{"title":"在他自己的亲戚和在他自己的房子:人工智能和审慎的相互关系培养","authors":"Mariele Courtois","doi":"10.1111/jore.70003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>While ease of access to information curated by artificial intelligence (AI) can be advantageous, it jeopardizes collaborative investigational practices central to virtue theory as a whole, the cultivation of prudence in particular, and a Christian notion of God's participation in the moral life. A relational setting actualizes prudence, which assists a moral agent in determining the right means for achieving a goal for action. Interpersonal discourse, the identification of moral exemplars, and the gift of grace are ways in which Catholic virtue theory presents the encounter of the other as necessary for individual prudential development. AI can offer ready access to resources, yet this access may contribute to a false portrayal of the individual as self-sufficient. Technology should present a springboard, not a replacement, for the true encounter of the other. The negative impacts of neglecting to seek counsel within true relationships are many. For example, without participation in interrelational conversation, one risks failing to habituate humility, a prerequisite for prudence, as well as failing to hold oneself accountable to social responsibility. Empathizing with another's perspective is necessary for identifying the potential for moral improvement in oneself. In turn, shared experiences open the door to effective fraternal correction from other members of a community. This paper will explore the insights of theological anthropology and virtue theory, which illuminate the necessity of an authentic discourse with “the Other” for the cultivation of prudence, as such encounters benefit all participating parties. Toward this end, this paper will utilize resources within the work of Emmanuel Levinas on the significance of the encounter of the other and the work of Edith Stein on the communally contextualized development of the individual, the relationship of the individual before God, and the divine gift of individuality that necessitates relationality.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":45722,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS ETHICS","volume":"53 2","pages":"172-192"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Among His Own Kin and in His Own House: Artificial Intelligence and the Interrelational Cultivation of Prudence\",\"authors\":\"Mariele Courtois\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jore.70003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>While ease of access to information curated by artificial intelligence (AI) can be advantageous, it jeopardizes collaborative investigational practices central to virtue theory as a whole, the cultivation of prudence in particular, and a Christian notion of God's participation in the moral life. A relational setting actualizes prudence, which assists a moral agent in determining the right means for achieving a goal for action. Interpersonal discourse, the identification of moral exemplars, and the gift of grace are ways in which Catholic virtue theory presents the encounter of the other as necessary for individual prudential development. AI can offer ready access to resources, yet this access may contribute to a false portrayal of the individual as self-sufficient. Technology should present a springboard, not a replacement, for the true encounter of the other. The negative impacts of neglecting to seek counsel within true relationships are many. For example, without participation in interrelational conversation, one risks failing to habituate humility, a prerequisite for prudence, as well as failing to hold oneself accountable to social responsibility. Empathizing with another's perspective is necessary for identifying the potential for moral improvement in oneself. In turn, shared experiences open the door to effective fraternal correction from other members of a community. This paper will explore the insights of theological anthropology and virtue theory, which illuminate the necessity of an authentic discourse with “the Other” for the cultivation of prudence, as such encounters benefit all participating parties. Toward this end, this paper will utilize resources within the work of Emmanuel Levinas on the significance of the encounter of the other and the work of Edith Stein on the communally contextualized development of the individual, the relationship of the individual before God, and the divine gift of individuality that necessitates relationality.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45722,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS ETHICS\",\"volume\":\"53 2\",\"pages\":\"172-192\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS ETHICS\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jore.70003\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS ETHICS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jore.70003","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Among His Own Kin and in His Own House: Artificial Intelligence and the Interrelational Cultivation of Prudence
While ease of access to information curated by artificial intelligence (AI) can be advantageous, it jeopardizes collaborative investigational practices central to virtue theory as a whole, the cultivation of prudence in particular, and a Christian notion of God's participation in the moral life. A relational setting actualizes prudence, which assists a moral agent in determining the right means for achieving a goal for action. Interpersonal discourse, the identification of moral exemplars, and the gift of grace are ways in which Catholic virtue theory presents the encounter of the other as necessary for individual prudential development. AI can offer ready access to resources, yet this access may contribute to a false portrayal of the individual as self-sufficient. Technology should present a springboard, not a replacement, for the true encounter of the other. The negative impacts of neglecting to seek counsel within true relationships are many. For example, without participation in interrelational conversation, one risks failing to habituate humility, a prerequisite for prudence, as well as failing to hold oneself accountable to social responsibility. Empathizing with another's perspective is necessary for identifying the potential for moral improvement in oneself. In turn, shared experiences open the door to effective fraternal correction from other members of a community. This paper will explore the insights of theological anthropology and virtue theory, which illuminate the necessity of an authentic discourse with “the Other” for the cultivation of prudence, as such encounters benefit all participating parties. Toward this end, this paper will utilize resources within the work of Emmanuel Levinas on the significance of the encounter of the other and the work of Edith Stein on the communally contextualized development of the individual, the relationship of the individual before God, and the divine gift of individuality that necessitates relationality.
期刊介绍:
Founded in 1973, the Journal of Religious Ethics is committed to publishing the very best scholarship in religious ethics, to fostering new work in neglected areas, and to stimulating exchange on significant issues. Emphasizing comparative religious ethics, foundational conceptual and methodological issues in religious ethics, and historical studies of influential figures and texts, each issue contains independent essays, commissioned articles, and a book review essay, as well as a Letters, Notes, and Comments section. Published primarily for scholars working in ethics, religious studies, history of religions, and theology, the journal is also of interest to scholars working in related fields such as philosophy, history, social and political theory, and literary studies.