Prophetic Dialogue as Approach to the Church’s Engagement with Stakeholders of the Technological Future (P.4/5)

4. Prophetic Dialogue as a Concept on Church Mission

The concept of prophetic dialogue emerged from discussions on Christian mission and was formally recognized as a significant missiological concept at the 2000 General Chapter of the Society of the Divine Word (SVD), where it was adopted as a viable approach to mission in the contemporary world. The phrase “prophetic dialogue” was first mentioned in passing by Indian missiologist Michael Amaladoss in one of his essays prior to the 2000 General Chapter of the Society of the Divine Word (SVD).[43] However, it was only after being adopted by the SVD Chapter documents that theologians Stephen Bevans and Roger Schroeder further developed the concept in their books, Constants in Context and Prophetic Dialogue. The concept has since been widely embraced by other authors from diverse denominational backgrounds.

According to Bevans, prophetic dialogue is both a theology and practice that requires a “deep listening to the movement of the Spirit, deep reverence for the context in which one witnesses and proclaims the gospel, the cultivation of a habit of contemplation, deep conversation among whom and with whom a person or a community is working.”[44] Moreover, it finds its foundation in a practice of meditative discernment, collaborative examination, and theological exploration, which strives to bridge the gap between current experiences and the profound biblical and doctrinal traditions of Christianity.45] Bevans asserts that because prophetic dialogue entails doing theology in specific contexts, it has to be discerned and undertaken by individuals who are directly involved in mission situations where Christians proclaim and bear witness to the gospel.

Before delving further into the particular meaning of prophetic dialogue, it is important to emphasize at the outset that dialogue itself is fundamental to the mission of the Church. Pope Paul VI states in the encyclical Ecclesiam Suam, “[Dialogue] is demanded nowadays.... It is demanded by the dynamic course of action which is changing the face of modern society. It is demanded by the pluralism of society, and by the maturity man has reached in this day and age. Be he religious or not, his secular education has enabled him to think and speak, and to conduct a dialogue with dignity.”46] Paul VI acknowledges that dialogue is the primary mode of engaging with individuals from diverse contexts. The Church affirms that Christians must adopt a dialogical approach in living out their Christian vocation. “Dialogue is … the norm and necessary manner of every form of Christian mission, as well as every aspect of it, whether one speaks of simple presence and witness, service or direct proclamation. Any sense of mission not permeated by such a dialogical spirit would go against the demands of true humanity and against the teachings of the gospel.”[47]

Thus, Christians have to approach their mission with dialogue as the fundamental “mental attitude,” that is carried out based on “respect and friendship”[48] with dialogue partners. This is why Pope Francis, in the Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, emphasizes that “Dialogue is much more than the communication of a truth. It arises from the enjoyment of speaking and it enriches those who express their love for one another through the medium of words. This is an enrichment which does not consist in objects but in persons who share themselves in dialogue.” The human dialogue receives its inspiration from God’s own Trinitarian dialogue of love and with humanity. According to Chiara Lubich, the founder of the Focolare Movement, God, who is entirely fulfilled and requires nothing from creation, selflessly offers Himself out of mercy to bring happiness to humanity. The crux of God’s love is uncovered in the notion of “Jesus Forsaken,” where the Father gives His Son to humanity, and the Son gives us the Father, both offering themselves to the Holy Spirit. Consequently, we are received into the heart of God’s love and existence.[50] “Such a God is a God of dialogue, a God who understands, a God who listens with compassion and feels people’s pain. The dialogue to which the Church is called is a dialogue practiced by God as such.”[51]

Dialogue as an approach to mission has not only been emphasized at the top levels of the Church but also at the local level. For example, the Federation of Asian Bishops' Conferences (FABC) emphasizes the pursuit of “new ways of being Church”[52] in Asia, which involves a threefold dialogue with Asian religions, cultures, and poverty.[53] Over the decades, this commitment has not waned. In October 2022, when the FABC gathered in Bangkok on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of its establishment, Cardinal Charles Maung Bo, FABC president, affirmed, “We realize that dialogue has become not only relevant but also indispensable to a world that has grown more fragmented and prone to violent conflict.”[54] The FABC asserts that only through dialogue can the Church in Asia become peacemaker and peace-builder.

Dialogue is not an isolated phenomenon, but a natural part of life. According to Mikhail M. Bakhtin, “To live means to participate in dialogue: to ask questions, to heed, to respond, to agree, and so forth.”[55] Therefore, it is essential to develop the ability to engage in respectful and reverential dialogue if we want to succeed in our lives. Further, since life is not a continuous series of conflicts or debates, but an effort to build meaningful relationships, dialogue should be seen as a way to recognize and accept the other person’s identity by being willing to listen, learn, and collaborate with dialogue partners.[56]

How is dialogue prophetic? The SVD General Chapter Document gives us a clue. It states, “It is in dialogue that we are able to recognize ‘the signs of Christ’s presence and the working of the Spirit’ (RM, 56) in all people, that we are called to acknowledge our own sinfulness and to engage in constant conversion, that we witness to God’s love by sharing our own convictions boldly and honestly, especially where that love has been obscured by prejudice, violence, and hate. It is clear that we do not dialogue from a neutral position, but out of our own faith. Together with our dialogue partners, we hope to hear the voice of the Spirit of God calling us forward, and in this way our dialogue can be called prophetic.”[57]

A prophet is defined by their ability to listen and their commitment to their community.[58] It is impossible to speak prophetically if one is removed from the real conditions of the people and the situation on the ground. Therefore, it is crucial that the prophetic voice is not that of an outsider or bystander but of someone who is genuinely invested in the well-being of the community and the common good. Prophets express their message with boldness, precision, and at times, with indignation. This is not because they are opposed to the people, but rather because they unwaveringly support them. The anguish in tone or demeanor that emanates from the prophet does not reflect hatred, condescension, or disrespect towards the people, but rather a deep concern for their lives.

The prophetic message can take various forms, including both words and deeds. According to Bevans, there are two types of prophetic communication—“speaking forth” and “speaking out.” “Speaking forth” has the power to energize[59] people towards positive attitudes and actions, inspiring hope for the future. As Walter Bruggemann notes, “It is the task of the prophet to bring to expression the new realities against the more visible ones of the old order. Energizing is closely linked to hope. We are energized not by that which we already possess but by that which is promised and about to be given.”[60]

Prophetic energizing is essential in freeing us from the mindset that genuine change is illusionary. As Bruggemann explains, “If there is any point at which most of us are manifestly co-opted, it is in this way. We do not believe that there will be newness but only that there will be merely a moving of the pieces into new patterns. It is precisely the prophet who speaks against such managed data and who can energize toward futures that are genuinely new and not derived.”[61] In addition to hope, the prophet can energize people towards repentance for sin, courage in the face of oppression, and resistance to the destructive forces of death.

The second type of prophetic content is “speaking out” or “speaking against.” This entails criticizing, not in a scolding or reprimanding manner, but “so as to cut through the numb¬ness, to penetrate the self-deception, so that the God of endings is confessed as Lord.”[62] In this task, the prophetic voice aims to find ways to help the people “confront the horror and massiveness of the experience that evokes numbness and requires denial.”[63] “The prophet must speak evocatively to bring to the community the fear and the pain that individual persons want so desperately to share and to own but are not permitted to do so.”[64] The prophetic message underscores the notion that death becomes evident through disconnection, deprivation of heritage, seeking fulfillment through futile means, and the “ultimate consumerism” is “consuming each other.”[65] In addition, the prophet articulates a sense of unease with the prospect of things coming to an end, the collapse of our self-imposed constructs, the systems of inequality and oppression that perpetuate at the expense of others, and the unsettling practice of exploiting the vulnerable by “eating off the table of a hungry brother or sister.”[66]

In essence, prophetic dialogue enables us to recognize the Holy Spirit’s presence in all individuals, constantly convert ourselves, bear witness to God’s love, and listen to the voice of the Spirit, propelling us forward. Prophetic communication, whether “speaking forth” or “speaking out,” ignites positive attitudes and actions, instills hope for the future, and helps us confront the overwhelming experiences that can lead to numbness and denial. As we engage in prophetic dialogue, it is vital to speak boldly, with precision, and offer unwavering support to our community, keeping in mind the prophetic task of unveiling new realities against the old order.

__________

43. See Michael Amaladoss, “La Mission comme Prophétie,” Spiritus 128 (September, 1992): 275. English translation in ed. James A. Scherer and Stephen B. Bevans, New Directions in Mission and Evangelization 2: Theological Foundations (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1994), 72.
44. Stephen Bevans, “Witness and Proclamation as Prophetic Dialogue,” in Christian Witness in a Multi-Religious World, ed. Indunil J. Kodithuwakku K (Rome: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2022), 245-55.
45. Ibid.
46. Pope Paul VI, Ecclesiam Suam, 1964, no. 78, https://www.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_06081964_ecclesiam.html.
47. Secretariat for Non-Christians, The Attitude of the Church toward the Followers of Other Religions: Reflections and Orientations on Dialogue and Mission, 1984, no. 29, https://www.pcinterreligious.org/the-attitudes-of-the-church-towards-the-followers-of-other-religions.
48. The Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, Dialogue and Proclamation, 1991, no. 9, https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/interelg/documents/rc_pc_interelg_doc_19051991_dialogue-and-proclamatio_en.html.
49. Pope Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, 2013, no. 142, https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium.html
50. Chiara Lubich, Patrzeć na wszystkie kwiaty (Kraków: Fundacja Mariapoli, 1996), 72.
51. Stephen Bevans, “Evangelii Gaudium and Prophetic Dialogue,” Australian eJournal of Theology 22/1 (April, 2015): 14, http://aejt.com.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/741671/Evangelii_Gaudium_and_Prophetic_Dialogue_B evans_Apr15_Vol22.1.pdf
52. Synod of Bishops, Lineamentaon the “New Evangelization for the Transmission of the Christian Faith,” http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/synod/documents/rc_synod_doc_20110202_lineamenta-xiii-assembly_en.html#CHAPTER_I.
53. Gaudencio B. Rosales and Catalino G. Arevalo (eds.), For All the Peoples of Asia: Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences, Documents from 1970 to 1991, vol. 1 (Quezon City: Claretian Publications, 1992), 14.
54. Jose Torres Jr, “FABC 50: ‘Dialogue is not an option, it’s a necessity’,” Licas News, November 4, 2022, https://www.licas.news/2022/11/04/fabc-50-dialogue-is-not-an-option-its-a-necessity/.
55. Mikhail M. Bakhtin, “Toward a Reworking of the Dostoevsky’s Book,” in Problems of Dostoevsky's Poetics, ed. Caryl Emerson (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1984), 293.
56. Amaladoss, Michael. “Identity and Harmony: Challenges to Mission in South Asia.” In Mission in the Third Millennium. Edited by Robert Schreiter. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2001: 34.
57. Society of the Divine Word, General Chapter Documents, 2000.
58. Stephen Bevans and Cathy Ross, Mission on the Road to Emmaus Constants, Context, and Prophetic Dialogue (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2015).
59. vanThanh Nguyen, “The Final Testimony of Missio Dei: A Missiological Reading of Revelation,” in Christian Mission, Contextual Theology, Prophetic Dialogue, ed. Dale T. Irvin and Peter C. Phan (Maryknoll: NY, Orbis Books, 2018), 6.
60. Walter Bruggemann, The Prophetic Imagination (Minneapolis, Fortress Press, 2001), 14.
61. Ibid.
62. Bruggemann, The Prophetic Imagination, 45.
63. Ibid.
64. Ibid.
65. Ibid.
66. Ibid.

Prophetic Dialogue as Approach to the Church’s Engagement with Stakeholders of the Technological Future (P.3/5)

 3. Identifying Stakeholders as Dialogue Partners of the Church

Technological development involves a broad range of stakeholders, including technology developers and companies, governments and regulatory bodies, consumers and users, communities and society at large, environmental organizations and advocacy groups, and religious institutions and adherents. While these stakeholders can vary depending on the specific technology and its intended use, it is essential to recognize that their interests may not always align with each other.

Technology developers and companies invest significant resources in research and development to create new products and services with a focus on profitability and growth rather than social or environmental impact. As major players in the industry, these companies also have significant influence over the direction of technological development. They make decisions about which technologies to prioritize for research and development and which to bring to market. However, it is crucial to ensure that technological development is guided by principles of social responsibility and democratic governance, with the interests of all stakeholders taken into account. This approach will help ensure that technological advancements benefit society as a whole while minimizing any adverse effects.

Governments and regulatory bodies play a crucial role in shaping the future of technology. They have the power to influence the development and use of technology through policies, laws, and regulations. For instance, regulatory bodies such as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) oversee the use of technology in specific areas such as telecommunications, broadcasting, and internet services. It’s important to note that their role is not only crucial but also fascinating as it ensures that the development and deployment of new technologies are guided by principles of social responsibility and democratic governance while taking into account the interests of all stakeholders.

Consumers and users are the end-users of technology, and their needs and preferences are the driving force behind technological development. As technology becomes more integrated into our daily lives, it’s increasingly important for developers and companies to consider the impact of technology on consumers and users. Moreover, consumers and users are becoming more aware of the social and environmental impact of technology. They are interested in products and services that are environmentally friendly, socially responsible, and contribute to the betterment of society. As a result, there is a growing demand for ethical and sustainable technology that not only meets the needs of consumers but also aligns with their values.

Communities and society are the architects of future technological development, as they have the power to transform how people live, work, communicate, and interact with each other. Society at large also has a stake in future technological development as technology can impact issues such as inequality, privacy, security, and job displacement. It’s crucial to consider the social and ethical implications of new technologies to ensure that they are developed and used in ways that benefit society as a whole.

Environmental organizations and advocacy groups are important stakeholders in future technological development. As technology continues to advance and become more ubiquitous in our lives, it can have significant impacts on the environment, both positive and negative. Environmental organizations and advocacy groups work to raise awareness of these issues, advocate for more sustainable technological practices, and push for government regulations to mitigate negative environmental impacts.

Finally, religious institutions and adherents are important stakeholders in the digital future because technology has the potential to impact religious practices, beliefs, and traditions. While some religious institutions and leaders may be concerned about the impact of digital technologies on traditional religious practices and authority structures, many religious adherents and organizations have embraced digital technologies as a way to spread their message and connect with followers around the world.

Prophetic Dialogue as Approach to the Church’s Engagement with Stakeholders of the Technological Future (P.2/5)

 

2. Effects of Technological Shifts on Humanity

William Gibson, a science fiction writer widely credited with creating a subgenre called cyberpunk, said, “Technologies are morally neutral until we apply them.”[17] Much of the consequences that come out will depend on the intent and the actual application of those individuals and organizations who decide to make use of the technological inventions. Despite the many positive effects that technological advances will bring to human life in terms of health, economic and social benefits, negative consequences can also appear, taking humanity towards undesired directions.

2.1. Loss of Privacy

Living in a digitally inter-connected world, while there are enormous benefits in being able to share and access information, the risks of loss of privacy is real. In the age of Google search and social media, we are already forced to make Faustian bargains in order to be able to use free and convenient services provided by a few powerful organizations. Every search we make, every like we hit, every comment we post, every video we click, every product we seek, information about us is being noted by computer algorithms, which based on all the collected data about us, will provide us with product advertisements and content that will most likely appeal to our interests and sensibility.

Loss of privacy is not just about companies trying to make a profit by harvesting personal information about us. Technological developments can lead to a society where we are unceasingly being observed by the authority in the name of maintaining social order. According to the report “The Global Expansion of AI Surveillance,” the proliferation of AI around the world is taking place at a rapid pace. “A growing number of states are deploying advanced AI surveillance tools to monitor, track, and surveil citizens to accomplish a range of policy objectives—some lawful, others that violate human rights, and many of which fall into a murky middle ground.”[18] It is not surprising that China, an authoritarian state, is the most significant driver of AI surveillance worldwide. Huawei alone provides surveillance technology to at least 50 countries. This compares to the largest Japanese company NEC Corporation with 14 countries, and the largest American company IBM with 11 countries. Because of China’s long experience of building a system of digital surveillance with its own citizens, its know-how is highly sought after by regimes bent on curtailing individual freedom and civil liberties.[19] In the future, the development of AI and Internet of Things (IoT) may lead to the biggest surveillance network humanity has ever experienced. Everyone will be monitored and tracked everywhere, all the time and from every angle.

2.2. Job Displacement

The development of AI and automation will no doubt have significant impact on the job market, where job loss will be seen in both the blue as well as the white-collar sectors. In the digital revolution, if robots could do most things that people can do—and a better job at that—the number of jobs left for human will be severely limited. Business owners set their priority at profit making, which makes investment in robots that do not take a salary, break, sick or maternity leave an obvious choice.

It is not hard science, however, how many jobs will be lost due to automation. In 2013, Oxford academics Carl Benedikt Frey and Michael A. Osborne co-authored a widely cited paper (over 4,000 times) stating that by the mid-2030s, 47 percent of US jobs are at high risk of AI replacement. The top 5 included telemarketers, insurance underwriters, sports referees, cashiers and chefs.[20] However, recently, the authors published an article emphasizing that the idea that half of the jobs in the US will be automated is a misunderstanding of the paper. The authors clarified that the study referred to did not make predictions, but rather provided an estimate of how susceptible existing jobs are to automation from the development of artificial intelligence and mobile robotics. The study indicated that 47% of jobs are technically automatable. The study has been misrepresented to suggest an employment apocalypse, when in fact it only showed the vast potential for automation, similar to what happened at the onset of the Second Industrial Revolution.[21]

In reality, the impact of AI and automation on jobs will vary according to various economies. There are three possible results: eliminating jobs, enhancing existing jobs, and creating new jobs. A study of 11 Asian economies by MIT Technology Review, predicts that in the next five years, on average automation will result in elimination of 12 percent of jobs while 8 percent of the jobs will be enhanced by AI capabilities. In all but one economy, the number of jobs eliminated exceed those created. Emerging markets such as Vietnam and Indonesia where the manufacturing sector is large and process-driven, jobs eliminated outnumber jobs enhanced by two to one.[22]

2.3. Growing Inequality

Even though technological progress has created opportunities for many, there is a worrisome trend towards increasing global inequality. According to Oxfam, in 2018 the 26 richest people in the world owned as much as 50 percent of the bottom half in the world. Between 2017 and 2018, a new person was added to the global billionaire list every two days. Yet, nearly half of humanity was making it on less than 5.50 USD a day.[23] There is concern that technological progress, instead of mitigating this situation, ends up exacerbating it even more because most of the wealth and power is concentrated in global tech or technology related giants such as Microsoft, Apple and Amazon. Development of AI and automation will result in profits skyrocketing for these firms while people are losing jobs and regular income. The irony is that AI will most likely be used by powerful companies to figure out how to selectively address various issues plaguing human society, at the same time maximize productivity and profit for themselves, but not employed to address the very problem of inequality which the very development of AI is a significant contributing factor.

Some have even envisioned a future in which inequality will be prevalent due to unequal access to certain revolutionary technological developments. The Israeli historian Yuval Noah Harari presents a possibility where AI is applied to bioengineering which helps humans to upgrade their physical health, lengthen their life span, and increase their cognitive abilities. In this case, wealthy people will take advantage of these opportunities while the poor are left behind, creating a giant gap between them. Human society might be split into biological castes with real differences between the haves and the have-nots.24] Needless to say, the rich and powerful, or the superhuman elite will constitute a small percentage of the total population; however, they are the ones who control and have access to all the data, the most important asset of the digital era. It is no wonder why tech giants such as Google, Facebook, Baidu and Tencent are racing to amass as much data as they possibly can. Every little bit of data that we are giving (voluntarily or unknowingly) to these companies by using their free email services, chatting and photo sharing apps, and entertainment platforms is contributing to their long term aim at data hegemony. The more personal data are given to governments and corporations, the more risk we have in losing our social, economic and political control to them.

2.4. Social Instability

Andrew Yang, former 2020 US Presidential candidate, once remarked, “All you need is self-driving cars to destabilize society. That one innovation will be enough to create riots in the street. And we’re about to do the same thing to retail workers, call center workers, fast-food workers, insurance companies, accounting firms.”[25] The outlook proposed by Yang and others has been characterized as “robot apocalypse,” which warns of a rather extreme and pessimistic economic and social future. Although reports have painted both rosy as well as gloomy job futures as a result of automation, many have become increasingly uneasy with monopolistic behavior exhibited by tech giants who are trying to build ultra-efficient machines and other instruments to augment human life. While benefits brought about by technological progress is undeniable, questions arise as to whether the negative impact will result in social instability when new genetic treatments that could extend one’s longevity could only be accessed by the wealthy elite. Likewise, will the access to brain-computer interface (BCI) implants help the rich to gain cognitive capability but cause resentment among the underprivileged and lead to civil unrest and terrorism? Social instability in the forms of protests, demonstrations, riots and violent uprisings can result not only from massive number of people’s livelihood being severely affected by a sudden influx of robots but also from the resentment towards very real inequality—economically, socially, politically, and even biologically—brought about by technological progress.

2.5. Dependence on Technology

Dependence on technology is a major concern in today’s society, as individuals and societies increasingly rely on digital technologies to perform various tasks and solve problems. While technology has undoubtedly brought numerous benefits, including increased efficiency and convenience, its overreliance can lead to a range of potential risks and challenges. One of the primary risks associated with technology dependence is the vulnerability to system failures and cyber attacks.[26] As we become more reliant on technology, a large-scale power outage or cyber attack on critical infrastructure systems could have severe consequences. Moreover, the use of technology to automate and simplify tasks could reduce critical thinking skills, leading to a lack of creativity and innovation in society.

Another issue arising from technology dependence is the reduction in face-to-face interaction. With the increasing use of technology for communication and social interaction, people may miss out on the benefits of human connection, which is an essential aspect of social well-being. Over-reliance on algorithms and AI is another risk of technology dependence. The more sophisticated and capable these technologies become, the more likely we are to rely on them to make decisions and solve problems, which could lead to a lack of human judgment and accountability. Social isolation is another concern that comes with the use of technology. Individuals who are already vulnerable to social isolation and loneliness may be further disconnected from society due to their dependence on technology.[27]

2.6. Environmental Impact

The rapid pace of technological development is bringing about significant changes in society, but it also has a significant impact on the environment.[28] The energy consumption required for digital technologies is one of the main sources of environmental damage. Data centers and large-scale computing systems require a considerable amount of energy to operate, contributing to greenhouse gas emissions and global warming. This growing trend highlights the need for more sustainable practices in the technology industry, as well as the need for more energy-efficient and environmentally-friendly designs.

Another major concern arising from technological development is the increase in e-waste generated by discarded gadgets and devices. E-waste contains toxic materials that can harm the environment and human health if not disposed of properly. The production of digital technologies also requires the consumption of natural resources, such as minerals and metals, often extracted in environmentally damaging ways. The construction of data centers and other technology infrastructure requires large amounts of land, which can lead to deforestation and other environmental damage. The transportation of goods and people associated with the technology industry also contributes to air pollution, particularly in areas with high concentrations of tech companies and workers. The significant amount of water needed for cooling and other purposes in data centers and other technology infrastructure can also lead to water scarcity and other environmental issues.

This reality has prompted a need for promoting digital sustainability which refers to the concept of designing, producing, and using digital technologies in a way that minimizes their negative impact on the environment and promotes long-term sustainability.[29] This involves implementing practices that reduce energy consumption, minimize waste, use environmentally-friendly materials, and reduce the carbon footprint of digital technologies. Digital sustainability also encompasses the responsible use of technology by individuals and organizations, including reducing e-waste, promoting recycling, and using technology in a way that reduces overall environmental impact. The goal of digital sustainability is to ensure that the benefits of digital technology can be enjoyed without compromising the health of the planet and its resources.

2.7. World Peace

World organizations such as the United Nations, the World Bank and the Red Cross are placing their hopes on AI’s ability to process massive amount of data and analyze complex factors that contribute to humanitarian disasters such as famine, mass migration as well as political and religious conflicts among peoples and nations.[30] By predicting where and when these happenings would take place based on available information, efforts could be made in order to thwart the realization of such calamities. There is an optimistic thinking that Big Data and tools to analyze them will ultimately lead to solving many issues plaguing the world.

Although there are researchers such as Timo Honkela who are trying to find ways to build a “peace machine” that can bridge human divides in language, culture and emotions,[31] others are building AI based weapons. According to an article in Forbes magazine,

The rapid development of AI weaponization is evident across the board: navigating and utilizing unmanned naval, aerial, and terrain vehicles, producing collateral-damage estimations, deploying “fire-and-forget” missile systems and using stationary systems to automate everything from personnel systems and equipment maintenance to the deployment of surveillance drones, robots and more are all examples.[32]

Many individuals, organizations and governments are involved in the debate around ethical issues surrounding AI and autonomous weapon systems. The UN Secretary-General António Guterres stated in a Tweet on 26 March 2019, “Autonomous machines with the power and discretion to select targets and take lives without human involvement are politically unacceptable, morally repugnant and should be prohibited by international law.”[33] To date, 28 countries have called for prohibition of fully autonomous weapons also known by the ominous title of “killer robots.”[34] Notably among them is the Holy See and China. China, however, only calls for banning the use of fully autonomous weapons but not for their development and production. Peter Singer, a specialist in 21st century warfare commented, “They’re simultaneously working on the technology while trying to use international law as a limit against their competitors.”[35] It is not surprising considering China is on the list of countries alongside the US, Russia, the UK, Israel, and South Korea who are involved in the rat race in developing these types of weapons.[36] The international diplomatic process to set up norms on their development and use has, unfortunately, been much slower than the pace by which the competitors have engaged in their research and development. The commitment of the United States to this race is undoubtedly stemmed by China’s own determination to challenge American place as the world’s superpower. President Xi Jinping has set the goal for China to become the world leader in AI by 2030 with its military innovation an essential part of this agenda.

2.8. Responsibility and Accountability

As technology becomes more integrated into our daily lives, there are growing concerns about responsibility and accountability.[37] One of the primary issues is determining who is responsible for the outcomes of advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI). For instance, if an autonomous vehicle causes an accident, should the manufacturer, owner, or software developer be held accountable? The ethical considerations associated with the use of advanced technologies, including AI, robotics, and biotechnology, are also growing. As these technologies become more sophisticated, they raise questions about privacy, security, and human rights implications. The concern for bias and discrimination in algorithms and AI-based technologies is also increasing, with facial recognition technology having higher error rates for people of color, raising concerns about racial bias.

Cybersecurity threats are another major issue with more sensitive information being stored and transmitted online. State actors, hackers, and cybercriminals can exploit vulnerabilities in systems, raising concerns about how to prevent and mitigate these risks. As technology companies become more powerful, there are concerns about their social responsibility. Critics argue that social media platforms have contributed to the spread of misinformation and polarization, and that these companies need to do more to address these issues.[38] Lastly, there is a growing need for regulation and governance of advanced technologies to ensure they are used responsibly and ethically. However, there is also concern about the potential for overregulation and stifling innovation.

2.9. Impact on Religion

Trends in the development of digital technologies is expected to have a significant impact on faith and religiosity in various ways. One significant impact is the greater access to religious information, including texts, teachings, and traditions from diverse sources. This could lead to a greater understanding and appreciation of different religions and faiths, and provide opportunities for interfaith dialogue and collaboration. Another impact of digital development is the potential for new forms of religious expression. For instance, virtual reality may be used to create immersive religious experiences, while social media platforms could be used to share and discuss religious ideas and practices.

However, one growing concern among some religious leaders is the erosion of traditional religious authority due to digital development trends. Digital technologies have made it easier for people to access information and ideas from a variety of sources, potentially undermining the authority of traditional religious institutions and leaders. For example, access to non-traditional or non-mainstream sources of religious knowledge may create confusion and uncertainty about which sources are legitimate or authoritative, leading some people to question the authority of traditional religious institutions and leaders.[39] Moreover, the trend towards decentralization in digital development may also challenge traditional religious authority structures. Individuals and smaller religious groups may have greater access to religious texts and teachings, potentially sharing their own interpretations and ideas with a wider audience.[40] This can potentially challenge the authority of traditional religious institutions and leaders, who may be seen as less relevant or necessary in a more decentralized religious landscape.

Similarly, disintermediation in digital development may also impact religious authority. This refers to the use of digital platforms and tools to connect individuals directly with religious texts, teachings, and communities, bypassing traditional intermediaries such as religious leaders, institutions, or structures. This may empower individual believers to explore and interpret religious texts and teachings in new ways without relying on traditional religious authorities to provide guidance or interpretation, leading to greater fragmentation and diversity within religious communities.

In essence, digital technology has had and will continue to have a significant impact on human society, with both positive and negative consequences. While the benefits are undeniable, it's crucial to acknowledge and address the potential downsides. This section delved into the possible negative outcomes not to discredit technology’s potential and realized benefits but to recognize that scientific and technological progress, despite being aimed at human betterment, isn't immune to risks and dangers. Although scientists and technologists may intend to create positive change, the application of their discoveries takes place within a complex framework of politics, economics, and society. This construct is rife with individuals and institutions vying for power, wealth, and control, and it’s often fueled by personal biases and agendas. Thus, technological advancements, even with good intentions, may cause unintended harm. It can erode our privacy, disconnect us from reality, and hinder our capacity for deep thought and introspection. These present and potential risks highlight the need for a critical and mindful approach to technological progress and its impact on human and environmental well-being. Therefore, we must strike a balance between the pursuit of technological advancements and the promotion of human and ecological flourishing. The key is to approach progress with discernment, always considering its potential impact on society and the planet. Only then can we ensure that technology serves us rather than the other way around.

_________

  17. William Gibson Interview, http://josefsson.net/gibson/
18. Steven Feldstein, “The Global Expansion of AI Surveillance,” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (17 September 2019), https://carnegieendowment.org/2019/09/17/global-expansion-of-ai-surveillance-pub-79847.
19. Alina Polyakova and Chris Meserole, “Exporting digital authoritarianism: the Russian and Chinese Models,” Brookings Institute, https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/FP_20190827_digital_authoritarianism_polyakova_meserole.pdf.
20. Carl Benedikt Frey and Michael A. Osborne, “The Future of Employment: How Susceptible Are Jobs to Computerisation?” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 114 (2017): 254-280.
21. Carl Benedikt Frey and Michael A. Osborne, “Automation and the Future of Work—Understanding the Numbers,” Oxford Martin School, April 13, 2018, https://www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk/blog/automation-and-the-future-of-work-understanding-the-numbers/.
22. “Asia’s AI agenda—AI and human capital,” MIT Technology Review (2019), https://s3-ap-southeast-1.amazonaws.com/mittr-intl/AsiaAItalent.pdf.
23. Oxfam, https://www.oxfam.org/en/5-shocking-facts-about-extreme-global-inequality-and-how-even-it
24. Yuval Noah Harari, 21 Lessons for the 21st Century (New York: Spiegel & Grau, 2018): Kindle edition.
25. Kevin Roose, “His 2020 Campaign Message: The Robots Are Coming,” New York Times, February 10, 2018, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/10/technology/his-2020-campaign-message-the-robots-are-coming.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Ftechnology&fbclid=IwAR0rPXVy5qafyLiJXqKFnKiBgid3mbm45acWoDTaiIMYSkzJ3J3bNuk9oXc
26. Ker Bailey, Andrea Del Miglio, and Wolf Richter, “The Rising Strategic Risks of Cyberattacks,” McKinsey Quarterly, May 1, 2014, https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/mckinsey-digital/our-insights/the-rising-strategic-risks-of-cyberattacks
27. Medicial News Today, “Negative Effects of Technology: What to Know,” February 25, 2020, https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/negative-effects-of-technology.
28. Geneva Environment Network, “Data, Digital Technology, and the Environment,” Geneva Environment Network, November 25, 2021, https://www.genevaenvironmentnetwork.org/resources/updates/data-digital-technology-and-the-environment/.
29. Rebellion Research, “What Is Digital Sustainability?” Rebellion Research, July 24, 2021, https://www.rebellionresearch.com/what-is-digital-sustainability.
30. “How AI Could Unlock World Peace,” BBC, February 19, 2019, https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20190219-how-artificial-intelligence-could-unlock-world-peace
31. Niko Nurminen, “Could Artificial Intelligence Lead to World Peace?” Aljazeera, May 30, 2017, https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2017/05/scientist-race-build-peace-machine-170509112307430.html
32. Jayshree Pandya, “The Weaponization of Artificial Intelligence,” Forbes, January 14, 2019, https://www.forbes.com/sites/cognitiveworld/2019/01/14/the-weaponization-of-artificial-intelligence/#7834fc433686
33. “Autonomous weapons that kill must be banned, insists UN chief,” UN News, March 25, 2019, https://news.un.org/en/story/2019/03/1035381
34. “Campaign to Stop Killer Robots,” November 22, 2018, https://www.stopkillerrobots.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/KRC_CountryViews22Nov2018.pdf
35. Melissa K. Chan, “China and the US are Fighting a Major Battle over Killer Robots and the Future of AI,” Time, September 13, 2019, https://time.com/5673240/china-killer-robots-weapons/
36. Justin Rohrlich, “Report: Kill the Idea of Killer Robots before They Kill Us,” Quartz (9 May 2019), https://qz.com/1614684/killer-robots-must-be-stopped-pax-tells-the-world/
37. See Mark Coeckelbergh, AI Ethics (Boston, MA: MIT Press, 2020): Kindle edition.
38. Ally Daskalopoulos et al., “Thinking Outside the Bubble: Addressing Polarization and Disinformation on Social Media,” CSIS, September 27, 2021, https://journalism.csis.org/thinking-outside-the-bubble-addressing-polarization-and-disinformation-on-social-media/.
39. Anthony Le Duc, “The Way, the Truth and the Life: Asian Religious Communication in the Post-Truth Climate,” Religion and Social Communication 16, no. 1 (2018): 28-29.
40. Le Duc, “The Way, the Truth and the Life,” 29.

Prophetic Dialogue as Approach to the Church’s Engagement with Stakeholders of the Technological Future (P.1/5)

 

ABSTRACT

This paper explores the role of the Catholic Church in the emerging cognitive revolution driven by science and digital technology, and its engagement with stakeholders in technological development. It begins by emphasizing the immense potential of this new era and the transformative impact these technological shifts can have on humanity. Instead of questioning the relevance of religion in this context, the paper proposes a framework of “prophetic dialogue” as an effective means for the Church, as a stakeholder itself, to engage with other stakeholders. The concept of prophetic dialogue, traditionally applied to discussions on Church mission, is presented as an appropriate and effective approach for engaging with stakeholders of the technological future, including innovators, policymakers, and consumers. The framework of prophetic dialogue comprises two interrelated aspects: energizing communication and criticizing communication. By employing these aspects in a prophetic manner, the Church can actively participate in shaping the future of technology while also safeguarding itself against potential negative consequences of technological advancements. The central thesis of the paper is that prophetic dialogue empowers the Church to adopt a proactive and relevant role in influencing the course of human development. Through engaging in dialogue with various stakeholders, the Church can advocate for ethical considerations, the common good, and the preservation of human dignity in the realm of technological progress. The paper contends that the Church’s involvement is essential in shaping a future that aligns with its moral principles and fosters the well-being of all individuals and communities. By actively participating in the dialogue surrounding technological advancements, the Church can contribute to the development of a society that upholds its values and promotes the greater good. This paper provides an important exploration of the Catholic Church’s engagement in the new milieu and offers insights into how religious institutions can navigate the challenges and opportunities presented by the digital future.

Keywords: prophetic dialogue, digital technology, digital future, stakeholders

Humanity is once again standing at the threshold of a cognitive revolution, but this time, the changes will be driven by science and digital technology. The potential of this new era is vast, with unprecedented advances in fields ranging from medicine and transportation to artificial intelligence and space exploration. This revolution promises to take us into uncharted territories and transform our very existence in ways never before imagined. As we look back in history, we see that the cognitive revolution that occurred over 70,000 years ago enabled Homo Sapiens to revolutionize their communication and socialization methods, leading to groundbreaking advancements in agriculture, industry, and science. Now, we have science and technology as the driving forces behind the current revolution.

As we navigate this new era, it is essential to re-examine our relationship with technology and what it means to be human. While philosophy, religion, and interdisciplinary thought have long grappled with such questions, this paper sets its sights on the role of the Catholic Church in the new context, investigating how it can engage with various stakeholders of technological development. Rather than questioning the validity of religion in the face of this massive change, the paper explores how the Church can manifest itself, proposing a framework of “prophetic dialogue” as an approach to religious engagement. This approach involves a respectful and constructive conversation between different stakeholders, including technology innovators, policymakers, and everyday consumers.

Through this paper, I aim to identify current and future trends in technological development and their potential impact on humanity. I also introduce the concept of prophetic dialogue and its relevance to this context, and apply this framework to religious engagement with various stakeholders. The framework of prophetic dialogue entails two inter-related aspects – energizing dialogue and criticizing dialogue. I will delineate how the Church can carry out these two aspects in context of dialogue with various stakeholders. The thesis of this paper is that the approach of prophetic dialogue will enable the Church to actively participate in shaping the future of technology while also taking control of how the life of the Church itself is impacted by technological advancements. It is a pro-active attitude and strategy of engaging with the various sectors to ensure that the Church continues to exert the proper influence over the course of human development.


1. Trends in Technological Development

To begin the discussion on the role of religion in the face of scientific and technological advancements, it is necessary to first examine some of the notable digital innovations that are anticipated for both the near and distant future. As posited by futurist Gerd Leonhard, there are numerous “megashifts” that are poised to occur in the realm of technology.[1] Briefly, the most important megashifts include:

Digitalization: The concept of “digitalization” is often confused with “digitization,” which is the process of converting analog data into digital format for computer processing. Examples of digitization include converting typewritten text, VHS videos, and LP music into digital formats.[2] However, digitalization refers to a broader transformation that involves various industries and activities as a result of increased use and availability of digital technology. This transformation includes the integration of digital technology into business processes, the creation of new digital products and services, and the development of new business models that leverage digital technology. Thus, digitalization encompasses the way modern life is reshaped and adapted to digital communication and media infrastructures. In the business realm, Gartner defines digitalization as “the use of digital technologies to change a business model and provide new revenue and value-producing opportunities.”[3] This new model affects every sector, and businesses must either transform or face extinction.

Mobilization: The prevalence of digital technology in all aspects of modern life has given rise to a phenomenon known as mobilization, in which such technology is ubiquitous and always accessible. The impact of mobilization has been profound, affecting the ways in which we live, work, and interact with one another. For instance, it has facilitated new forms of communication and collaboration, as well as enabling us to access and share information in previously unprecedented ways. With mobile devices, we can work remotely, participate in virtual meetings, and take part in online education and training from anywhere in the world. Mobilization has created a new class of “digital nomads” who use technology to stay connected and productive while traveling the world.[4] Entertainment has also been transformed by mobilization, allowing users to stream music, movies, and TV shows on the go, and to play games and interact with others in real-time. As technology continues to advance, we can anticipate even more portable and flexible devices, such as wearables and brain-computer interfaces, which will further integrate digital technology into our daily lives. In essence, mobilization means that digital technology is always on hand, anytime, and anywhere, from our phones and tablets to our watches and even our bodies.

Screenification: Screenification is the integration of digital screens and displays into more aspects of our daily lives. This trend is fueled by advancements in display technology and the increasing prevalence of mobile devices and the internet of things. Screenification is observable in various applications, such as smart home devices with built-in displays, wearable devices like smartwatches and augmented reality headsets, and interactive public displays and digital signage. A key feature of screenification is the ability to show dynamic, real-time information and data, such as weather updates, traffic alerts, and social media feeds. This allows users to stay up-to-date and provides new opportunities for interactivity and engagement. Screens are gradually replacing traditional paper mediums,[5] such as newspapers, magazines, and restaurant menus, and replacing physical knobs and dials with touch buttons. They also serve as replacements for display boards, billboards, and information boards. In addition, screens can be used as alternatives to paintings and photographs by displaying digital scenery on an apartment window. Looking ahead, screenification may continue to evolve, with the potential for screens to be placed on our eyes, augmenting our vision to see details in new ways. As a result, screenification will likely become even more pervasive, making screens an integral part of our daily lives.

Disintermediation: The trend of disintermediation is becoming increasingly prevalent, allowing parties to engage directly in transactions and processes without the need for intermediaries.[6] Thanks to advances in digital technology, communication and transactions between producers and consumers, buyers and sellers, and other parties are now more direct and efficient. In the past, intermediaries such as record labels and publishers were needed to access an artist or writer’s work, but now, we can access them directly through various digital channels. E-commerce platforms like Amazon and Alibaba have made it possible for consumers to buy products directly from manufacturers and wholesalers, bypassing traditional retail supply chains. Similarly, peer-to-peer lending platforms like LendingClub and Prosper have enabled borrowers to obtain loans directly from investors, without the need for traditional financial intermediaries like banks.[7] In industries like travel and hospitality, platforms such as Airbnb and Uber have disintermediated traditional hotels and taxi services by enabling direct interactions between hosts and guests, and drivers and passengers. Disintermediation has also made it possible for people to sell and rent out their homes to tourists without having to go through an agent. This trend is expected to continue, as digital technology continues to advance, allowing for even more direct and efficient interactions between parties in various industries.

Decentralization: Decentralization is a concept that involves distributing control and decision-making away from a central authority or organization through the use of distributed networks and protocols, and it is closely related to disintermediation. Centralized systems rely on a single entity or organization to control and make decisions about how the system operates, while decentralized systems distribute control and decision-making across a network of nodes or participants without the need for intermediaries or central authorities. Decentralization offers many benefits,[8] including increased security, transparency, resilience, and autonomy for individual users or participants, while reducing costs, increasing efficiency, and creating new opportunities for innovation and value creation. However, decentralization also poses challenges, such as the need for new governance models and incentive structures to ensure the network operates fairly and efficiently, and the requirement for new skills and technical knowledge to participate effectively. Decentralization is a crucial principle of Web 3.0, also known as the “decentralized web,”[9] which relies on decentralized networks and blockchain technology to enable direct peer-to-peer interactions without intermediaries. Web 3.0 is built on decentralized networks and protocols that allow users to interact and transact directly without intermediaries such as banks, governments, or online platforms. Decentralized networks are typically distributed across multiple nodes, with each node contributing to the network’s overall processing power and security. Blockchain technology is a key enabler of decentralization in Web 3.0, as it allows the creation of trustless systems that facilitate direct interactions between parties without the need for intermediaries. Blockchains are distributed ledgers that record transactions in a secure and transparent manner, without relying on a central authority.

Transformation: Transformation in the digital development context implies a more significant change than simply innovation or modification. It denotes a process of becoming a new entity that can adapt to the demands and conditions of a new environment. Transformation can occur at personal, social, and economic levels. One instance of transformation is in the emerging field of neurotechnology, which utilizes devices and techniques to directly interface with the human brain. It has the potential to revolutionize our understanding of the brain and facilitate new forms of communication and interaction between individuals and technology. In the future, transformation could involve humans becoming cyborgs or genetically engineered to achieve better physical health and longevity. Prosthetic limbs are one example of this, as they enable individuals with amputations to regain mobility and functionality. The latest prosthetics technology has allowed the development of increasingly sophisticated and integrated devices controlled directly by the user’s thoughts. Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) are another example of transformation, allowing individuals to control computers or devices with their thoughts. BCIs can help people with disabilities communicate or control robotic devices or prosthetics.[10] Furthermore, future advancements in fields like nanotechnology and biotechnology could enable even more integration between technology and human biology, such as nanobots for tissue repair or gene editing for enhanced traits or capabilities.

Intelligization: This shift has to do with the development of artificial intelligence (AI), which is seen as key to the running of society in the present and future. According to Oxford Reference, AI is “the theory and development of computer systems able to perform tasks normally requiring human intelligence, such as visual perception, speech recognition, decision-making, and translation between languages.”[11] Quartz provides a more understandable explanation of AI as follows:

Artificial intelligence is a software, or a computer program, with a mechanism to learn. It then uses that knowledge to make a decision in a new situation, as humans do. The researchers building this software try to write code that can read images, text, video, or audio, and learn something from it. Once a machine has learned, that knowledge can be put to use elsewhere.[12]

The trend of intelligization denotes the growing integration of AI technologies into various aspects of our lives, including work, communication, entertainment, transportation, and healthcare. By employing machine learning, natural language processing, robotics, and other forms of AI, intelligization aims to automate tasks, enhance human decision-making, and develop novel human-machine interactions. This holds great potential for improving productivity, efficiency, and innovation across a wide range of industries and domains. For instance, in the workplace, intelligization can automate mundane tasks, allowing workers to dedicate their attention to more complex and creative tasks. In healthcare, AI can analyze medical data and assist with diagnosis and treatment decisions.[13] In transportation, AI can optimize traffic flow and minimize congestion, while in entertainment, AI can provide personalized and engaging experiences for users.[14] The integration of AI technologies into various domains of our lives underscores the significance of intelligization in shaping our future, and it is vital to continuously explore its potential to further enhance our daily lives.

Automation and Robotization: Automation and robotization are related concepts that involve the use of technology to streamline and optimize processes and tasks that were previously performed by humans. Automation refers to the use of software, machines, robots, and other digital technologies to perform tasks such as data entry, quality control, and assembly line operations. The goal of automation is to improve efficiency, productivity, and accuracy, while reducing the need for human intervention in routine tasks. Robotization, on the other hand, specifically refers to the use of robots to perform tasks that were previously performed by humans. Robots are intelligent machines that can be programmed to perform a wide range of tasks, from manufacturing and assembly line operations to healthcare and customer service. The key difference between automation and robotization is that automation is a more general term that encompasses a wide range of technologies, while robotization specifically refers to the use of robots. However, the two concepts are closely related, as robots are often used in automation systems to perform tasks that are too complex, dangerous, or repetitive for humans. Both automation and robotization have the potential to significantly improve productivity, efficiency, and quality in a wide range of industries, from manufacturing and healthcare to finance and transportation. The creation of robots to assist in the daily life of human is expected to be more conspicuous. Intelligization has the potential to accelerate robotization by enabling robots to perform more complex and intelligent tasks. By integrating AI technologies, robots can become more autonomous and adaptable, and able to operate in a wider range of environments and social contexts.[15] Prices for robots will decrease as more people buy them and science makes advances in components such as agility, natural language understanding, image recognition and battery power—things that make robots more aesthetically attractive and useful.[16] In a more sinister prospect, robots will also be created to engage in warfare between nations and states, and could be activated for deadly missions.

Anticipation: Artificial intelligence (AI) has revolutionized the way we process and analyze data to anticipate future events. For example, in the future, AI-powered personal assistants can analyze patterns in behavior to predict future actions and needs. They can anticipate changes in schedules, reschedule appointments, and rebook airline tickets. AI doctors can predict health issues by analyzing medical records, genetic information, lifestyle factors, and environmental factors. Advanced algorithms and machine learning techniques identify patterns and correlations to predict potential health risks or issues. Predictive analytics is another tool used by AI doctors to identify individuals at high risk of developing certain health conditions, allowing for early intervention and preventative measures. In law enforcement, AI-powered tools analyze crime data, social media activity, and other sources of information to identify potential crime hotspots or predict where certain types of crimes may occur. Machine learning algorithms can identify patterns and correlations that human analysts may not have noticed, allowing law enforcement agencies to allocate resources more effectively and proactively prevent crime. AI can also analyze demographic and socioeconomic data to identify communities that may be more vulnerable to crime or other social problems. By using this information to target resources and interventions, law enforcement agencies can improve public safety. The integration of AI with the internet of things (IoT) will further enhance the ability of people, animals, and objects to share data and anticipate future events, leading to more efficient and effective decision-making across a wide range of industries.

_________

1. Gerd Leonhard, Technology Vs. Humanity: The Coming Clash Between Man and Machine (UK: Fast Future Publishing Ltd., 2016).

2. Jason Bloomberg, “Digitization, digitalization, and digital transformation: confuse them at your peril,” Forbes, April 29, 2018, https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonbloomberg/2018/04/29/digitization-digitalization-and-digital-transformation-confuse-them-at-your-peril/#1b48dc022f2c

3. Gartner, https://www.gartner.com/en/information-technology/glossary/digitalization

4. Clifford Chi, “What is a Digital Nomad and How Do You Become One?” Hubspot, October 10, 2022, https://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/digital-nomad.

5. Rachel Nuwer, “Are Paper Books Really Disappearing?” BBC, January 26, 2016, https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20160124-are-paper-books-really-disappearing

6. Bernd W. Wirtz, Digital Business and Electronic Commerce. Springer Texts in Business and Economics (Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2021), 283.

7. Jerry Brown and Jordan Tarver, “LendingClub Vs. Prosper Personal Loans 2023,” Forbes, September 22, 2021, https://www.forbes.com/advisor/personal-loans/lending-club-vs-prosper/.

8. Doug Petkanics, “The Benefits of Decentralization,” Medium, November 15, 2016, https://medium.com/@petkanics/the-benefits-of-decentralization-aa40c3a448e2.

9. Werner Vermaak, “What is Web 3.0? Decentralized Web Explained,” Coinmarketcap, 2023, https://coinmarketcap.com/alexandria/article/what-is-web-30-decentralized-web-explained.

10. Society for Neuroscience, “Brain-Computer Interface Advances Improve Prosthetics, Therapies: Advances Offer Help for Quadriplegic, Stroke, Amputee, and Blind Patients,” Science Daily, November 6, 2018, www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/11/181106121415.htm.

11. Oxford Reference, https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095426960.

12. Dave Gershgorn, “The Quartz guide to artificial intelligence: What is it, why is it important, and should we be afraid?” Quartz, September 10, 2017, https://qz.com/1046350/the-quartz-guide-to-artificial-intelligence-what-is-it-why-is-it-important-and-should-we-be-afraid/.

13. João Bocas, “How AI Is Changing Healthcare: From Diagnosis to Treatment,” Digital Salutem, August 24, 2022,, https://digitalsalutem.com/how-ai-is-changing-healthcare-from-diagnosis-to-treatment/.

14. Victoria Woollaston, “Personalised TV: The Future of AI-Powered Entertainment or a Step Too Far?,” E&T, November 29, 2022, https://eandt.theiet.org/content/articles/2022/11/personalised-tv-the-future-of-ai-powered-entertainment-or-a-step-too-far/.

15. Adam Zewe, “Giving Robots Social Skills,” Massachusetts Institute of Technology, November 5, 2021, https://news.mit.edu/2021/robots-social-skills-1105.

16. Mike Thomas, “The Future of Robots and Robotics,” Built In, October 31, 2022, https://builtin.com/robotics/future-robots-robotics.

Confucian Communication Ethics in Media: A Short Introduction

 

Download pdf

1. Introduction

Confucianism, the system of thought that has been variously described as a philosophy, a way of life, a worldview, a religion, a culture, and so on, is named after Kung Fu-tzu, or Kung the Master. Confucius was born in the sixth century BCE in the principality of Lu in the modern Shandong Province of China. The socio-religio-cultural worldview that is identified as Confucianism and has characterized the way of life of a large segment of people in Asia and beyond for the last several thousand years began with an intellectual who was convinced that he had a divine mission to re-establish the social order of his time. Although Confucius attempted for many years to propagate his teachings through official government channels, his efforts were often not justly rewarded. Nonetheless, Confucius never gave up on teaching his disciples and also spent the last years of his life editing the classics of China’s past – all in the effort to provide a vision and way out of the state of social and political conflict due to human moral decline, especially among those in power.

Confucius’ pedagogical regiment consisted of lessons in civics, literature, mathematics, history, music, propriety, divination, and sports. This represented a comprehensive and integrated method for human beings to transform themselves from the inner core, starting with the individual undertaking a self-effort that would contribute positively to the entire society, indeed the world. In terms of communication style, Confucius shared similarity with Socrates, preferring to engage his students with questions and carrying out conversations rather than giving lectures (Smith, 1991, p.174).

2. Confucian Ethical Worldview

Communication is not exclusive to human beings, but ethical human communication in the Confucian paradigm requires a process of personal self-cultivation and transformation in order to be imbued with qualities that characterize full self-realization. Through a proper education and consistent learning, the individual embodies the following essential qualities (Runes, 1983, p. 338): Ren (仁, benevolence, humaneness); Yi (义; 義, righteousness, justice); Li (礼; 禮, propriety, rites); Zhi (智, wisdom, knowledge); Xin (信, sincerity, faithfulness). Indeed, these qualities demonstrate the human awareness of being in relationship with others and the desire to act towards others virtuously as their dignity deserves. Whether in formal religious ceremonies or in mundane daily routines, actions must be carried out with precision and intention in accordance with each particular context. Confucius taught, “Do not look at what is contrary to li, do not listen to what is contrary to li, do not speak what is contrary to li, and do not make any movement that is contrary to li” (Analects, 12.1).

When one is imbued with these qualities, one is appropriately called a Junzi (君子) – the paradigmatic model of Confucian personality. The individual embodies the highest degree of moral excellence and free from any sign of depravity, ill-will, and pettiness. Translated variously as ‘superior person,’ ‘exemplary person,’ and ‘profound person,’ the junzi communicates the image of one who has received a proper education and has the ability to establish in oneself the unity of knowledge and action.

Indeed, education and character, in the Confucian paradigm, are not two separate aspects of a fully realized person, but are integrally connected to one another, supporting and informing one another. According to Confucius, a junzi has nine wishes (Nadeau, 2015, p. 45): 1) to have a clear vision; 2) to be able to listen well; 3) to have a gentle appearance; 4) to exhibit reverential expressions; 5) to be true to one’s word; 6) to be conscientious of one affairs; 7) to make inquiries when in doubt; 8) to regret having lost one’s temper; and 9) to consider carefully before attaining something (Analects, Ch. 10).

While Confucian self-transformation is first and foremost to achieve self-realization, to be authentically human is not simply about acquisition of knowledge and skills for selfish purposes. While self-cultivation takes the individual as the point of departure, the self is not an isolated entity; rather it exists within an interconnected and ever-expanding network of human relations – starting with the family and going towards the community, the world, and indeed the cosmos. According to Tu Weiming, “Self-realization as a communal act presupposes a personal commitment for harmonizing the family, governing the state, and bringing peace to the world. The full realization of personhood entails the real possibility of transcending selfishness, nepotism, parochialism, nationalism, and anthropocentrism” (Tu, nd, p. 79). Thus, authentic humanity in the Confucian understanding is never narcissistic and self-serving, but ever conscious of the four essential dimensions of the shared human experience—self, community, Earth (nature) and Heaven.

Authentic humanity in Confucianism calls for the integration of the body, heart, mind, soul, and spirit of the self. This integration results in actions and interactions that promote harmony at all levels – from the home to the world and beyond. A highly cultivated person while deeply rooted in his/her immediate context, is nevertheless able to enter into relationship with other human beings, with nature, and with the transcendent. An essential element of the Confucian vision is the commitment to relationship of mutuality with Heaven, whose way is distinct and superior to that of human beings. Thus, human beings must open their heart and mind to the Way of Heaven so that their thoughts and deeds are in harmony with the will of Heaven.

The culmination of the process of self-cultivation is the ability to envision oneself as part of an intrinsic whole and be able to shift one’s locus of concern to others rather than being focused on one’s selfish needs and desires. As Huston Smith remarks, “In shifting the center of one’s empathic concern from oneself to one’s family one transcends selfishness. The move from family to community transcends nepotism. The move from community to nation overcomes parochialism, and the move to all humanity counters chauvinistic nationalism” (1991, p. 200). Indeed, the conscious move to the transcendent also overcomes egotistical anthropocentrism and be able to obtain what Tu Weiming calls an ‘anthropocosmic’ vision of reality (2013, p. 6).

Although Confucianism serves an all-encompassing role in the societies influenced by this worldview, it is usually not identified as a ‘religion’ by the people in these places. Religion, for many East Asians, is associated with institutional teaching or school of instruction, which is perceived as organizational and sectarian. Confucianism, on the other hand, is thoroughly diffused in the people’s lives, more like the air that East Asians breathe (Nadeau, 2014, p. 21). Even though certain aspects of Confucian thought and practices have been suppressed due to historical and political developments in the region, or judged as outdated and oppressive due to the rise in modernity and globalization, the Confucian worldview and its values still largely govern the way East Asians perceive themselves and relationship with others.

Many people in East Asian societies continue to perform family-oriented rituals rooted in Confucian teaching and making regular offerings to ancestors even if they do not explicitly identify themselves as Confucian. In Communist Vietnam, the government sanctions and organizes ceremonies annually to pay tribute to the legendary Hung kings who Vietnamese people consider to be their national ancestors. It is true that in East Asia, while students in the last century and a half no longer pore over Confucian classics and memorize sayings by the beloved sage, Confucianism remains very much a part of the social and spiritual fabric of East Asian societies as the ancient teachings get re-contextualized for the contemporary age.

3. Confucianism and the Media

While Confucian teachings have always been communicated through literature and lived traditions throughout the centuries, in the modern age, another common way that Confucian values get transmitted are through movies and dramas. Many media scholars have attributed the success of Korean dramas as part of the ‘Hallyu’ Korean wave in East Asian markets to what has been labeled as ‘cultural proximity’ (Yang, 2008, p.109). Cultural proximity refers to the cultural resemblances that enable people from different countries to appreciate and receive what each has to offer. This theory has been offered as an explanation for the popularity of Korean dramas among the Chinese audience who can relate to the depiction of “Neo-Confucian social concepts…awakening a respect for traditional values lost under communism” (Y. Kim, 2007, p. 127).

As for Japan, cultural proximity refers to the new consciousness of the similarities between the Korean and Japanese cultures, with the latter once perceiving the former as being ‘backwards’ and ‘underdeveloped’ (Kim, Agrusa, and Lee, 2007, p.1351). However, by seeing Confucian aspects embedded in the Korean culture as depicted in the dramas, Japanese people began to see Koreans in a new light. Cultural proximity indeed has been a popular theory among media scholars to explain the success of the Hallyu wave that began in the early 2000s and continues to be a strong presence in the global pop culture. Certainly, in Vietnam and Taiwan, countries profoundly influenced by Confucianism and where Korean dramas are widely watched, Vietnamese and Taiwanese audience can easily connect with the cultural elements and social traditions portrayed in the plotlines.

While cultural proximity is the most accepted explanation for the popularity of Korean dramas in its neighboring countries, other explanations would need to be made for why Korean dramas have managed to garner a large audience in countries where Confucianism is not the prevalent worldview, e.g., the United States and South Asian countries. No matter the reason, to this extent, the reach of the Korean wave means that Confucianism is then introduced to an entirely new audience in other parts of the world.

Although the depiction of the Confucian worldview and values in Asian dramas demonstrates the ongoing significance of Confucian thought in contemporary Asian society, one of the signifiers of the ‘revival’ of Confucianism in China itself is the production of the movie ‘Confucius’ in 2009 to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China and the 2,560th birthday of Confucius himself. The movie, which starred Chow Yun-fat as the great master and philosopher, was released in January 2010, during the same time that the Hollywood blockbuster ‘Avatar’ was playing across China. Although the Hollywood production out-grossed ‘Confucius’ 2.5 times per day (Lafraniere, 2010), the fact that the movie was made at all was remarkable, considering that during the Cultural Revolution, Confucius’ teachings were banned by Mao Zedong, who ordered his family home destroyed.

While the positive values of Confucianism have been portrayed in various communication genres, from literature to music, the controversial elements of Confucian social system have also been the subject of many artistic works, especially pertaining to the role of women in an hierarchical Confucian society. In Vietnamese society, the four virtues required of a married woman, consisting of work, manner, speech, and ethics remain deeply ingrained in the consciousness of the women who decide to enter matrimony and raise a family as well as the men who expect these virtues from their wives. Songs about mothers are regularly composed and continue to be popular even in the modern pop culture. At a karaoke party, anyone who chooses to sing a song about mother can guarantee to induce feelings of nostalgia, melancholy, and empathy from the listeners who are always ready to join in the chorus section.

In addition, the depiction of the struggles and suffering of women in loveless marriages arranged by parents, having to deal with dictatorial and demanding husbands who spend their drunken days playing chess and gambling is a staple in Vietnamese dramas and comedy. The 1993 critically acclaimed film by Tran Anh Hung, ‘The Scent of Green Papaya,’ for example, depicts the Vietnamese woman in the traditional stereotypes as a hardworking, patient, and kind person, who has to deal with a husband who only knows how to spend all the money she tries to save on his escapades. All she can do is to quietly accept her fate and suffering, just like countless other Vietnamese women throughout history.

Confronting this reality, Vietnamese find themselves torn between feeling distaste with such apparent inequality and injustice, at the same time admiration for the strength of Vietnamese women. Unfortunately, expressing admiration without the necessary critiques of the system can perpetuate an unjust model of the ideal wife and mother in Vietnamese society.

4. Conclusion

In summary, while Confucianism is academically categorized as a world religion, its organizational structure differs significantly from other religions, even Buddhism, which has temples and sanghas that serve as the official face of institutional Buddhism. Thus, communication and transmission of Confucian thought and worldview over the centuries have been implemented primarily through formal education, traditional practices, social inculcation, and literature rather than through individuals affiliated with religious institutions as in the case of Christianity and Islam. In the modern age, Confucian values and practices have also been depicted in various media such as films, plays, television drama, and music. Through the ongoing portrayal of elements of Confucianism in modern media, this worldview continues to influence the way East Asians perceive and communicate about themselves. At the same time, it also facilitates opportunities for deeper critique about unjust elements embedded in Confucian thought and practices as well as creating opportunities for dialogue with other religious systems in matters relevant to the contemporary milieu.

​References

Kim, S.S., Agrusa, J., Lee, H., & Chon, K. (2007). Effects of Korean television dramas on the flow of Japanese tourists. Tourism Management 28, 1340-1353.

Kim, Y. (2007). The rising East Asian ‘wave’: Korean media go global. Media on the move: Global flow and contra-flow. Ed. Daya Kishan Thussu. New York: Routledge.

Lafraniere, S. (2010, January 29). China’s zeal for ‘Avatar’ crowds out ‘Confucius’. The New York Times.

Nadeau, R.L. (2014). Asian religions: A cultural perspective. Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell.
Runes, D.D., ed. (1983). Dictionary of Philosophy. Philosophical Library.

Smith, H. (1991). The world’s religions: Our great wisdom traditions. San Francsico: HarperOne.

Tu, W.M. (nd). Ecological implications of Confucian humanism. Retrieved from http://msihyd.org/pdf/19manuscript_tu.pdf.

Tu, W.M. (2013). Spiritual humanism. Hangzhou International Congress, “Culture: Key to Sustainable Development,” 15-17 May 2013, Hangzhou, China.

Yang, J. (2008). The Korean wave (hallyu) in East Asia: A comparison of Chinese, Japanese, and Taiwanese audiences who watch Korean TV dramas. Development and Society 41(1), 103-147.

Đối thoại liên tôn trong kỷ nguyên số (Phần 6/6 - Kết)

6. Công tác đối thoại trong bối cảnh mới

Các tài liệu của Giáo hội đã giới thiệu bốn hình thức đối thoại liên tôn mà tất cả mọi người có thể thực hiện với những mức độ khác nhau, như đã đề cập ở trên. Trong khi các hình thức đối thoại cơ bản có thể không thay đổi, việc áp dụng dĩ nhiên phải được điều chỉnh cho phù hợp với bối cảnh kỹ thuật số ngày nay. 

Trong kỷ nguyên số, đối thoại không còn bị giới hạn trong không gian vật lý. Như đã thấy, ngày nay, phần lớn nội dung trình bày ý tưởng và quan điểm của mọi người thường diễn ra trong không gian mạng. Không gian mạng là nơi người ta dùng để truyền bá chủ nghĩa cơ yếu tôn giáo, xuất bản các bản tuyên ngôn cực đoan, tuyển mộ những kẻ khủng bố tiềm năng và đăng tải hướng dẫn cách chế tạo bom để thực hiện các chiến dịch bạo lực. Internet không chỉ là một nền tảng truyền thông đại chúng truyền thống như báo và sách được in trên giấy. 

Không gian mạng ngày nay đã biến thành một không gian không thể thiếu được trong cuộc sống con người, nó là nơi mọi người được kết nối và tương tác với nhau. Nó là nơi người ta có thể dùng để gây chiến, gieo rắc chia rẻ, hận thù, bạo lực, nhưng cũng có thể là nơi để xây dựng hòa bình, tình liên đới và sự hiệp thông. Vì vậy, đối thoại phải được thực hiện một cách có chủ đích và hệ thống trong không gian này. Như Đức Bênêđíctô XVI đã khẳng định trong Thông điệp cho Ngày Truyền thông lần thứ 47,

Những không gian này, khi được tham gia một cách khôn ngoan và cân bằng, sẽ giúp thúc đẩy các hình thức đối thoại và tranh luận, nếu được tiến hành một cách tôn trọng và quan tâm đến quyền riêng tư, trách nhiệm và sự trung thực, có thể củng cố mối dây đoàn kết giữa các cá nhân và thúc đẩy hiệu quả sự hòa thuận của gia đình nhân loại.[49]

Nếu những người trong Giáo hội đã từng bước vào các nhà thờ Hồi giáo và giáo đường Do Thái để thực hiện đối thoại và xây dựng tình liên đới, thì điều tương tự cũng phải được thực hiện đối với các nền tảng trực tuyến nơi tụ họp của những người thuộc các truyền thống tôn giáo và hệ tư tưởng khác nhau. Tuy nhiên, khi nhìn sâu sắc vào sứ mệnh này, có thể thấy rằng đối thoại trong môi trường không gian mạng thách thức hơn nhiều so với không gian vật lý, một phần bởi vì các thực thể bên trong môi trường này là vô số. Mặc dù cơ hội đối thoại là vô hạn, nhưng không thể phủ nhận làm tốt sứ vụ thực sự rất là khó khăn.

Đối thoại trong kỷ nguyên kỹ thuật số đòi hỏi một nhận thức mới về ý nghĩa của khái niệm “cuộc sống hằng ngày”. Cái gọi là cuộc sống hằng ngày không còn chỉ là chuyện gặp gỡ mọi người ở chợ, ở quán cà phê, hay nơi làm việc. Cuộc sống hằng ngày còn bao gồm tất cả các cuộc gặp gỡ trên phương tiện mạng xã hội, trong đó có “bạn bè” trên Facebook, “những người theo dõi” trên Instagram và Twitter, và những người đồng nghiệp trên các diễn đàn thảo luận. Thuật ngữ “chuyên gia” trong việc đối thoại liên tôn không còn chỉ dành để nói về những người có bằng Thần học, Kinh Thánh, hay Tôn giáo học. 

Không gian hội thảo các vấn đề không chỉ là các phòng máy lạnh được bài trí đẹp đẽ tại các nhà thờ, học viện, thậm chí cả các phòng hội nghị của khách sạn cao cấp. “Chuyên gia” trong bối cảnh ngày nay còn bao gồm những người có khả năng thâm nhập vào các nền tảng khác nhau trên internet để tham gia đối thoại với các “chuyên gia” khác trong môi trường trực tuyến, trong các diễn đàn mà các nhóm người khác nhau tìm đến để bày tỏ suy nghĩ và cảm xúc.

Do đó, như Đức Bênêđíctô XVI khẳng định, bối cảnh mới đòi hỏi “sự cam kết của tất cả những ai ý thức về giá trị của đối thoại, tranh luận có lý trí và lập luận hợp lý; của những người cố gắng trau dồi các hình thức diễn đạt và diễn đạt thu hút những nguyện vọng cao quý nhất của những người tham gia vào quá trình giao tiếp."[50] Sứ mệnh đối thoại của Giáo hội hiện nay đòi hỏi một cái nhìn hoàn toàn mới về các hình thức đối thoại khác nhau từng được Giáo hội đưa ra trước đây. 

Trong thời đại kỹ thuật số, việc phải thực hiện các hình thức đối thoại liên tôn trong không gian trực tuyến yêu cầu nơi mỗi thành viên trong Giáo hội sự sáng tạo để đáp ứng tốt hơn những thay đổi trong lối sống và cách giao tiếp trong xã hội ngày nay. Thiết nghĩ các chuyên gia về đối thoại liên tôn cần nghiên cứu và tìm ra những phương cách thiết thực, hiệu quả để đối thoại trong không gian mạng, bên cạnh những hình thức đối thoại trong không gian vật lý.

***

Trong kỷ nguyên kỹ thuật số, Giáo hội phải đương đầu với nhiều thách thức khi thực hiện sứ mệnh của mình. Một trong những thách đố lớn nhất của xã hội ngày nay là tư duy hậu sự thật có nguy cơ phá vỡ sự hiệp nhất trong Giáo hội cũng như các mối quan hệ giữa các tôn giáo. Trước bối cảnh đáng quan ngại này, các vị lãnh đạo Giáo hội phải chủ động và sáng tạo trong sứ mệnh đối thoại nhằm thúc đẩy sự đoàn kết bên trong Hội Thánh cũng như sự hòa hợp giữa các tôn giáo. Đối thoại giữa các tôn giáo phải tiếp tục là yếu tố chủ chốt của Giáo hội và tất cả các thành viên của Giáo hội. Đây không phải là một cách thức mới để thể hiện bản chất và sứ vụ của Giáo hội, nhưng là cách thức thiết yếu, nhất là trong bối cảnh ngày nay, sứ mệnh phục vụ Nước Trời của Giáo hội đang bị cản trở bởi chủ nghĩa bè phái, cố chấp, chủ nghĩa cơ yếu tôn giáo và chủ nghĩa cực đoan. 

Những hiện tượng và trào lưu tiêu cực này lại được hỗ trợ và được kích động bởi các công cụ và chiến dịch tuyên truyền thông tin xuyên tạc, sai lệch, ác ý. Sự trung thành của chúng ta với sứ mệnh này có nghĩa là chúng ta tiếp tục cam kết với các giá trị hòa bình, công lý và lòng nhân ái – những giá trị chỉ có thể được thực hiện thông qua đối thoại với những người thuộc các nền văn hóa và tôn giáo khác. Như Thánh Giáo Hoàng Gioan Phaolô II đã tuyên bố, các Kitô hữu phải “cam kết đối thoại với các tín đồ của tất cả các tôn giáo” và “sẽ chung tay với tất cả nam và nữ thiện chí và làm việc cùng nhau để mang lại một xã hội công bằng và hòa bình hơn, trong đó người nghèo sẽ là người đầu tiên được phục vụ."[51]

Truyền bá sứ điệp Tin Mừng và loan báo Nước Thiên Chúa luôn là ưu tiên lớn nhất trong suốt lịch sử của Giáo hội. Sự tiến bộ về công nghệ thông tin và truyền thông đã được chứng minh có tiềm năng mang lại lợi ích to lớn trong sứ mệnh truyền bá Phúc Âm. Tuy nhiên, thời đại kỹ thuật số và tư duy hậu sự thật hiện nay cũng gây ra những trở ngại cho tính hiệu quả của công việc mà Giáo hội đang thực hiện. Bài viết này khẳng định mạnh mẽ rằng đối thoại liên tôn là điều cần thiết cho đời sống và sứ mạng của Giáo hội trong bối cảnh xã hội hiện nay. 

Trước những thế lực xã hội trực tiếp hoặc gián tiếp nhắm mục tiêu loại bỏ tôn giáo ra khỏi đời sống con người hoặc gây bất ổn cho nhân loại bằng cách gieo rắc sự hiểu lầm và xung đột tôn giáo, Giáo hội cần phải nỗ lực gấp đôi trong việc đối thoại giữa các tôn giáo ở mọi cấp độ và trong mọi môi trường bất kể vật lý hay kỹ thuật số. Tuy nhiên, hành động đối thoại đó được thực hiện như thế nào là điều mà các vị lãnh đạo trong Giáo hội cần nghiêm túc nghiên cứu, phân định và thử nghiệm nhằm đáp ứng được bối cảnh xã hội và lối tư duy của con người thời nay. 

______

49. Đức Giáo Hoàng Bênêđíctô XVI, Sứ điệp ngày Thế giới Truyền thông 2013, http://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/messages/communications/documents/hf_ben-xvi_mes_20130124_47th-world-communications-day.html.
50. Ibid.
51. Đức Giáo Hoàng Gioan Phaolô II, Sứ điệp ngày Thế giới Truyền thông 1981, https://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/speeches/1981/february/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_19810221_manila-auditorium.html, 5.