Some time ago, I attended an interesting lecture in Father Matteo Tolomelli’s Theology seminar for master’s students at the Catholic University of the Sacred Heart. Two groups of students had prepared for a debate, representing two opposing positions (techno-optimists versus techno-pessimists) in response to the question of how technology, demonstrating the hegemony of spirit over matter and revealing the human aspiration for development, can remain a humanizing factor. The topic is difficult to adequately address in the brief lines of this editorial, but I wanted to share some interesting insights and reflections. The two groups, ideally opposed, revealed some similar positions, reflecting the difficulty in describing technology and the fears we often experience regarding its growing dominance and what is now a recurring subject of discussion with colleagues, friends, and family: artificial intelligence (AI). The students successfully grounded all their arguments in a solid cultural foundation, demonstrating their ability to amaze when properly stimulated and informed (it almost sounds like AI). Among their arguments: technology is inherently neutral, but it reflects its developer; one of the goals or challenges is to humanize technology; the problem is the lack of control and the concentration of power in a few hands; there’s a threat of abolishing humanism and being overwhelmed by technology, leaving behind other ways of living and thinking; intermediate steps for using technology correctly, even though they are necessary, are often missing; a sense of inadequacy arises when one finds oneself unable to use a new tool (I, in reality, only feel inadequate due to a lack of knowledge). AI was obviously dug in, emphasizing how it is essentially knowledge, but not connected to the physical world, and how it will likely begin to have a memory and interact with the world (and I was reminded of the 1987 film Terminator, which envisioned a distant 2029 in which a global AI defense network achieved self-awareness and rebelled against humanity…). I was also struck by the reference to the value of technology and AI in increasing free time. Freeing up time for family or oneself was a central and recurring theme in the advertising of the first household appliances. The current message in the promotion of various AI software and tools doesn’t seem much different: I’ll simplify your life and free up your time. I expect it to work like with household appliances. Less effort and more speed, certainly, but the house still doesn’t clean itself, and if you put the wrong clothes on or choose the wrong wash cycle, no one will give you back your favorite sweater. The puzzle is how to exploit all this newfound free time. Some of it will be spent learning to use new tools, and then, hopefully, it will be used for something truly useful for one’s well-being, work, and society, rather than dedicating more time to zombie scrolling or doom scrolling. AI will require increasingly solid skills to be able to not only program it, but also use it. It becomes a true help only when we understand what we want it to do for us, why and how it does it; otherwise, we won’t be able to critically interpret the result and move forward. AI is revolutionizing every sector, reshaping necessary skills, job fields, and opportunities for development and improvement. This is why we chose the topic of AI in the food industry for this year’s distance learning program. In 1955, Heidegger reflected on the transformation of the world into a complete domination of technology, without humanity being at all prepared for such a radical change. Are we prepared now?
