Western tradition has developed its own conception of the human being based on the account in Genesis. Although the biblical text affirms the equal dignity of men and women, the image of Eve being formed from Adam’s rib has been interpreted as a sign of women’s derivative nature and subordination. In addition, it has helped to consolidate a culture in which the masculine is the universal measure of humanity, whilst the feminine is seen as a complementary but secondary reality.
Art too has reflected this perspective. The image of the Creation of Adam, made universally recognisable by Michelangelo in the Sistine Chapel, has become a symbol of humanity. Although women are part of the divine plan, they almost always remain in the background of cultural representations of human beings.
Today, in the age of artificial intelligence, this ancient question returns in a new form. If, for centuries, culture has implicitly taken the masculine as the universal measure of humanity, there is a danger that artificial intelligence will inherit the same paradigm. Perhaps more than a danger. Algorithms learn from the data of the past, much of it produced and shaped by men, and they risk reproducing the same cultural patterns that have marked human history until now. Intelligent machines – and this is the risk – may perpetuate existing forms of exclusion, stereotypes and imbalances. The past carries with it prejudice, exclusion and hierarchy. A machine trained on history may ultimately end up reproducing history.
The crucial question to ask, then, becomes: what understanding of humanity should we transmit to artificial intelligence? To become truly “magnificent”, as Pope Leo XIV describes it in his encyclical, is it enough for it to embody efficiency, competition and control? Or, must it also embrace relationship, care, listening, empathy and attentiveness to human vulnerability? Only the masculine or the feminine as well?
The “magnifica humanitas” evoked by the Pope points to a humanity in its fullness. Such a humanity can only be composed of both men and women, in which neither experience can be regarded as marginal. Without the richness of women’s perspectives, experiences and cultures, artificial intelligence risks becoming technically advanced yet humanly incomplete.
If the “magnifica humanitas” has two faces, male and female, then artificial intelligence must also learn to recognise them both. Only then will technology become a tool genuinely at the service of the human person, rather than a digital reproduction of ancient inequalities.
The future of artificial intelligence will therefore depend on our ability to move beyond a vision of humanity built upon the precedence of one sex over the other. If the human person is truly made in the image of God, then no intelligence that claims to be “human” can ever be complete while one of those two voices continues to be regarded as derivative, secondary or merely supplementary. No humanity is truly “magnificent” unless it is also female.
- Women Church World
