What does it mean to be human in an age where, through Artificial Intelligence (AI), we can become a god? An age in which AI competes with Christianity for everlasting life?
More importantly, is it even wise to become eternal? Missing from most debates concerning AI are its theological implications.
The possibility of AI’s omniscience has raised existential questions among developers. Many are turning to Christianity in search of possible answers. Silicon Valley is reporting growth in area congregations among tech workers, prompted by concerns raised in the development and use of AI.
Consider Peter Thiel, co-founder of PayPal and Palantir, who in September conducted a series of lectures on the biblical Antichrist to a sold-out audience. The series was organized by Acknowledging Christ in Technology and Society (ACTS). ACTS is an organization founded by Michelle Stephens, the wife of Trae Stephens, co-founder of Anduril Industries, which produces and sells autonomous weapon systems to the military.
My concern is not that tech bros are turning to Jesus. My concern is the particular Jesus they are turning to.
Is this the Jesús who stands in solidarity with the disenfranchised, preaching the liberation called for by the gospels? Or is this the emerging Jesus of white Christian nationalism? I sincerely doubt the Jesús in whom I believe is the same Jesus Peter Thiel follows.
Thiel, after all, donated millions to the Trump/Vance campaign, which runs counter to the teachings of the Jesús I follow. Furthermore, he co-authored The Diversity Myth, where he complains about the shift at Stanford from Western values to multiculturalism and the “dumbing down” by the admissions office to attract diversity.
His Jesus stands over and against my, and that of minoritized communities’ quest for liberation. Troubling also is his assertion that the definition of rape has been expanded to include “seductions that are later regretted.”
The liberative ethics for which I advocate is community-based, whose imperative remains solidarity. And yet AI reinforces the prevalent eurocentric characteristic of radical hyper-individualism.
Consider the ability to create an AI-powered likeness of a recently departed loved one, as is being developed and marketed by start-ups like DeepBrain and HereAfter AI. Such quests for existence after death cease to be the domain of religious institutions.
Such digital afterlife industries foster a techno-spiritualism fueled by realistic holograms or chatbots programmed with the departed’s memories, providing an ability to communicate with the dead. This neo-spiritualism, like the nineteenth and early twentieth century pseudoscientific attempts to communicate with the dead through séances, is foremost a profit-generating venture preying on the vulnerable—those who are grieving.
In our capitalist culture, how soon before these AI avatars begin making suggestions from their sponsors, such as ordering the deceased’s favorite food for special delivery on their birthday or anniversary?
Of course, the damage can be more than simply economic. By delaying or postponing the processing of grief, greater psychological damage can develop. Studies indicate that avoiding loss can lead to the creation of one’s own reality, reinforcing isolation. In contrast, a liberative ethics calls upon the community to be presente, to provide the necessary care and love for the surviving family member. This allows those who have experienced loss to work through their grief and find healing among others—those composed of flesh and blood, not algorithms.
Furthermore, because hyper-realistic videos can easily be created of people saying and doing things that did not occur, another ethical consideration must be considered: the use or misuse of the departed to advocate positions without their consent.
On August 4, former CNN correspondent Jim Acosta interviewed an AI avatar of Joaquin Oliver, one of the seventeen victims of the 2018 Parkland school shooting. This deepfake resurrection allowed Oliver to advocate for gun safety legislation. Such deepfakes of the departed steal from them the right to be forgotten. This is a prevailing problem with social media, as anyone who has ever tried to delete their Facebook account would testify.
Because AI is being normalized and legitimized in the name of progress and profit, resistance seems futile. Eurocentric ethics is not the answer, as it follows the Jesus of the dominant culture who lives into a history of spiritually justifying neoliberal, repressive and oppressive economic structures.
- About the Author
- Latest Posts
Professor of Social Ethics and Latinx Studies at Iliff School of Theology in Denver, Colorado, and a contributing correspondent at Good Faith Media.
