah. 

Online Worship and Techno-Totalitarianism

In a theology of AI what really matters online is not positive religious content but a certain religious attitude intensified and eventually motivated by Artificial Intelligence. An online religious attitude includes much more than any cult of personality and may extend to the whole of online existence. As researchers of contemporary cultural anthropology and sociology of religion have pointed out, many users of digital technology find a “higher life” and a “more authentic self” online, at the same time as experiencing a mystical fusion with the entirety of the global digital cloud.[1] The relocation of the sacred and the godlike in the realm of the digital is as obvious here as the influence of a technological version of New Age spirituality which is often called “New Edge” by researchers and devotees alike.

From Pixabay.com

This “techno-religion” is fully subservient to what can be termed techno-totalitarianism. The digital technology and environment of our times perfectly fit the definition of totalitarianism: it pervades and knits tightly together all aspects of society while enabling the full subjugation of the individual to a ubiquitous and anonymous power. The totalitarian and curiously religious presence of the secular, “neutral” and functional algorithms of artificial intelligence evokes both a religious past and a religious future.

Algorithmic Determinism

This is another example of the historical dialectic between religion and secularisation. The secular probability theory underpinning these secular algorithms (and predicting the online behavior of users) has roots in the Early Modern statistical theory of prediction modeled on the idea of God’s predestination.[2] Ironically, the idea of divine predestination is making a gruesome return in contemporary times as the increasing bulk of big data at the disposal of AI algorithms means more and more certainty about user behavior and, as a consequence, increasingly precise prediction for and automation of the human future. It is, therefore, safe to say that there can indeed be such a thing as a theology of AI and machine learning.

The division between those who are elected and those who are not, increasingly defines various sectors of contemporary information society such as the financial market. The simple truth of a formula like “the rich get richer, the poor poorer” has deep roots in the reality of inscrutably complex AI algorithms running in the financial sector that determine not only trade on Wall Street but also the success or failure of many millions of small cases like individual credit applications.

By Pixabay.com

Algorithms decide on who obtains credit and at what interest rate. The more data about individual applicants they have at their disposal, the more accurately they can predict their future financial behavior.[3] Like in many other fields defined by AI, it is not difficult to recognize here how prediction slips into modification and modification into techno-determinism which seals the fate of the world’s population. Indeed, this immense power over individuals, holding their past, present, and future with iron clips together, is nothing short of a force for a new religious realm and a wake-up call to Christian theology from its dogmatic slumber.

Conclusion

It is clear that if there is a positive theology of artificial intelligence as such it must go far beyond an analysis of explicit, positive “religious content” in today’s online environment.  If so, one question certainly remains which is impossible to answer within the confines of this blogpost: what would a negative theology of AI look like, a theology in which an engagement with AI would go hand in hand with a distance from and criticism of it?

[1]  cf. Stef Aupers & Dick Houtman (eds.), Religions of Modernity: Relocating the Sacred to the Self and the Digital (Leiden-Boston: Brill, 2010).

[2] This idea is spelled out in Virgil W. Brower, “Genealogy of Algorithms: Datafication as Transvaluation”, Le foucaldien 6, no. 1 (2020): 11, 1-43.

[3] This is one of the main arguments in Cathy O’Neill, Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy (New York: Crown, 2016).

Gábor L. Ambrus holds a post-doctoral research position in the Theology and Contemporary Culture Research Group at The Charles University, Prague. He is also a part-time research fellow at the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas, Rome. He is currently working on a book on theology, social media, and information technology. His research primarily aims at a dialogue between the Judaeo-Christian tradition and contemporary techno-scientific civilization.

Recreating our World Through Mustard Seed Technology

In this blog, I sketch the outline of an alternative story for technology. It starts with an ancient parable and how it has sprung into a multiplicity of meanings in our time. It is a story of grassroots change, power from below, organic growth, and life-giving transformation. Those are terms we often do not associate with technology. Yet, this is about to change as we introduce the concept of mustard seed technology.

Narratives are powerful meaning-making tools. They bring facts together and organize them in a compelling way, making them hard to refute. Most often, their influence goes beyond story-telling to truth defining. That is, the reader becomes a passive, uncritical receiver of its message mostly taking for granted the fact that it is only a narrative. The story often becomes an undisputed fact.

Looking Behind the Curtain

When it comes to technology, the situation is no different. The dominant narrative tells the story of Silicon Valley overlords who rule our world through their magical gadgets, constantly capturing our attention and our desires. Other times, it hinges on a Frankenstein perspective of creation turning against their creators where machines conspire to re-shape our world without our consent. While both narratives hold kernels of truth, their power is not in their accuracy but in their influence. That is, they are not important because they are true but because we believe in them.

Photo by Frederico Beccari from unsplash.com

The role of the theologian, or the critical thinker if you will, is to expose and dismantle them. Yet, they do that not by direct criticism alone but also by offering alternative compelling narratives that connect the facts in new ways. Most dominant narratives around technology share a bent towards despair. It is most often the story of a power greater than us, a god if you will, imposing their will to our detriment. Hence, the best antidote is a narrative of hope that does not ignore the harms and dangers but weighs them properly against the vast opportunities human creativity has to offer the world.

The best challenge to algorithmic determinism is human flourishing against all odds.

That is what AI theology aspires to. As we seek to intersect technological narratives with ancient text, we look both for ethical considerations as well as the lens of hope, both in short supply in the world of techno-capitalism and techno-authoritarianism. In the worship of profit, novelty, and order, these two dominant currents tell only part of the story. Yet, unfortunately, as they proclaim it with powerful loudspeakers parallel stories are overshadowed.

A Biblical Parable

According to the Evangelists, Jesus liked to teach through parables. He knew the power of narrative. The gospels contain many examples of these short stories often meant to make the hearer find meaning in their environment. They were surprisingly simple, memorable, and yet penetrating. Instead of being something to discern, it discerned the listener as they encounter themselves in the story.

Photo by Mishaal Zahed on Unsplash

One of them is the seminal parable about the mustard seed. Evangelist Matthew puts it this way:

He put before them another parable: “The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed that someone took and sowed in his field;  it is the smallest of all the seeds, but when it has grown it is the greatest of shrubs and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and make nests in its branches.

Matthew 13:31-32

From this short passage, we can gather two main paths of meaning. The first one is of small beginnings becoming robust and large over time. It is not just about the fast growth of a startup but more a movement that takes time to take hold eventually becomes an undisputed reality that no one can deny.

The other path of meaning is one of function. Once it is grown, is not there simply to be admired and revered. Instead, it is there to provide shelter for other beings who do not have a home. It is a picture of hospitality, inclusion, and invitation. The small seed becomes a big tree that can now help small animals. It can provide shade from the sun and a safe place for rest.

A Contemporary Story from the Margins

Jesus was not talking directly about technology. We can scarcely claim to know the original meaning of the text. That is not the task here. It is instead an attempt to transpose the rich avenues of meaning from the text into our current age and in turn, build a new narrative about the development of technology in our time. A story about how technology is emerging from the margins and solving problems in a life-giving way, rather than a flashy but profitable manner. That is what I would define as mustard seed technology.

What does that look like in concrete examples? From the great continent of Africa, I can tell of at least two examples. One is the story of a boy who built a wind generator to pump water to his village. With limited access to books, parts, and no one to teach him, he organized an effort to build the generator using an old bike motor. The Netflix movie The Boy who Harnessed the Wind tells this story and is worth your time. Another example is how Data Science Nigeria is training millions of data scientists in Africa. Through hackathons, boot camps, and online courses, the organization is a the forefront of AI skills democratization efforts.

Beyond these two examples, consider the power unleashed through the creative economy. As billions get access to free content on YouTube and other video platforms, knowledge can be transferred a lot faster than before. Many can learn new skills from the comfort of their home. Others can share their art and crafts and sell them in a global cyber marketplace. Entrepreneurship is flourishing at the margins as the world is becoming more connected.

Conclusion

These examples of mustard seed technology tell a different story. They speak of a subversive undercurrent of goodness in history that will not quiet down even in the midst of despair, growing inequality, and polarization. It is the story of the mustard seed technology springing up in the margins of our global home. They are growing into robust trees of creativity and economic empowerment.

Do you have the eyes to see and the courage to testify to their truth? When you consider technology, I invite you to keep the narratives of despair at bay. For a moment, start looking for the mustard seeds happening all around you. As you find them, they will grow into trees of hope and encouragement in your heart.

Placing Human Dignity at the Center of AI Ethics

In late August we had our kick-off Zoom meeting of the Advisory Board. This is the first of our monthly meetings where we will be exploring the intersection of AI and spirituality. The idea is to gather scholars, professionals, and clergy to discuss this topic from a multi-faceted view. In this blog, we publish a short summary of our first conversation. The key theme that emerged was a concern for safeguarding and uploading human dignity as AI becomes embedded in growing spheres of our lives. The preocupation must inhabit the center of all AI discussions and be the guiding principles for laws, business practices and policies.

Question for Discussion: What, in your perspective, is the most pressing issue on AI ethics in the next three to five years? What keeps you up at night?

Brian Sigmon: The values from which AI is being developed, and their end goals. What is AI oriented for? Usually in the US, it’s oriented towards profit, not oriented to the common good or toward human flourishing. Until you change the fundamental orientation of AI’s development, you’re going to have problems.

AI is so pervasive in our lives that we cannot escape it. We don’t always understand the logic behind it. It is often beneath the surface intertwined with many other issues. For example, when I go on social media, AI controls what I see on my feed. It does not optimize in making me a better person but instead maximize clicks and revenue. That, to me, is the key issue.

Elias Kruger: Thank you, Brian. To add some color to that, since the pandemic, companies have increased their investment in AI. This in turn is creating a corporate AI race that will further ensure the encroachment of AI across multiple industries. How companies execute this AI strategy will deeply shape our lives, not just here in the US but globally.

Photo by Chris Montgomery on Unsplash

Frantisek Stech: Coming from Eastern Europe, one of the greatest issues is the abuse of AI from authoritarian non-democratic regimes for human control. In other words, it is the relationship between AI control and human freedom. Another practical problem is how people are afraid to lose their jobs to AI-driven machines.  

Elias Kruger: Thanks Frantisek, as you know we are aware of what is happening in China with the merging of AI and authoritarian governments. Can you tell us a little bit about your area of the world? Is AI more government-driven or more corporate?

Frantisek Stech: In the Czech Republic, we belong to the EU, an therefore to the West. So, it is very much corporate-driven. Yet, we are very close to our Eastern neighbors are we are watching closely how things develop in Belarussia and China especially as they will inevitably impact our region of the world.

However, this does not mean we are free from danger there. There is the issue of manipulation of elections that started with the Cambridge Analytics scandal and issues with the presidential elections in the US. Now we are approaching elections in the EU, so there is a lot of discussions about how AI will be used for manipulation and the problem . So when people hear AI, they often associate with politics. So they think they are already being manipulated if they buy a phone with Facial recognition. We have to be cautious but not completely afraid. 

Ben Day: I am often pondering on this question of AI’s, or technology in general, relates with dignity and individual human flourishing. When we aggregate and manipulate data, we strip out individual human dignity which is Christian virtue, and begin to see people as compilations of manipulative data. It is really a threat to ontology, to our very sense of being. In effect, it is an assault on human dignity through AI.

Going further, I am interested in this question of how AI encroaches in our sense of identity. That is, how algorithms govern my entire exposure to media and news. Not just that but AI impacts our whole social eco-verse online and offline. What does that have to do with the nature of my being?

I often say that I have a very low view of humanity. I don’t think human beings are that great. And so, I fear that AI can manipulate the worst parts of human nature. That is an encroachment in huam dignity.

In the Episcopal church, we believe that serving Christ is intimately connected with upholding the dignity of human beings. So, if we are turning a blind eyed to human dignities being manipulated, then my Christian praxis compels me by moral obligation to do something about it. 

Photo by Liv Merenberg on Unsplash

Elias Kruger: Can you give us a specific example of how this plays out?

Ben Day: Let me give you one example of how this affected my ministry. I removed myself from most of social media as of October of 2016 because of what I was witnessing. I saw members of my church sparring on the internet, attacking each other’s dignity, and intellect over politicized issues. The vitriol was so pervasive that I encounter a moral dilemma. As a priest, it is my duty to deny the sacrament to those who are in unrepetant sin.

So I would face parishioners only hours after these spars online and wonder whether I should offer them the sacrament. I was facing this connundrum as a result of algorithms manipulating feeds to foster angry engagements because it leads to profit. It virtually puts the church at odds to how these companies pursue profit.

Levi Checketts:  I lived in Berkley for many years and the cost of living there was really high. It was so because a lot of people who worked in Silicon Valley or in San Francisco were moving there. The influx of well-to-do professionals raised home prices in the area, forcing less fortunate existing residents to move out.

So, there is all this money going into AI. Of the big 5 biggest companies in market cap, three are in Silicon Valley and two in the Seattle area. Tech professionals often do not have full awareness of the impact their work is having on the rest of the world. For example, a few years back, a tech employee wrote an op-ed complaining about having to see disgusting homeless people in his way to work when he was paying so much for rent.

What I realized is that there is a massive disconnect between humanity and the people making decisions for companies that are larger than many countries’ economies. My biggest concern is that the people who are in charge and controlling AI have many blind spots. Their inability to emphathize with those who are suffering or even notice the realities of systems that breed oppression and poverty. To them, there is always a technical fix. Many lack the humility to listen to other perspectives, and come from mainly male Asian and White backgrounds. They are often opposed to other perspectives that challenge their work.

There have been high-profile cases recently like Google firing a black female researcher because she spoke up about problems in the company. The question that Ben mentioned about human dignity in AI is very pressing. If we want to address that, we need people from different backgrounds making decisions and working to develop these technologies.

Futhermore, if we define AI as a being that makes strictly rational decisions, what about people who do not fit that mold?

The key questions are where do we locate this dignity and how do we make sure AI doesn’t run roughshod over humanity?

Davi Leitão: These were all great points that I was not thinking about before. Thank you for sharing this with us.

All of these are important questions which drive the need for regulation and laws that will gear profit-driven corporations to the right path. All of the privacy and data security laws stand on a set of principles written in 1981 by the OECD. These laws are looking to these principles and putting into practice. They are there to inform and safeguard people from bias.

My question is: what are the blind spots on the FIP (fair information principles) that are not accounting for these new issues technology has brought in? This problem is a wide net, but it can help guide a lot of new laws that will come. This is the only way to make companies care about human dignity.

Right now, there is a proliferation of state laws. But this brings another problem: customers of states that have regulation laws can suffer discrimination by companies from other states. Therefore, there is a need for a federal uniform set of principles and laws about privacy in the US. The inconsistency between state laws keep lawyers in business but ultimately harm the average citizen.

Elias Kruger:  Thanks for this perspective. I think it would be a good takeaway for the group to look for blindspots in these principles. AI is about algorithms and data. Data is fundamental. If we don’t handle it correctly, we can’t fix it with algorithms. 

My 2 cents is that when it comes to AI applications, the one that concerns me most is facial recognition for surveillance and law enforcement. I don’t think there is any other application where a mistake can cause such devastating impact on the victim than here. When AI wrongly incriminates someone of a crime because an algorithm confused their face with the actual perpetrator, the indidivual loses his freedom. There is no way to recover from that.

This application calls for immediate regulation that puts human dignity at the center of AI in so we can prevent serious problems in the future.

Thanks everybody for your time.

What is Mystical Christian Transhumanism? A Conversation with ICN

Just recently, I had the privilege to talk to Luke Healy and David Pinkston for the Integral Christian Network podcast. The interview was inspired by the 3 essay series I completed at Medium on Mystical Christian Transhumanism.

To listen to the podcast click on the picture

In this casual conversation, we covered a lot of ground from deconstructing evangelical faith to integrating it into all aspects of life. I really enjoyed the conversation and would like to provide a guided summary here for those interested in listening in.

Luke started us off with a short guided meditation, setting the tone for a lively but relaxed conversation. It also helped me engage with the questions less from the head and more from the heart.

The conversation started at 4:00 when Luke asked me to give a short overview of my spiritual journey. I discussed portions of it in previous blogs like this one and this one. In the podcast, I described the path from a Charismatic militant religion to the Mystical Christian Transhumanism where I am today.

Discovering the Mystical

Next at about 7:55, Luke asked about how the mystical fits into this picture. What is the mystical part? I spoke a bit about how the mystical was a thread that was there all along. One that has run through Christian history and even embedded in our current movements. In short, the mystical is about the experience of the divine presence irrespective of how we explain it theologically. It sets a foundation of non-dualistic thinking that enables us to be open to the world.

At around minute 12, Luke asked me to dive deeper into the Christian part. He was particularly interested in the militant part of my faith upbringing. I shared how while having to shed the more combative aspects of my earlier faith, I was also grateful for how it celebrated the experiential. While this was a long a painful road, I would certainly not be who I am today without going through it.

Technology and Transhumanism

This became a good segway into discussing technology at minute 19. He first asked me about the path to integrating my work with technology with the Christian faith. That is how I told the story of how AI Theology started as a desire to integrate the technologist in me with the theologian.

From minute 24 onwards, the conversation shifted towards Transhumanism. I started by providing a brief definition. Next, I talked about engaging this emerging philosophy and its Christian roots. I then proceeded to better define Christian Transhumanism as a way to live out the faith in very practical terms.

At 29:30, Luke asked how the mystical relates to Transhumanism. Are those opposing ideas? I talked about how mystical adds a spiritual dimension to the pursuit of Transhumanism. The remainder of the conversation revolved around our relationship with technology and how it can support and uphold human flourishing. Part of this process is re-thinking how we use church buildings.

This is the first of many conversations to come on this topic. I hope you find the exploration of Mystical Christian Transhumanism helpful for your journey.

Developing an E-Bike Faith: Divine Power with Human Effort

What can technology teach about faith? In a past blog, I spoke of the mystical qubit. Previously I spoke on how AI can expand our view of God. In this blog, I explore a different technology that is now becoming a common fixture of our cities: e-bikes. A few weeks ago I bought a used one and have loved riding it ever since. For those wondering, you still get your exercise minus the heart palpitations in the uphill climbs. But I digress, this is not a blog about the benefits of an e-bike but of how its hybrid nature can teach us about faith and spirituality.

Biking to Seminary

Eight years ago, we moved to sunny Southern California so I could attend seminary. We found a house about 5 miles from the campus which in my mind meant that I could commute by bike. The distance was reasonable and the wonderful weather seem to conspire in my favor. I could finally free myself from the shackles of motorized dependency.

On our first weekend there, I decided to go for a trial bike ride. The way to the campus went by like a breeze. In no more than 15 minutes I was arriving at Fuller seminary beaming in delight. Yet, I had a nagging suspicion the way back home would be different. One thing that did not enter my calculations was that though we were only 5 miles away from campus, our house was at the foothills of Altadena. That meant that the only way home was uphill. The first 2 miles were bearable yet by mile 3, my legs were giving out. I eventually made it back home drenched in sweat and disappointment.

It became clear that this would not be a ride I could take often. My dreams of biking to seminary ended that day. Back to the gasoline cages for the rescue, not as exciting but definitely more practical.

Photo by Federico Beccari on Unsplash

Divine Electricity

We now live in the Atlanta area and often go to Chattanooga for day trips. This charming Tennesee jewel offers a beautiful riverfront with many attractions for families like ours. Like many cities seeking to attract Millenials, they offer a network of public bikes for a small cost. Among them, I noticed they had some e-bikes available. For a while, I was curious to try one but not enough to shell out the thousands of dollars they cost. Timidly, I pick one for a leisure ride in the city.

From the beginning, I could sense the difference. I still had to pedal normally like I would on a normal bike. Yet, as I pedaled it was like I got a little push that made my pedaling more effective. I would dash by other bikers glancing back at them triumphantly. I then decided to test in an uphill. Would the push sustain or eventually fizzle out because of gravity?

To my contentment, that was when the e-bike shined. For those accustomed to biking, you know that right before going uphill you pedal fast to get as much speed as you can. As you start climbing, you switch to lower gears until the bike is barely moving while you pedal intensively. You make up for the weight relief by tripling your pedal rotations. It can be demoralizing to pedal like a maniac but move like a turtle which is why many dismount and walk. It is like all that effort dissipates by the gravitational pull on the bike.

Pedaling uphill in an e-bike is a completely different experience. First, there is no need to maximize your speed coming into it. You pedal normally and as the bike slows down, the electric motor kicks in to propel you forward. You end up keeping the same speed while pedaling at the same rate.

Goodbye frantic-pedaling-slow-going uphill, hello eternal-e-bike-flatlands

It is as if the hand of God is pushing you from behind when your leg muscles can keep the speed. Going up is no longer a drag but a thrill, all thanks to the small electric motor in the back wheel capable of pushing up a grown man and a 50 lbs bike.

Humanity Plus

If I could change one thing in the Western Christian tradition, that would be the persistent and relentless loathing for humanity. From very early on, and at times even expressed in the biblical text, there is a tendency to make humans look bad in order to make God look good. The impetus stems from a desire to curb our constant temptation to hubris. Sure, we all, especially those whom society put on a pedestal, need to remember our puny frailty lest we overestimate our abilities.

Yet, we are mysteriously beautiful and unpredictable. Once I let go of this indoctrinated loathing, I could face this intricate concoction of flesh in a whole new way. Humanity is a spectacular outcome for an insanely long and painful process of evolution. In fact, that is what often leads us back to the belief in God. The lucid beauty of our humanity is what points us to the invisible divine.

This loathing of humanity often translates into the confusing and ineffective grace-versus-work theology. Stretching Pauline letters to ways never intended by the beloved apostle, theologians have produced miles of literature on the topic. While some of it is helpful (maybe 2%, who knows?), most of it devolves into a tendency to deny the role of human effort in spirituality. In an effort to address transactional legalism, many overshoot in emphasizing divine activity in the process. This is unfortunate because removing the role of human effort in spirituality is a grave mistake. We need both.

Photo by Fabrizio Conti on Unsplash

The Two Sides of Spiritual Growth

Human empowerment plays a pivotal role in a healthy spirituality. If pride is a problem so is its passive-aggressive counterpart low self-loathing. To have an inordinately negative view of self does not lead to godliness but it is a sure path to depression. Along with a realistic view of self comes the understanding that human effort is key to accomplishing things on this earth.

Yet, just like pedaling uphill, human effort can only take you so far. Sometimes you need a divine push. For a long time, I thought divine empowerment worked independently from human effort. What if it is less like a car and more like an e-bike? That is, you still need to pedal, tending for this earth and lifting fellow humans from the curse of entropy. Yet, as you faithfully do it, you are propelled by divine power to reach new heights.

Had e-bikes existed 8 years ago, my idea of commuting to seminary would have been viable. I could have conquered those grueling hills of Altadena with elegant pedaling. I would have made it home without breaking a sweat and still kiss my wife and kids without repelling them with my body odor. It would have been glorious.

Conclusion

Human effort without divine inspiration is not much different from trying to bike uphill. It requires initial concentrated effort only to get us to a state of profuse effort with little movement. Engaging the world without sacred imagination can and will often lead to burnout.

As we face mounting challenges with a stubborn pandemic that will relentlessly destroy our plans, let’s hold on to an e-bike faith. One the calls us to action fueled by divine inspiration. One that reminds us of our human limitation but focuses on a limitless God. That is when we can soar to new heights as divine electricity propel us into new beginnings.

Faith Deconstruction: Trading Convictions for Better Questions

In a previous blog, I shared about my journey to find a more integrated faith. In this blog, I talk about the process of faith deconstruction that led me there. It was a long windy road that took years. Nevertheless, I am grateful for every mile traveled.

Imagine your car breaks down. Because you don’t have the money to buy a new one, you decide to fix it. However, you do not know any mechanics. You still need a mode of transportation and bikes are out of the question. That is when you decide to fix the engine yourself. Your first step is taking the engine apart, piece by piece, inspecting to see what can be wrong with it. After this long process, you are now ready to put the engine back together. Yet, to save time and effort, you decide to let go of the parts that are broken and those that are unnecessary. Instead, you rebuild it a leaner version of the original to ensure you are able to have a working car to take you from point a to point b.

That is what faith deconstruction looks like.

It is a long and laborious process of taking beliefs apart, inspecting what may not serve you any longer. Seeing the good and the bad and choosing to retain only what is needed for the journey ahead.

Photo by Tim Mossholder on Unsplash

A Personal Story

Deconstructing one’s faith is not for the faint of heart. I confess this was a task I dared not engage in for years. Why? In one word: fear. I was afraid I would lose my bearings, my sanity, my identity, my community, the respect of my loved ones, my very purpose of being. On top of that, of course, there was the fear of eternal damnation. That small nagging feeling that even if there was a 1% chance of being true, that was enough not to risk it. Forget it, there was much to lose, too many uncertainties on the other side and after all — things were not that bad on this side. At least, so I thought.

I wasn’t like I woke up one day and said: “Now I am ready to deconstruct my faith!” Like for many that underwent this process, it was a combination of events, disappointments, and irreconcilable situations that thrust us into the tempestuous sea of doubt. For some, it was the death of a loved one. To me, it was the death of a dream. Yes, in every story of faith deconstruction, there is death involved.

This is the way.

I have written before about my pain and disappointment. Suffice it to say that at every turn doors closed and it became painfully clear that my vocational path would lead elsewhere. It wasn’t just about vocation but also about identity, meaning, and deep disappointment with Chrisitians’ attitude in the public square. Yes, you guessed it: Trump, treatment of LGBTQ, authoritarianism, and other unfortunate events.

Revisiting Old Certainties

Photo by Nathan Dumlao on Unsplash

If I was going to move further, I had to let go of some convictions. Like screws in an engine, they must first loosen up before we fix anything. One key conviction was my view of the Bible. In my childhood faith, the Bible was the ultimate authority and source of all truth. It was never to be questioned only to be submitted to. While this may have saved my European ancestors from Papal oppression, it has now become the foundation for dogmatic thinking and stifling perspectives. Re-visiting my view of the Bible was a key step in the journey of faith deconstruction.

The change went deeper than that. It meant letting go of certainty and inviting doubtful faith. My childhood faith taught me the blessed assurance was beyond doubt. Letting go of this perceived security was a hard thing to do. It begged the following: if the Bible is no longer the source of ultimate authority, then what is?

For years I had no answer to this question which was why I also stood paralyzed in this conundrum. On the one hand, I knew that placing this amount of faith in the letter of the Bible was no longer viable. On the other, I did not see any alternative that could adequately replace it.

Leaping into Untethered Faith

Would my experience now be the arbiter of truth? I am not that smart or spiritually enlightened. That, I knew for sure so it had to be elsewhere. Would science be the new source of authority? It was also a problematic choice given the evolving nature of scientific inquiry. What we know now can really change in the next discovery. What then?

It was then that instead of trying to answer the question, that I encountered a new question: What if there is no absolute authority to hang my belief in? What if I will never really know for sure? The implications were terrifying but also surprisingly freeing.

Even so, they did not require a simple change of perspective. Instead, they call for a leap of faith. It was more like a jump into untethered belief. A certainty that even though I could not articulate an ultimate authority for my faith, that faith was real nevertheless. Not just that, but there was a trust that there was higher power on the other side to catch me. This is not a rejection of God but an acceptance that God is much more we can describe or experience.

The place of encounter is where God lives – no other assurances are needed.

Losing My Religion to Find an Integrated Christianity

In the last six months, I have written primarily on AI ethics and AI for good in the AI theology portal. In this piece, I would like to turn inward. Rather than providing informative pieces that keep the pulse of AI developments, I would like to dive deeper into a theological reflection of my spiritual experience – more theology, less AI. In this blog, I share about the journey of letting go of militant convictions to find an integrated Christianity.

A Holistic Spirituality

Encouraged by my western upbringing, I tend to compartmentalize spirituality separately from the rest of my life. On the one hand, I had my spiritual life consisting of practices like prayer, studying, and worship. On the other hand, I managed the remainder of life through analytical rational forms, trying to balance the competing demands of being a father, husband, professional, and citizen. I knew these two parts were interrelated but found it difficult to integrate them. It invited too many questions often making good fodder for deep thinking but little impetus for action. And so, I carried on with an internal spiritual life while also responding to external circumstances brought by my many roles in society.

Photo by Willian Justen de Vasconcellos on Unsplash

Thankfully, this dynamic began to shift in the last few years. I have written before about my journey out of church life. In this wilderness, I have encountered companions that helped me show the way to a more integrated Christianity. I am far from mastering it but I am content to become an avid disciple under its vast wisdom. When convictions wane and certainties loosen up, we can finally receive the gift of the new. That is, the new wine of an integrated spirituality can only arrive in the new wineskins of an open heart.

What does that integrated spirituality look like? I really didn’t have words until recently and in this piece will attempt to flesh it out for others. This is in no way an authoritative description of an emerging Christianity. It is, however, anecdotal evidence that an Christian spirituality can thrive outside of the confines of organized religion. I hope you find it useful to your journey.

Shedding a Militant Worldview

The move to a more holistic spirituality could not happen without leaving some old convictions behind. One of those that I was happy to shed was a militant dualistic view of the world. One of the most destructive theological fallacies of the last two centuries was a marrying of dispensationalism with political conservatism. That is, the first one filled believers with fear of imminent doom. The second one mistook Capitalism for Christianity. The mix created the insidious Christian nationalism that mistakes global cooperation with the mark of the beast.

Photo by Maxim Potkin on Unsplash

In practice, what that meant to me was that the Christianity I was raised in was often punctuated by a need to fight real and imaginary enemies. Our spiritual practices were part of a military mobilization for the kingdom of God – as if Jesus needed an army of freedom fighters (or terrorists) to bring his kingdom to earth. Spiritual warfare was an indirect way to address the social anxiety of losing cultural influence.

This militarism also made me suspicious of any mystical experience outside the very narrow acceptable definitions imposed by evangelical orthodoxy. That is, they have to be “biblical,” lest they be an opportunity for the enemy. In this militarized focus, many were hit by friendly fire. Spiritual experiences, especially those of rival Christian denominations, that deviated from an arbitrary “biblical” norm, became a threat. This in effect closed me off from going deeper into Christian tradition so I could learn more from the mystics. After all, when you are a part of the church that will usher Jesus’ return, you have no need to learn from history. 

Integral Christianity

As my journey moved away from the centers of official Christendom, I grew increasingly isolated. Thankfully, I recently learned about the Integral Christian Network. That was when I discovered mystical Christianity anew. 

Reading books, studying movements, and discussing their implications are all helpful ways to learn. They are, however, poor substitutes to experiencing spiritual practices in community. This is how any faith is best transmitted and preserved through generations. So, while I have had my share of studying Christian mystics from the past and even read their important writings, joining an ICN Wespace allowed me to go a step further. 

This Zoom facilitated small group has allowed me to encounter a supportive group to explore mystical Christianity unbounded by the militant restrictions of my upbringing. I confess I was scared and at times skeptical. The talk about spirit guides and speaking with angels made me uncomfortable at first. As I pressed forward, I received an inner affirmation that the Creator would be there to prod me from error. As I get to know a bigger God, the fear of error diminishes. That is when I am free to fly. 

Conclusion

The movement from dualism to mystical openness did not happen overnight. Instead, it came from a long process of dying and being born anew with the help of others along the way. In an integrated Christianity, I don’t claim to have found a new orthodoxy to hang my hat on. I am only here to report what my experience has said. It is neither authoritative nor meaningless.

Yet, I do hope that by learning about my experience you can look to your own. The path for spiritual growth will rarely look the same for two individuals but thankfully we can always learn from each other. And that is why I leave you with a final question:

Where is your spiritual journey leading you to?

This post is a snippet from a larger article I published at medium.

Alexa Goes to Church: Imagining a Holy AI for Modern Worship

Can artificial intelligence be holy?

The very question of holy AI calls to mind certain images that raise our anxiety: chatbots offering spiritual advice or pastoral care; an artificial minister preaching from the pulpit or presiding at Communion; a highly advanced AI governing our lives with the authority, power, and mystery reserved for God alone.

It’s not surprising that we instinctively shrink back from such images. Artificial intelligence is still so new, and advancing so rapidly, that finding the proper categories to integrate it into our faith can be a major challenge.

But if we’re willing to entertain the idea that AI can be holy, doing so can help us imagine new possibilities for using AI faithfully in our churches and spiritual life. It can show us the potential of AI to be a constructive partner with people of faith in shaping our spiritual lives, bearing witness to God’s grace in the world, and loving one another.

Photo by christian buehner on Unsplash

What Is Holiness?

It’s important to begin with a clear understanding of holiness in the Bible and Christian tradition. Holiness in its most basic sense means set apart for God. The Hebrew word for holy, qadosh, has a root meaning of “separate,” indicating the boundary separating the everyday, the human realm from the sacred, divine realm. To be holy is to be separated—set apart—for God.

Throughout the Bible, we find a broad range of things designated as holy:

  • Places (the Tabernacle, the Temple, Mount Sinai).
  • Times (the Sabbat, various holidays and festivals).
  • People (the people of Israel, the Israelite priests, prophets).
  • Objects (the Ark of the Covenant, the menorah or lampstand, and the other instruments of worship in the Tabernacle).

These examples are from the Old Testament, but a look at Christian practice today shows that Christians recognize a similar range of holy things, though the specifics vary depending on one’s particular tradition:

  • Places (sanctuaries, holy sites such as the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem).
  • Times (Sunday, holidays like Christmas and Easter).
  • People (ministers, priests, bishops, elders).
  • Objects (altar, the chalice and patin used in observing Communion).

Holiness does not make something inherently better or more worthy in God’s sight. Rather, designating a person or object as holy often signifies and expresses God’s care and claim for all. So, the Temple is a holy place where God’s presence is especially intense and most keenly felt, but this does not mean God is absent everywhere else. On the contrary, at the Temple’s dedication, Solomon says, “But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Even heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain you, much less this house that I have built!” (1 Kings 8:27). God’s presence at the Temple signifies God’s presence throughout the whole earth. In the same way, God calls the Israelites a holy people, while affirming that all people belong to God: “Indeed, the whole earth is mine, but you shall be for me a priestly kingdom and a holy nation” (Exodus 19:5-6). The designation of the Sabbath as a holy day is a way of ordering all of our time in a way that honors God as the Creator of all that exits.

The existence of a holy artificial intelligence in this sense—that is, set apart for God in a special way—would not mean that only this AI belongs to God or serves God. Rather, a holy artificial intelligence would signify and express that all artificial intelligence belongs to God and finds its proper orientation when directed toward God’s purposes. Seen in this way, recognizing a holy artificial intelligence seems not only permissible but imperative. Identifying an artificial intelligence as holy, and recognizing it as such through specific practices, can teach us to envision how all artificial intelligence—and all the human energies and hopes it represents—belongs to God.

Photo by William Farlow on Unsplash

Holy Artificial Intelligence

One way to think of holy artificial intelligence is as a tool or instrument—in this case, a complex piece of technology—created by humans and used in worship. The Tabernacle and its furnishings described in Exodus 25-40 make for a good comparison: the Ark of the Covenant, the menorah or lampstand, the incense altar, even the curtains and tent posts that served as the Tabernacle’s structural elements and walls.

These items were created by humans, highly skilled at their craft, at God’s initiative and direction. God gave specific instructions to Moses, and the narrative repeatedly tells us that the workers built everything “as the Lord had commanded Moses.” The artisans exercised great care in creating them, expressed in the detailed, step-by-step account of their construction in Exodus 36-39. The Tabernacle signified God’s presence in the midst of the Israelites, and its furnishings and tools facilitated the people’s worship of God.

It requires a bit of imagination to envision ways in which artificial intelligence might serve similar purposes in Christian worship today. A few possibilities present themselves for holy AI:

  • An automated program to turn on lights, music, or other dimensions of a sanctuary’s atmosphere as a way of preparing the space or guiding the order of worship. The algorithm might work at pre-set times, or in response to other input such as facial recognition, number of people in the sanctuary, or verbal or physical cues from a worship leader. Such a program might tailor the worship atmosphere to feel more intimate for a smaller gathering, or grander and more energetic for a larger body of worshipers.
  • An automated program might offer a repeated portion of a litany or prayer, responding to specific cues from the congregation or minister. Such cues might be verbal, such as a particular word at the end of the congregation’s part of the litany, or physical, for instance in response to the congregation standing, kneeling, or making a particular gesture. A program used in a digital worship service might collect and respond to input through social media.
  • A self-driving vehicle might bring people to worship, helping worshipers prepare for the worship experience before arriving at the church. The AI might respond differently to different individuals or to different worship experiences. Upon detecting a family with young children, the vehicle might play kid-friendly worship music with brightly colored lighting, while it would play something quieter and more meditative for an adult individual.

Conclusion

Others will no doubt think of more and different possibilities, or find dilemmas with the possibilities mentioned above.

I will end with a final point of emphasis. Recognizing an AI as holy, something set aside for God, is different from simply using it in a holy or worshipful setting. There should be ways for the worshiping community to recognize its status.

Specific procedures to use during its development or activation, such as prayers or Scripture reading, would be one way to acknowledge its status as holy—for instance, saying a special set of prayers throughout the development or programming of the AI, or using certain programming processes and avoiding others. There might be a liturgy of dedication or short worship service for when the AI is activated or used for the first time in worship. Social media feeds or a virtual environment might allow the congregation to digitally “lay hands” on the AI as a part of the service. Another, similar liturgy or service could accompany its deactivation or replacement.

The key is not reducing the artificial intelligence to a purely functional role, but providing a means for worshipers to recognize and express God’s initiative and their own response in setting it apart for a holy purpose. The means to accomplish this should engage both the congregation and the AI in appropriate ways; should invoke God’s presence and blessing; and should be surrounded by a theological narrative that illuminates how and why it is being set apart for a holy purpose.

Such a way of identifying and acknowledging AI as holy is an invitation for the worshiping community to consider that all AI are a part of God’s creation, and can be directed toward God and God’s purposes in the world.

Dr. Brian Sigmon

Brian Sigmon is an acquisitions editor at The United Methodist Publishing House, where he edits books, Bible studies, and official resources for The United Methodist Church. He has a Ph.D. in Old Testament Studies from Marquette University, where he taught courses in the Bible and theology. Brian finds great joy in thinking deeply about the Christian faith and helping people of all backgrounds deepen their understanding of Scripture. He lives in Kingston Springs, Tennessee with his wife Amy and their three children.