Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
The algorithm decides What we see, another filters what we read, and still others enter into the processes that govern collective action, information, and choices. In the post Wonderful humanity. The first was signed by Pope Leo XIV and published on May 25. artificial intelligence It is not viewed as just another technology; It is part of the invisible infrastructure of our contemporary daily lives.
But the text is not seen as an exclusively technological reflection. Pope Leo New things Pope Leo XIII (published May 15, 1891) in the year of its 135th anniversary. This encyclical addressed the question of labor at the height of the Industrial Revolution in the late nineteenth century.
If the “new precision” of that time were factories, labor, and industrial capitalism, today’s new issues are about digital platforms, algorithms, data, and automation systems that are reshaping power, economics, and social relations. For this reason, the Encyclical does not present itself as a technical text on innovation, but rather as an attempt to interpret digital transformation in the light of human dignity and the common good. The Pope writes that technology is not evil in itself; On the contrary, it belongs to human history and creativity. But the current situation is different in scale and depth: “Never has humanity had so much power over itself,” the text notes, describing technologies that now shape decision-making processes, collective imagination, and social life in an increasingly pervasive way.
It is from this point that Robert Francis Prevost chooses to begin: from the increasing concentration of power exercised through systems that are becoming increasingly ambiguous but increasingly decisive, and from the question that runs throughout the encyclical: What remains of human dignity, the protection of truth, work, social justice, and peace when decisions are transferred to algorithmic reasoning?
Disarmament technology
In the encyclical there is a phrase that becomes the key to explaining the whole scenario: “disarming technology.” The meaning is far from any attempt to slow the development of AI or deny forever its potentially transformative impact. For Robert Francis Prevost, disarming artificial intelligence means preventing it from becoming a form of power capable of controlling human existence.
For Leo XIV, the point is not the technology itself, but its organization and application. AI is part of a global race today toward the “highest performing algorithm” and “largest data center,” Pope writes, where competitive advantage also becomes geopolitical. In this context, a small number of players focus on digital infrastructure, data, and computing power, which affects information, the economy, and even democracy.
Disarmament means breaking this equation between technical power and the right to rule. “As happens with every major technological turning point,” the Pope explains, “AI tends above all to increase the power of those who already have the economic resources and the ability to access data.”
In blunt terms, the encyclical states that it is not enough to simply regulate technology: it must be wrested from monopolies, made transparent and open to challenge – that is, made “habitable” by a multiplicity of actors. Most importantly, AI must be prevented from becoming a tool for economic, political or military domination by a select few. This is not a moral metaphor: it is a call to prevent the logic of competition from turning shared infrastructure into a system of control.
Truth is within the systems that choose reality
If technology concentrates power, one of the first tangible effects concerns the way collective truth is shaped. The Encyclical addresses the issue of disinformation, but certainly in a deeper way because perceived reality, or rather experience, is increasingly filtered by systems that decide what to show and what to hide.
It’s not just about fake news or fake content in various forms. The problem is that platforms and algorithms select information based on criteria of maximizing interest and engagement. In other words, what becomes visible is not necessarily what is healthiest, but rather what works best at generating reactions. Thus, truth does not disappear, but rather becomes subject to ambiguous systems that influence collective opinions, perceptions, and choices without it being always clear how.
