Etika Penggunaan Kecerdasan Buatan dalam Perspektif Teologi Moral Katolik
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63037/ivl.v9i1.171Kata Kunci:
Kata kunci: kecerdasan buatan, teologi moral Katolik, kebebasan manusia, tanggung jawab moralAbstrak
Perkembangan kecerdasan buatan (artificial intelligence) semakin mempengaruhi cara manusia belajar, berpikir, dan mengambil keputusan, termasuk dalam ranah pendidikan dan pembentukan moral. Situasi ini menimbulkan pertanyaan etis yang mendasar, khususnya mengenai kebebasan dan tanggung jawab manusia sebagai subjek moral. Artikel ini merefleksikan penggunaan kecerdasan buatan dalam perspektif teologi moral Katolik dengan menempatkan martabat manusia sebagai titik tolak utama.
Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif melalui metode refleksi teologis, dengan mengkaji Kitab Suci, tradisi teologi moral Katolik, dokumen resmi Gereja, serta literatur teologis kontemporer yang relevan. Hasil kajian menunjukkan bahwa kecerdasan buatan dapat menjadi sarana yang membantu kehidupan manusia, namun berisiko melemahkan kebebasan dan mengaburkan tanggung jawab moral apabila digunakan tanpa refleksi etis yang memadai. Ketergantungan berlebihan pada AI, terutama dalam konteks pendidikan, berpotensi mengurangi daya pikir kritis, kebajikan intelektual, dan proses pembentukan karakter moral.
Dalam terang iman Katolik, kecerdasan buatan perlu dipahami sebagai alat yang melayani manusia, bukan sebagai pengganti perannya sebagai subjek moral yang berpikir, memilih, dan bertanggung jawab. Refleksi ini diharapkan dapat memperkaya kajian teologi moral Katolik dalam merespons tantangan etis teknologi kontemporer secara lebih kontekstual dan manusiawi.
Referensi
Antiqua et Nova. (2025). Antiqua et nova: Dicastery for the doctrine of the faith and dicastery for culture and education. Vatican City: Holy See.
Bjelobaba, S., Waddington, L., Perkins, M., Foltýnek, T., Bhattacharyya, S., & Weber-Wulff, D. (2024). Research integrity and GenAI: A systematic analysis of ethical challenges across research phases. arXiv Preprint, arXiv:2412.10134.
Brey, Philip A. E. 2012. “Anticipatory Ethics for Emerging Technologies.” NanoEthics 6(1):1–13. doi:10.1007/s11569-012-0141-7.
Brey, P. A. E. (2012). Anticipatory ethics for emerging technologies. NanoEthics, 6(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-012-0141-7
Coeckelbergh, M. (2020). Artificial intelligence, responsibility attribution, and a relational justification of explainability. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26(4), 2051–2068. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-019-00146-8
De Witte, M. (2023, February 13). How will ChatGPT change the way we think and work? Stanford Report. Stanford University.
https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/13/will-chatgpt-change-way-think-work/
Floridi, L., Cowls, J., Beltrametti, M., Chatila, R., Chazerand, P., Dignum, V., Luetge, C., Madelin, R., Pagallo, U., Rossi, F., Schafer, B., Valcke, P., & Vayena, E. (2018). AI4People—An ethical framework for a good AI society: Opportunities, risks, principles, and recommendations. Minds and Machines, 28(4), 689–707. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-018-9482-5
Francis. (2020). Rome call for AI ethics. Vatican City: Pontifical Academy for Life.
Francis. (2024). Message of His Holiness Pope Francis for the 57th World Day of Peace. Vatican City: Holy See.
Green, B. (2021). The contestation of tech ethics: A sociotechnical approach to ethics and technology in action. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3859358
Groome, T. H. (2011). Will there be faith? A new vision for educating and growing disciples. HarperOne.
Hongladarom, S. (2023). Review of The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power by Shoshana Zuboff. AI & Society, 38(6), 2359–2361. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-020-01100-0
Huang, K. (2023, January 17). Alarmed by AI chatbots, universities start revamping how they teach. The New York Times.
John Paul II. (1993). Veritatis splendor. Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.
Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeffer, J., Stadler, M., & Foltýnek, T. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1041608023000195
Melina, L. (2001). Sharing in Christ’s virtues: For a renewal of moral theology in light of Veritatis Splendor. Catholic University of America Press.
Pontifical Academy for Life. (2020). Rome call for AI ethics. Vatican City.
Luckin, Rose, Wayne Holmes, Mark Griffiths, and Laurie B. Forcier. 2016. Intelligence Unleashed.
Pontifical Academy for Life. 2020. Rome Call for AI Ethics.
Santoni de Sio, F. (2021). Review of AI ethics: The philosophical challenges by Mark Coeckelbergh. Science and Engineering Ethics, 27(4), Article 50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-021-00323-8
Stahl, B. C. (2021). Artificial intelligence for a better future: An ecosystem perspective on the ethics of AI and emerging digital technologies. Springer.
Terbaru, Alkitab Deuterokanonika, Terjemahan (2019). Alkitab deuterokanonika. Lembaga Alkitab Indonesia.
Thomas Aquinas. (2006). Summa theologiae (Fathers of the English Dominican Province, Trans.). Christian Classics. (Original work published 1274)
UNESCO. (2021). AI and education: Guidance for policy-makers. UNESCO Publishing.
Vallor, S. (2019). Technology and the virtues: A philosophical guide to a future worth wanting. Oxford University Press.
Williamson, B. (2020). Big data in education: The digital future of learning, policy and practice. SAGE Publications.
Zuboff, S. (2020). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. Yale Law Journal, 129(5), 1460–1515.
