Artificial Pastoral Care: Abdication, Delegation or Collaboration?
This article considers the relationship between Christian pastoral care and Artificial Intelligence systems. Four aspects are identified from definitions of pastoral care: the horizon of contingency in mortality, the role of wisdom rather than mere information, the oppressive and/or liberatory poten...
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Type de support: | Électronique Article |
| Langue: | Anglais |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | En cours de chargement...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publié: |
Sage
2023
|
| Dans: |
Studies in Christian ethics
Année: 2023, Volume: 36, Numéro: 3, Pages: 660-674 |
| Classifications IxTheo: | NBE Anthropologie NCJ Science et éthique RB Ministère ecclésiastique RG Aide spirituelle; pastorale ZG Sociologie des médias; médias numériques; Sciences de l'information et de la communication |
| Sujets non-standardisés: | B
Good Samaritan
B Transhumanism B Wisdom B Pastoral Care B Artificial Intelligence B Empathy |
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Résumé: | This article considers the relationship between Christian pastoral care and Artificial Intelligence systems. Four aspects are identified from definitions of pastoral care: the horizon of contingency in mortality, the role of wisdom rather than mere information, the oppressive and/or liberatory potential of AI and the importance of empathic presence. In rejecting a transhumanist argument that mental processes are substrate-independent, it is contended that pastoral carers embrace, rather than seeking to circumvent, their crucial finitude in being humans who care. A distinction is drawn between probabilistic reasoning and judgement in retaining a vital place for decision-making that is social. Whilst not eschewing value in AI systems, this article argues for critical evaluation of technologically framed contributions to addressing barriers to people's participation. The importance of empathy is highlighted—in the light of claims not only of robotic mimicry but of interindividual models of emotion. It is concluded that the notion of artificial care be ruled out although the possibilities of AI-assisted care are not dismissed. Opportunities for humans to abdicate from the responsibilities to care, in favour of AI substitutes, are deemed to be best avoided. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0953-9468 |
| Contient: | Enthalten in: Studies in Christian ethics
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1177/09539468231179571 |