24/01/01 [담화] 2024년 프란치스코 교황 성하의 제57차 세계 평화의 날 담화 - 인공 지능과 평화

[성기화 요셉]

프란치스코 교황 성하의
제57차 세계 평화의 날 담화
(2024년 1월 1일)

인공 지능과 평화

주님께서 우리 저마다에게 베풀어 주시는 은총의 때인 새해를 시작하며, 하느님의 백성은 물론 여러 민족, 각 나라와 정부 지도자, 다양한 종교와 시민 사회 대표, 그리고 이 시대를 살아가는 모든 이에게 저는 평화를 향한 저의 간절한 바람을 전하고자 합니다. 

1. 평화의 길인 과학과 기술의 진보

하느님께서 인간에게 당신의 영을 부어 주시어 “재능과 총명과 온갖 일솜씨”(탈출 35,31)를 채워 주셨다고 성경은 증언합니다. 인간의 지능은, 우리가 창조주께 받은 존엄을 표현합니다. 창조주 하느님께서는 당신과 비슷하게 당신 모습으로 우리를 창조하시어(창세 1,26 참조), 우리가 의식적이고도 자유롭게 당신 사랑에 응답하게 해 주셨습니다. 과학과 기술은, 인간 지능이 지닌 이러한 근본적인 관계적 특성을 특별한 방식으로 드러냅니다. 과학과 기술은 인간 지능의 창조적 잠재력이 빚어낸 빛나는 성과입니다. 

제2차 바티칸 공의회는 현대 세계의 교회에 관한 사목 헌장 「기쁨과 희망」(Gaudium et Spes)에서 “인간은 자기 노력과 재능으로 자신의 삶을 더욱 폭넓게 발전시키려고 언제나 분투하여 왔다.” 1)라고 선언함으로써 이 진리를 재천명하였습니다. 인간은 “기술의 힘으로 땅을 …… 온 인류 가족의 알맞은 거처로” 2) 만드는 노력을 기울일 때, 하느님의 계획에 맞갖게 행동하며 창조의 완성과 민족들 사이에 평화를 가져오고자 하느님 뜻에 협력하게 됩니다. 또한 과학과 기술의 진보가 사회 질서와 형제적 친교와 자유를 증진하는 데에 이바지한다면 인류의 발전과 세상의 변화를 이룰 수 있습니다. 

과학과 기술의 뛰어난 성취에 대하여 우리는 마땅히 기뻐하고 감사하여야 합니다. 그 덕분에 인류의 삶을 괴롭히고 커다란 고통을 불러일으켰던 수많은 질병을 치료하였습니다. 아울러 기술-과학의 발전은 현실에 대하여 이제껏 없었던 통제력을 행사하게 함으로써 인간의 손에 방대한 선택권을 쥐여 주고 있습니다. 그 가운데 어떤 것들은 우리의 생존을 위협하고 우리 공동의 집을 위태롭게 만들지도 모릅니다. 3)

따라서 새로운 정보 기술 특히 디지털 분야의 눈부신 발전은 흥미로운 기회면서 동시에 중대한 위험을 제기하여 민족들 간의 정의와 화합의 추구에 심각한 영향을 미칩니다. 그러므로 몇 가지 긴급한 문제들을 짚어볼 필요가 있습니다. 이러한 새로운 디지털 기술은 중장기적으로 어떤 결과를 가져올까요? 개인의 삶과 사회에, 그리고 국제적 안정과 평화에 어떤 영향을 미칠까요?

2. 인공 지능의 미래: 기대와 위험 사이

최근 몇십 년 동안 정보 기술의 진보와 디지털 기술의 발전은 이미 국제 사회와 그 다양한 역동에 근본적인 변화를 불러오기 시작하였습니다. 새로운 디지털 도구들은 이제 커뮤니케이션, 공공 행정, 교육, 소비, 개인 상호관계, 그 밖에 우리 일상생활의 수많은 측면의 양상을 바꾸고 있습니다. 

게다가 다양한 알고리즘을 이용하는 기술은 인터넷을 통하여 퍼진 디지털 흔적(digital footprint)으로부터, 상업적 또는 정치적 목적을 위하여 정신적 관계적 습관을 좌우하게 하는 데이터를 추출할 수 있습니다. 그리하여 흔히 깨닫지 못하는 사이에 우리는 선택의 자유를 의식적으로 행사하는 데에 제약을 받습니다. 정보 과부하가 특징인 웹과 같은 공간에서 이러한 기술은, 사용자가 늘 인지할 수는 없는 선별 기준에 따라 데이터의 흐름을 형성할 수 있습니다. 

우리는 과학 연구와 기술 혁신이 현실과 유리된 “중립적”인 것이 아니며4) 문화적 영향을 받는다는 사실을 명심하여야 합니다. 온전한 인간 활동으로서 과학 연구와 기술 혁신이 택하는 방향은 그 시대의 개인적, 사회적, 문화적 가치들이 조건 지은 선택을 반영합니다. 그 결과들도 마찬가지입니다. 그 결과는 바로 우리를 둘러싼 세상을 대하는 인간의 특별한 방식의 결실이기에, 그 실험을 설계하고 특정 목적을 위한 도출로 이끄는 사람들이 내리는 결정과 언제나 긴밀히 연관되는 윤리적 차원을 지니는 것입니다. 

이는 인공 지능의 유형들에도 적용됩니다. 오늘날까지 과학 기술계에서는 인공 지능에 관하여 하나로 정의하지 않습니다. 이제는 일상 언어가 되어 버린 그 용어 자체에는, 기계가 인간의 인지 능력을 그 기능 안에 재생하거나 모방하게 만드는 것을 목표로 다양한 과학, 이론, 기술이 망라됩니다. ‘지능의 유형들’이라고 복수로 말하는 것은 무엇보다 그러한 시스템과 인간 사이에 넘을 수 없는 차이가 있다는 사실을 강조하는 데에 도움이 될 수 있습니다. 아무리 놀랍고 강력하다고 한들, 결국 이 지능의 유형들은 인간 지성의 특정 기능들을 모방하거나 재생만 할 수 있다는 점에서 ‘단편적’일 뿐입니다. 또한 복수로 말하는 것은 이 장치들 사이에도 서로 큰 차이가 있으며 이들을 늘 ‘사회-기술 시스템’으로 여겨야 한다는 사실을 드러냅니다. 어떤 인공 지능 장치도, 기저에 있는 기술과 무관하게, 그 기술 설계만이 아니라 그 장치 소유자들과 개발자들의 목적과 이윤 그리고 사용되는 상황에 따라 그 영향력이 달라집니다.

그렇기에 인공 지능을 다양한 실재들로 이루어진 집합체로 여겨야 합니다. 그 발전이 인류의 미래와 민족들 사이의 평화에 유익한 기여를 할 것이라고 선험적으로 가정할 수 없습니다. 우리가 책임 있게 행동하고 “포용, 투명성, 안보, 공정, 사생활 보호, 신뢰”5)와 같은 인간의 기본적 가치를 존중할 수 있다는 것을 보여줄 때만 그러한 긍정적 결과를 이룰 수 있습니다.             

알고리즘과 디지털 기술을 설계하는 이들이 윤리적이고 책임감 있게 행동하고자 노력할 것이라는 가정만으로는 충분하지 않습니다. 이 분야에서 제기되는 윤리적 문제들을 검토하고 인공 지능의 유형들을 이용하거나 그 영향 아래 놓인 이들의 권리를 보호하는 책임을 맡은 기구를 강화하거나, 필요하다면 설립하여야 합니다.6)

기술의 무한 확장에는 앞으로의 발전에 대한 적절한 책임 교육이 따라야 합니다. 인간이 이기심, 개인의 이익, 이윤과 권력에 대한 갈망이라는 유혹에 진다면 자유와 평화로운 공존은 위협받습니다. 따라서 우리는 시야를 넓혀 기술-과학 연구가 개인과 공동체의 온전한 발전에 봉사하면서 평화와 공동선을 추구하도록 이끌어야 하는 의무가 있습니다.7)

모든 인간이 타고난 존엄과 한 인류 가족의 구성원으로 우리를 묶어 주는 형제애가 신기술의 개발을 뒷받침하고 그 사용에 앞서 이를 평가하는 데에 확고한 기준이 되어야 합니다. 그래야 디지털 발전이 정의에 맞갖게 이루어지고 평화에 이바지할 수 있습니다. 온 인류의 삶의 질을 개선하는 방향으로 나가는 것이 아니라 오히려 불평등과 분쟁을 심화시키는 기술 발전은 결코 참다운 발전으로 여길 수 없습니다. 8)

인공 지능의 중요성은 점점 더 커질 것입니다. 인공 지능이 제기하는 도전은 기술적이기도 하지만 인간학적, 교육적, 사회적, 정치적이기도 합니다. 예를 들어, 인공 지능은 데이터 축적과 구조화와 확인 과정의 혁명은 물론 고된 노동에서의 해방, 더욱 효율적인 제작 공정, 더 편리한 수송과 더욱 준비된 시장을 약속합니다. 우리는 지금 일어나는 빠른 변화에 대해서 잘 알고, 기본 인권을 보호하며, 온전한 인간 발전을 증진하는 제도와 법률을 존중하는 방식으로 그러한 변화를 관리하여야 합니다. 인공 지능은 인간이 지닌 최대의 잠재력과 가장 높은 열망에 봉사하는 것이지 인간과 경쟁하여서는 안 됩니다. 

3. 미래의 기술: 스스로 ‘배우는’ 기계

머신 러닝 기술에 기반한 인공 지능은 아직은 개척 단계에 있지만 그 다양한 형태를 통하여 이미 사회 구조에 상당한 변화를 가져오고 또 문화, 사회적 행동, 평화 건설에 큰 영향력을 행사하고 있습니다. 

머신 러닝 또는 딥 러닝과 같은 발전은 기술과 공학의 영역을 넘어 인간 삶의 의미, 지식의 형성, 진리에 도달하는 정신의 능력을 깊이 이해하는 데에 관련된 문제들을 제기합니다. 

그 일례로, 특정 장치들이 구문론적 의미론적으로 일관된 내용을 만들어낼 수 있어도 결코 그 장치들의 신뢰성은 보장되지 않습니다. 이것을 ‘그럴듯한 오류의 환각’(hallucinate: 인공 지능이 맥락과 관련 없거나 사실이 아닌 내용을 마치 옳은 답처럼 내놓는 현상)이라고 부릅니다. 언뜻 보기에는 타당한 듯하지만, 근거가 없거나 고정관념에 반하는 진술을 만들어내는 것입니다. 인공 지능이 가짜 뉴스를 퍼뜨리고 커뮤니케이션 매체의 왜곡 심화로 이어지는 허위 정보 캠페인에 동원되면 심각한 문제를 야기합니다. 그 밖에도 이러한 기술이 중대한 위험을 생겨나게 하는 분야로 사생활 보호, 데이터 저작권, 지적 재산권이 있습니다. 이러한 기술의 오용에 따른 또 다른 부정적 영향에는 차별, 선거 개입, 감시 사회의 증대, 디지털 배척, 점점 사회와 유리되는 개인주의의 팽배 등이 있습니다. 이 모든 요인이 분쟁을 부채질하고 평화를 방해할 위험이 있습니다.     

4. 기술 지배 패러다임의 한계에 대한 인식      

우리 세상은 엄청나게 넓고 다양하며 복합적이어서 완전히 파악하고 분류할 수 없습니다. 가장 발전된 알고리즘의 도움으로도 인간 정신의 풍요로움은 결코 완전히 규명할 수 없습니다. 이러한 알고리즘은 보장된 미래를 예측하는 것이 아니라 그저 통계적 근사치만을 제공할 뿐입니다. 모든 것을 예측할 수 없습니다. 또한 모든 것을 측량할 수도 없습니다. 결국 “실재는 생각보다 더 중요합니다.”9) 우리의 계산 능력이 아무리 뛰어날지라도 계량화를 위한 어떤 노력도 닿을 수 없는 영역은 언제나 존재할 것입니다.   

나아가, 인공 지능이 분석한 방대한 양의 데이터는 결코 그 자체로 공정성을 보장하지 않습니다. 알고리즘이 정보를 추론할 때는 언제나 왜곡의 위험이 따르며 정보가 생겨난 환경이 지닌 불의와 편견도 그대로 따라갈 수 있습니다. 알고리즘이 더 빠르고 복잡해질수록 그것이 특정한 결과를 산출하는 이유를 이해하기란 더 어려워집니다.

‘지능형’ 기계는 맡겨진 과제를 매우 효율적으로 수행할 수 있습니다만, 그 작동의 목적과 의미는 여전히 고유한 가치 체계를 소유한 인간이 결정하거나 마련할 수 있습니다. 특정 결정들을 내리는 기준들은 명확성이 떨어지고, 그 결정의 책임이 은폐되며, 생산자는 공동체의 선익을 위하여 행동할 의무를 회피할 수 있는 위험이 있습니다. 어떤 의미에서 이는, 경제와 기술을 연계하고 효율성의 기준을 최우선으로 삼으며 즉각적 이윤과 관련되지 않은 것은 무엇이든 무시하곤 하는 기술 지배적 체계가 좋아하는 일입니다.10)

이는 현재 우리의 기술 지배적이고 효율 지향적인 사고방식 안에서 흔히 간과되지만 개인과 사회의 발전에 결정적인 그 무엇 곧 ‘한계의 자각’에 대하여 성찰하게 해 줍니다. 인간 존재는 처음부터 죽을 운명을 타고납니다. 기술을 통하여 모든 한계의 극복을 제안하면서 우리는 모든 것을 통제하려는 강박적인 열망 안에서 우리 자신에 대한 통제력을 잃을 위험에 빠집니다. 또한 우리는 절대적 자유를 추구하면서 ‘기술 독재’의 소용돌이에 말려들 위험에 빠집니다. 피조물로서 우리가 지닌 한계에 대한 인식과 수용은 성취를 선물로 받아들이고 나아가 반기는 데에 반드시 필요한 조건입니다. 스스로 충족할 수 있다는 프로메테우스적 가정에서 영감을 받은 기술 관료적 패러다임이라는 이념적 맥락 안에서 불평등은 심화되고, 지식과 부는 소수의 손에 축적되며, 민주 사회와 평화로운 공존에 대한 심각한 위험이 생겨날 수 있습니다.11) 

5. 긴박한 윤리 문제

미래에는 주택 담보 대출 신청자의 신용, 개인의 직무 적합성, 유죄 판결을 받은 자의 재범 가능성, 또는 정치적 비호나 사회 보호 수급자의 권리 등이 인공 지능 체계로 결정될 수 있습니다. 이러한 체계가 도입하는 조정은 다양한 수준에서 이루어지지 못하기에 각종 형태의 편견과 차별에 특히 노출됩니다. 체계의 오류가 쉽게 배가되고, 개별 사례의 불공정만이 아니라 도미노 효과 때문에 실제로 사회적 불평등을 일으킬 수 있는 것입니다.

또한 때로는, 인공 지능의 유형들이 그 촉진과 제지에 관하여 이미 결정된 선택안들을 통하여 작동하거나 정보 설계에 기초하여 사람들의 선택을 규제하는 체계를 통하여 작동함으로써 개인의 결정에 영향을 미칠 수 있는 것처럼 보입니다. 이러한 형태의 조종 또는 사회적 통제에 세심한 주의와 감독을 기울여야 하며, 그 생산자, 배포자, 정부 당국은 명확한 법적 책임을 져야 합니다.

예를 들어, 신용 관찰을 널리 이용하거나 사회 신용 시스템을 채택하여 개인들을 분류하는 자동화 과정에의 의존도 마찬가지로 시민들 사이에 계급을 설정함으로써 사회 구조에 깊은 영향을 미칠 수 있습니다. 이러한 인위적 분류 과정들은 권력 충돌로도 이어질 수 있습니다. 가상 세계 사용자만이 아니라 현실의 사람들에게도 관계되기 때문입니다. 인간 존엄에 대한 근본적 존중으로 우리는 일련의 데이터를 통하여 개인의 고유성을 확인하는 일을 반대하여야 합니다. 알고리즘이 우리가 인권을 이해하는 방식을 결정하거나 연민과 자비와 용서가 지니는 본질적으로 인간적인 가치를 없애버릴 수 없게 하여야 합니다. 또는 개인적 변화를 이루고 과거를 뒤로할 가능성을 제거할 수 없게 하여야 합니다. 

이러한 상황에서 우리는, 신기술이 일터에 미치는 영향력을 고려하지 못해서도 안 됩니다. 한때 인간 노동의 독점적 영역이었던 일자리들은 인공 지능이 산업에 적용됨으로써 빠르게 대체되고 있습니다. 여기에도 또한 많은 이들의 빈곤을 대가로 소수가 불균형하게 혜택을 누릴 위험이 실제 존재합니다. 이러한 형태의 기술이 우리 일터로 더욱 깊이 파고들고 있기에, 국제 사회는 노동의 존엄에 대한 존중, 개인과 가정과 사회의 경제적 안녕을 위한 고용의 중요성, 고용 안정과 공정 임금을 우선순위로 삼아야 합니다. 

6. 칼을 쳐서 보습을 만들면 좋지 않을까요?

오늘날 우리 주위의 세상을 보면 군비 부문에 관련된 중대한 윤리 문제에서 벗어날 길이 없습니다. 원격 제어 시스템을 통하여 군사 행동을 수행할 가능성은 이것이 야기하는 파괴에 대한 인식과 그 사용에 대한 책임감을 약화시켜, 전쟁의 엄청난 참상을 점점 더 냉담하고 무심하게 대하게 합니다. 인공 지능의 무기화를 비롯하여, 이른바 치명적 자율 무기 체계(Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems) 분야에서 새롭게 떠오르는 기술에 대한 연구는 심각한 도덕적 우려를 불러옵니다. 자율 무기 체계는 결코 윤리적으로 책임 있는 주체가 될 수 없습니다. 도덕적 판단과 윤리적 의사 결정을 하는 고유한 인간 능력은 복잡한 알고리즘의 집합보다 우월합니다. 그리고 그러한 인간 능력은 기계를 프로그래밍하는 것으로 축소될 수 없습니다. 아무리 ‘지능적’이 될 수 있다고 하여도 기계는 여전히 기계일 뿐입니다. 이러한 까닭에, 무기 체계에 대한 적절하고 의미 있으며 일관된 인간의 감독이 반드시 보장되어야 합니다.

우리는 정교한 무기가 결국 그릇된 자들의 손에 들어가, 이를테면 합법적 정부 체제의 제도들을 불안하게 만들려는 의도를 가진 테러리스트들의 공격이나 개입을 조장할 가능성 또한 무시할 수 없습니다. 곧 세계는 불의한 상업 개발과 무기 거래에 기여하여 결국 어리석은 전쟁을 부추기는 신기술을 결코 필요로 하지 않습니다. 그렇게 되면 지능뿐만 아니라 인간의 마음 자체도 더 ‘인공적’이 될 위험에 놓일 것입니다. 가장 진보된 기술 애플리케이션을 분쟁의 폭력적 해결을 조장하는 데에 사용하여서는 안 됩니다. 오히려 평화의 길을 닦는 데에 사용하여야 합니다.

좀 더 긍정적인 시각에서, 인공 지능이 온전한 인간 발전을 증진하는 데에 사용된다면 이는 농업, 교육, 문화에 중요한 혁신을 가져오고, 모든 나라와 민족의 삶의 수준을 높이며, 인간의 형제애와 사회적 우애를 증진할 수 있습니다. 결국 우리가 이를 활용하여 가장 작은 형제자매들과 취약한 이들, 도움이 가장 필요한 이들을 포용하는 길이 인류애의 참된 척도가 될 것입니다.

이 세상의 더 나은 미래를 향한 참으로 인간적인 전망과 바람은 분명 알고리즘의 윤리적 발전을, 곧 가치관이 신기술의 길을 인도하도록 하는 알고리즘 윤리(algor-ethics)를 목표로 하는 학제 간 대화의 필요성을 제시합니다.12) 연구에서 출발하여 실험, 설계, 생산, 배포, 마케팅에 이르기까지 윤리 문제들을 고려하여야 합니다. 이것이 교육 기관과 의사 결정 책임자들이 중요한 역할을 하여야 하는 설계의 윤리적 접근법입니다. 

7. 교육을 위한 도전 과제

인간 존엄성을 존중하고 이에 봉사하는 기술 발전은 교육 제도와 문화계에 뚜렷한 영향을 미칩니다. 디지털 기술은 소통의 가능성을 증가시키면서 우리가 새로운 방식으로 서로를 만날 수 있게 하였습니다. 그러나 우리를 움직이고 있는 이러한 방식의 관계들에 대한 지속적인 성찰이 필요합니다. 젊은이들은 기술이 속속들이 배어 있는 문화적 환경에서 성장하고 있으며 이는 우리의 가르침과 교육과 양성 방식에 도전이 될 수밖에 없습니다. 

인공 지능의 유형들 사용에 관한 교육은 무엇보다도 비판적 사고를 촉진하는 데 목표를 두어야 합니다. 모든 연령대의 사용자가, 그러나 특히 젊은 세대의 사용자는 웹에서 수집되거나 인공 지능 체계에서 생성된 데이터와 콘텐츠 사용에 안목 있는 접근 방식을 발전시켜야 합니다. 학교, 대학교, 과학협회는 기술 발전과 그 활용의 사회적 윤리적 측면을 파악하도록 학생들과 전문가들을 도우라는 도전 과제를 받고 있습니다. 

새로운 소통 수단의 사용에 대한 훈련은 또한 허위 정보, 곧 ‘가짜 뉴스’뿐만 아니라 “오랜 두려움이 …… 신기술 뒤에 숨어 강해지는” 충격적인 일이 다시 일어날 수 있다는 사실을 고려해야 합니다.13) 우리는 안타깝게도 ‘다른 문화와 다른 민족과의 만남을 막고자 장벽의 문화를 만들고 벽을 높이고 싶은 유혹’ 14)에 다시 한번 맞서 싸우며 평화롭고 형제적인 공존의 발전을 이루어야 합니다. 

8. 국제법 발전을 위한 도전 과제

인공 지능의 전 세계적 규모는 그 국내 사용을 규제하는 주권 국가의 책임과 더불어 국제기구가 다자간 협약을 체결하고 그 적용과 집행을 조정하는 데 결정적인 역할을 할 수 있다는 사실을 분명히 보여 줍니다.15)

 이와 관련하여 저는 다양한 유형의 인공 지능의 발전과 사용을 규제하는 구속력 있는 국제 조약을 채택하고자 여러 나라로 구성된 국제 공동체가 함께 힘써 주기를 권고합니다. 규제의 목적은 당연히 나쁜 관행의 방지만이 아니라 바람직한 관행을 장려하면서 새롭고 창의적인 접근 방식을 모색하고 개인적 집단적 제안들을 장려하는 것입니다.16)

디지털 기술 개발자들에게 윤리적 지침을 제공할 수 있는 규범적 모형을 찾는 과정에서 인간의 가치의 식별은 필요한 법률적 틀을 형성하고 채택하여 적용하려는 사회의 헌신에 토대가 되는 필수 요건입니다. 인공 지능의 유형들을 생산하기 위한 윤리적 지침의 초안 작업에서 인간 존재의 의미와 기본 인권의 보호, 그리고 정의와 평화 추구에 관한 더욱 본질적인 문제들을 고려하지 않을 수 없습니다. 이러한 윤리적 법적 식별 과정은 개인과 공동체의 삶에서 기술이 수행해야 하는 역할과 더욱 공평하고 인간적인 세상을 만드는 데 공헌할 수 있는 그 사용 방법에 대한 성찰을 나누는 소중한 기회가 될 수 있습니다. 따라서 인공 지능의 규제에 관한 논의는 가난한 이들, 이주민들, 그리고 국제적 의사 결정 과정에서 흔히 무시되는 이들을 포함하여 모든 이해관계자의 목소리를 고려해야 합니다. 

***

저는 앞서 나눈 성찰로 인공 지능이 발전하는 유형의 행보가 궁극적으로 인류의 형제애와 평화에 기여하는 노력에 도움이 될 수 있기를 바랍니다. 이는 몇몇 사람의 책임이 아니라 인류 가족 전체의 책임입니다. 평화는 양도할 수 없는 존엄성을 지닌 상대방을 인정하고 환영하는 관계의 열매이며 모든 개인과 민족의 온전한 발전을 추구하는 협력과 헌신의 열매이기 때문입니다. 

저는 새해를 시작하며 인공 지능 유형들의 급속한 발전이 오늘날 세상에 존재하는 불평등과 불의의 사례들을 늘리지 않고, 전쟁과 갈등을 종식시키며 우리 인류 가족을 괴롭히는 다양한 형태의 고통을 덜어주는 데에 도움이 될 수 있도록 기도합니다. 그리스도교 신자들과 다양한 종교를 따르는 이들, 그리고 선의를 지닌 모든 이가 조화를 이루어 함께 일하여 디지털 혁명이 제기하는 기회는 받아들이고 도전에는 맞서며 미래 세대에게 더욱 위대한 연대와 정의와 평화를 물려줄 수 있기를 바랍니다. 

바티칸에서
2023년 12월 8일
프란치스코

1) 제2차 바티칸 공의회, 현대 세계의 교회에 관한 사목 헌장 ｢기쁨과 희망｣(Gaudium et Spes), 1965.12.7., 33항, 󰡔제2차 바티칸 공의회 문헌󰡕, 한글판, 한국천주교중앙협의회, 2007(제3판), 201면.

2) 사목 헌장 57항.

3) 프란치스코, 회칙 ｢찬미받으소서｣(Laudato Si’), 2015.5.24., 한국천주교중앙협의회, 2021(제2판), 104항 참조. 

4) ｢찬미받으소서｣, 114항 참조.

5) 프란치스코, ‘미네르바 대화’ 참석자들에게 한 연설, 2023.3.27.

6) ‘미네르바 대화’ 참석자들에게 한 연설 참조.

7) 프란치스코, 다보스 세계 경제 포럼 의장에게 보낸 메시지, 2018.1.12. 참조.

8)｢찬미받으소서｣, 194항; 프란치스코, ‘디지털 시대의 공동선’ 세미나 참석자들에게 한 연설, 2019.9.27. 참조.

9) 프란치스코, 교황 권고 ｢복음의 기쁨｣(Evangelii Gaudium), 2013.11.24., 한국천주교중앙협의회, 2014(제2판), 233항. 

10) ｢찬미받으소서｣, 54항 참조.

11) 프란치스코, 교황청 생명학술원 총회 참석자들에게 한 연설, 2020.2.28. 참조.

12) 교황청 생명학술원 총회 참석자들에게 한 연설 참조.

13) 프란치스코, 회칙 「모든 형제들」(Fratelli Tutti), 2020.10.3., 한국천주교중앙협의회, 2021(제1판), 27항. 

14)「모든 형제들」, 27항 참조.

15) 「모든 형제들」, 170-175항 참조.

16) 찬미받으소서｣, 177항 참조.

<원문 Message of His Holiness Pope Francis for the 57th World Day of Peace “Artificial Intelligence and Peace”, 2023.12.8., 이탈리아어도 참조> 
 
영어: 
https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2023/12/14/0884/01927.html#en
 

Artificial Intelligence and Peace

At the beginning of the New Year, a time of grace which the Lord gives to each one of us, I would like to address God’s People, the various nations, heads of state and government, the leaders of the different religions and civil society, and all the men and women of our time, in order to offer my fervent good wishes for peace.

1. The progress of science and technology as a path to peace

Sacred Scripture attests that God bestowed his Spirit upon human beings so that they might have “skill and understanding and knowledge in every craft” (Ex 35:31). Human intelligence is an expression‎ of the dignity with which we have been endowed by the Creator, who made us in his own image and likeness (cf. Gen 1:26), and enabled us to respond consciously and freely to his love. In a particular way, science and technology manifest this fundamentally relational quality of human intelligence; they are brilliant products of its creative potential.

In its Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, the Second Vatican Council restated this truth, declaring that “through its labours and its native endowments, humanity has ceaselessly sought to better its life”.[1] When human beings, “with the aid of technology”, endeavour to make “the earth a dwelling worthy of the whole human family”,[2] they carry out God’s plan and cooperate with his will to perfect creation and bring about peace among peoples.

Progress in science and technology, insofar as it contributes to greater order in human society and greater fraternal communion and freedom, thus leads to the betterment of humanity and the transformation of the world.

We rightly rejoice and give thanks for the impressive achievements of science and technology, as a result of which countless ills that formerly plagued human life and caused great suffering have been remedied. At the same time, techno-scientific advances, by making it possible to exercise hitherto unprecedented control over reality, are placing in human hands a vast array of options, including some that may pose a risk to our survival and endanger our common home.[3]

The remarkable advances in new information technologies, particularly in the digital sphere, thus offer exciting opportunities and grave risks, with serious implications for the pursuit of justice and harmony among peoples. Any number of urgent questions need to be asked.

What will be the consequences, in the medium and long term, of these new digital technologies? And what impact will they have on individual lives and on societies, on international stability and peace?

2. The future of artificial intelligence: between promise and risk

Progress in information technology and the development of digital technologies in recent decades have already begun to effect profound transformations in global society and its various dynamics. New digital tools are even now changing the face of communications, public administration, education, consumption, personal interactions and countless other aspects of our daily lives.

Moreover, from the digital footprints spread throughout the Internet, technologies employing a variety of algorithms can extract data that enable them to control mental and relational habits for commercial or political purposes, often without our knowledge, thus limiting our conscious exercise of freedom of choice. In a space like the Web, marked by information overload, they can structure the flow of data according to criteria of selection that are not always perceived by the user.

We need to remember that scientific research and technological innovations are not disembodied and “neutral”,[4] but subject to cultural influences. As fully human activities, the directions they take reflect choices conditioned by personal, social and cultural values in any given age. The same must be said of the results they produce: precisely as the fruit of specifically human ways of approaching the world around us, the latter always have an ethical dimension, closely linked to decisions made by those who design their experimentation and direct their production towards particular objectives.

This is also the case with forms of artificial intelligence. To date, there is no single definition of artificial intelligence in the world of science and technology. The term itself, which by now has entered into everyday parlance, embraces a variety of sciences, theories and techniques aimed at making machines reproduce or imitate in their functioning the cognitive abilities of human beings. To speak in the plural of “forms of intelligence” can help to emphasize above all the unbridgeable gap between such systems, however amazing and powerful, and the human person: in the end, they are merely “fragmentary”, in the sense that they can only imitate or reproduce certain functions of human intelligence. The use of the plural likewise brings out the fact that these devices greatly differ among themselves and that they should always be regarded as “socio-technical systems”. For the impact of any artificial intelligence device – regardless of its underlying technology – depends not only on its technical design, but also on the aims and interests of its owners and developers, and on the situations in which it will be employed.

Artificial intelligence, then, ought to be understood as a galaxy of different realities. We cannot presume a priori that its development will make a beneficial contribution to the future of humanity and to peace among peoples. That positive outcome will only be achieved if we show ourselves capable of acting responsibly and respect such fundamental human values as “inclusion, transparency, security, equity, privacy and reliability”.[5]

Nor is it sufficient simply to presume a commitment on the part of those who design algorithms and digital technologies to act ethically and responsibly. There is a need to strengthen or, if necessary, to establish bodies charged with examining the ethical issues arising in this field and protecting the rights of those who employ forms of artificial intelligence or are affected by them.[6]

The immense expansion of technology thus needs to be accompanied by an appropriate formation in responsibility for its future development. Freedom and peaceful coexistence are threatened whenever human beings yield to the temptation to selfishness, self-interest, the desire for profit and the thirst for power. We thus have a duty to broaden our gaze and to direct techno-scientific research towards the pursuit of peace and the common good, in the service of the integral development of individuals and communities.[7]

The inherent dignity of each human being and the fraternity that binds us together as members of the one human family must undergird the development of new technologies and serve as indisputable criteria for eval‎uating them before they are employed, so that digital progress can occur with due respect for justice and contribute to the cause of peace.

Technological developments that do not lead to an improvement in the quality of life of all humanity, but on the contrary aggravate inequalities and conflicts, can never count as true progress.[8]

Artificial intelligence will become increasingly important. The challenges it poses are technical, but also anthropological, educational, social and political. It promises, for instance, liberation from drudgery, more efficient manufacturing, easier transport and more ready markets, as well as a revolution in processes of accumulating, organizing and confirm‎ing data. We need to be aware of the rapid transformations now taking place and to manage them in ways that safeguard fundamental human rights and respect the institutions and laws that promote integral human development. Artificial intelligence ought to serve our best human potential and our highest aspirations, not compete with them.

3. The technology of the future: machines that “learn” by themselves

In its multiple forms, artificial intelligence based on machine learning techniques, while still in its pioneering phases, is already introducing considerable changes to the fabric of societies and exerting a profound influence on cultures, societal behaviours and peacebuilding.

Developments such as machine learning or deep learning, raise questions that transcend the realms of technology and engineering, and have to do with the deeper understanding of the meaning of human life, the construction of knowledge, and the capacity of the mind to attain truth.

The ability of certain devices to produce syntactically and semantically coherent texts, for example, is no guarantee of their reliability. They are said to “hallucinate”, that is, to create statements that at first glance appear plausible but are unfounded or betray biases. This poses a serious problem when artificial intelligence is deployed in campaigns of disinformation that spread false news and lead to a growing distrust of the communications media. Privacy, data ownership and intellectual property are other areas where these technologies engender grave risks. To which we can add other negative consequences of the misuse of these technologies, such as discrimination, interference in elections, the rise of a surveillance society, digital exclusion and the exacerbation of an individualism increasingly disconnected from society. All these factors risk fueling conflicts and hindering peace.

4. The sense of limit in the technocratic paradigm

Our world is too vast, varied and complex ever to be fully known and categorized. The human mind can never exhaust its richness, even with the aid of the most advanced algorithms. Such algorithms do not offer guaranteed predictions of the future, but only statistical approximations. Not everything can be predicted, not everything can be calculated; in the end, “realities are greater than ideas”.[9] No matter how prodigious our calculating power may be, there will always be an inaccessible residue that evades any attempt at quantification.

In addition, the vast amount of data analyzed by artificial intelligences is in itself no guarantee of impartiality. When algorithms extrapolate information, they always run the risk of distortion, replicating the injustices and prejudices of the environments where they originate. The faster and more complex they become, the more difficult it proves to understand why they produced a particular result.

“Intelligent” machines may perform the tasks assigned to them with ever greater efficiency, but the purpose and the meaning of their operations will continue to be determined or enabled by human beings possessed of their own universe of values. There is a risk that the criteria behind certain decisions will become less clear, responsibility for those decisions concealed, and producers enabled to evade their obligation to act for the benefit of the community. In some sense, this is favoured by the technocratic system, which allies the economy with technology and privileges the criterion of efficiency, tending to ignore anything unrelated to its immediate interests.[10]

This should lead us to reflect on something frequently overlooked in our current technocratic and efficiency-oriented mentality, as it is decisive for personal and social development: the “sense of limit”. Human beings are, by definition, mortal; by proposing to overcome every limit through technology, in an obsessive desire to control everything, we risk losing control over ourselves; in the quest for an absolute freedom, we risk falling into the spiral of a “technological dictatorship”. Recognizing and accepting our limits as creatures is an indispensable condition for reaching, or better, welcoming fulfilment as a gift. In the ideological context of a technocratic paradigm inspired by a Promethean presumption of self-sufficiency, inequalities could grow out of proportion, knowledge and wealth accumulate in the hands of a few, and grave risks ensue for democratic societies and peaceful coexistence.[11]

5. Burning issues for ethics

In the future, the reliability of an applicant for a mortgage, the suitability of an individual for a job, the possibility of recidivism on the part of a convicted person, or the right to receive political asylum or social assistance could be determined by artificial intelligence systems.

The lack of different levels of mediation that these systems introduce is particularly exposed to forms of bias and discrimination: systemic errors can easily multiply, producing not only injustices in individual cases but also, due to the domino effect, real forms of social inequality.

At times too, forms of artificial intelligence seem capable of influencing individuals’ decisions by operating through pre-determined options associated with stimuli and dissuasions, or by operating through a system of regulating people’s choices based on information design.

These forms of manipulation or social control require careful attention and oversight, and imply a clear legal responsibility on the part of their producers, their deployers, and government authorities.

Reliance on automatic processes that categorize individuals, for instance, by the pervasive use of surveillance or the adoption of social credit systems, could likewise have profound repercussions on the social fabric by establishing a ranking among citizens. These artificial processes of categorization could lead also to power conflicts, since they concern not only virtual users but real people. Fundamental respect for human dignity demands that we refuse to allow the uniqueness of the person to be identified with a set of data. Algorithms must not be allowed to determine how we understand human rights, to set aside the essential human values of compassion, mercy and forgiveness, or to eliminate the possibility of an individual changing and leaving his or her past behind.

Nor can we fail to consider, in this context, the impact of new technologies on the workplace. Jobs that were once the sole domain of human labour are rapidly being taken over by industrial applications of artificial intelligence. Here too, there is the substantial risk of disproportionate benefit for the few at the price of the impoverishment of many. Respect for the dignity of labourers and the importance of employment for the economic well-being of individuals, families, and societies, for job security and just wages, ought to be a high priority for the international community as these forms of technology penetrate more deeply into our workplaces.

6. Shall we turn swords into ploughshares?

In these days, as we look at the world around us, there can be no escaping serious ethical questions related to the armaments sector. The ability to conduct military operations through remote control systems has led to a lessened perception of the devastation caused by those weapon systems and the burden of responsibility for their use, resulting in an even more cold and detached approach to the immense tragedy of war. Research on emerging technologies in the area of so-called Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, including the weaponization of artificial intelligence, is a cause for grave ethical concern. Autonomous weapon systems can never be morally responsible subjects. The unique human capacity for moral judgment and ethical decision-making is more than a complex collection of algorithms, and that capacity cannot be reduced to programming a machine, which as “intelligent” as it may be, remains a machine. For this reason, it is imperative to ensure adequate, meaningful and consistent human oversight of weapon systems.

Nor can we ignore the possibility of sophisticated weapons ending up in the wrong hands, facilitating, for instance, terrorist attacks or interventions aimed at destabilizing the institutions of legitimate systems of government. In a word, the world has no need of new technologies that contribute to the unjust development of commerce and the weapons trade and consequently end up promoting the folly of war. By so doing, not only intelligence but the human heart itself would risk becoming ever more “artificial”. The most advanced technological applications should not be employed to facilitate the violent resolution of conflicts, but rather to pave the way for peace.

On a more positive note, if artificial intelligence were used to promote integral human development, it could introduce important innovations in agriculture, education and culture, an improved level of life for entire nations and peoples, and the growth of human fraternity and social friendship. In the end, the way we use it to include the least of our brothers and sisters, the vulnerable and those most in need, will be the true measure of our humanity.

An authentically humane outlook and the desire for a better future for our world surely indicates the need for a cross-disciplinary dialogue aimed at an ethical development of algorithms – an algor-ethics – in which values will shape the directions taken by new technologies.[12] Ethical considerations should also be taken into account from the very beginning of research, and continue through the phases of experimentation, design, production, distribution and marketing. This is the approach of ethics by design, and it is one in which educational institutions and decision-makers have an essential role to play.

7. Challenges for education

The development of a technology that respects and serves human dignity has clear ramifications for our educational institutions and the world of culture. By multiplying the possibilities of communication, digital technologies have allowed us to encounter one another in new ways. Yet there remains a need for sustained reflection on the kinds of relationships to which they are steering us. Our young people are growing up in cultural environments pervaded by technology, and this cannot but challenge our methods of teaching, education and training.

Education in the use of forms of artificial intelligence should aim above all at promoting critical thinking. Users of all ages, but especially the young, need to develop a discerning approach to the use of data and content collected on the web or produced by artificial intelligence systems. Schools, universities and scientific societies are challenged to help students and professionals to grasp the social and ethical aspects of the development and uses of technology.

Training in the use of new means of communication should also take account not only of disinformation, “fake news”, but also the disturbing recrudescence of “certain ancestral fears… that have been able to hide and spread behind new technologies”.[13]Sadly, we once more find ourselves having to combat “the temptation to build a culture of walls, to raise walls… in order to prevent an encounter with other cultures and other peoples”,[14] and the development of a peaceful and fraternal coexistence.

8. Challenges for the development of international law

The global scale of artificial intelligence makes it clear that, alongside the responsibility of sovereign states to regulate its use internally, international organizations can play a decisive role in reaching multilateral agreements and coordinating their application and enforcement.[15]

 In this regard, I urge the global community of nations to work together in order to adopt a binding international treaty that regulates the development and use of artificial intelligence in its many forms. The goal of regulation, naturally, should not only be the prevention of harmful practices but also the encouragement of best practices, by stimulating new and creative approaches and encouraging individual or group initiatives.[16]

In the quest for normative models that can provide ethical guidance to developers of digital technologies, it is indispensable to identify the human values that should undergird the efforts of societies to formulate, adopt and enforce much-needed regulatory frameworks.

The work of drafting ethical guidelines for producing forms of artificial intelligence can hardly prescind from the consideration of deeper issues regarding the meaning of human existence, the protection of fundamental human rights and the pursuit of justice and peace.

This process of ethical and juridical discernment can prove a precious opportunity for shared reflection on the role that technology should play in our individual and communal lives, and how its use can contribute to the creation of a more equitable and humane world. For this reason, in debates about the regulation of artificial intelligence, the voices of all stakeholders should be taken into account, including the poor, the powerless and others who often go unheard in global decision-making processes.

* * * * *

I hope that the foregoing reflection will encourage efforts to ensure that progress in developing forms of artificial intelligence will ultimately serve the cause of human fraternity and peace. It is not the responsibility of a few but of the entire human family. For peace is the fruit of relationships that recognize and welcome others in their inalienable dignity, and of cooperation and commitment in seeking the integral development of all individuals and peoples.

It is my prayer at the start of the New Year that the rapid development of forms of artificial intelligence will not increase cases of inequality and injustice all too present in today’s world, but will help put an end to wars and conflicts, and alleviate many forms of suffering that afflict our human family. May Christian believers, followers of various religions and men and women of good will work together in harmony to embrace the opportunities and confront the challenges posed by the digital revolution and thus hand on to future generations a world of greater solidarity, justice and peace.

From the Vatican, 8 December 2023

FRANCIS

_________________________

[1] No. 33.

[2] Ibid., 57.

[3] Cf. Encyclical Letter Laudato si’ (24 May 2015), 104.

[4] Cf. ibid., 114.

[5] Address to Participants in the “Minerva Dialogues” (27 March 2023).

[6] Cf. ibid.

[7] Cf. Message to the Executive Chairman of the “World Economic Forum” meeting in Davos (12 January 2018).

[8] Cf. Encyclical Letter Laudato si’ (24 May 2015), 194; Address to Participants in the Seminar “The Common Good in the Digital Age” (27 September 2019).

[9] Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), 233.

[10] Cf. Encyclical Letter Laudato si’ (24 May 2015), 54.

[11] Cf. Meeting with Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020).

[12] Cf. ibid.

[13] Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), 27.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Cf. ibid, 170-175.

[16] Cf. Encyclical Letter Laudato si’ (24 May 2015), 177.

[01927-EN.01] [Original text: Italian]

이탈리아어:
https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/it/messages/peace/documents/20231208-messaggio-57giornatamondiale-pace2024.html

[내용출처 - https://cbck.or.kr/Notice/20230639?gb=K1200 ]