Can Robots Be Saved? An Interpretive Analysis of the Moral Consideration of Automata in Light of Theology
Article Sidebar
How to Cite
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Downloads
Societal impact
Main Article Content
Abstract
The revolution that has taken place in the twentieth century around artificial intelligences is already changing society and access to knowledge. However, the possibility of intelligent machines capable of feeling, learning and, perhaps, of free will forces us to reconsider the moral dimension of intelligent automata. In this sense, the possibility that there might exist “soulless” beings whom the believer is nonetheless obliged to care for and preserve is not a new theme in Christian thought, but rather has its roots in medieval interpretations of Genesis, in which the human being is named the “guardian of creation.” At the same time, other creatures without an immortal soul but endowed with intelligence (such as faerie beings) were accepted as spiritual entities that could not be saved by themselves, but could be saved through the intercession of humans with an immortal soul, who could teach these beings “the revelation.” This leads us, in this article, to address whether the intelligent automaton “can be saved” by means of our Christian charity, insofar as it appears capable of understanding the Holy Scriptures and is endowed with moral behavior.
Article Details
References
Alirio Ceballos Rosero, Franco, and María Camila Muñoz Bastidas Deysi Alejandra Mendoza Ortiz. (2022). Sujetos de deberes (inteligencias artificiales, androides, robots) y dogmática prospectiva. Pensamiento Jurídico, 55, 157-175.
Arboleda Mora, C. J., & Gutiérrez R., J. P. (2017). Desarrollo integral y responsabilidad con la casa común. Perspectivas de análisis filosófico-teológicas de la encíclica Laudato si’. Revista Iberoamericana de Teología, XIII(24), 65-92.
Aydoğan, Z. (2020). Gāzīs and cādūs at the margins: Conversion at the point of sword and enchantment. Aca’ib: Occasional Papers on the Ottoman Perceptions of the Supernatural, 1, 21–48.
Carbajal, I. (2025a) ¿IAhora la Libertad Religiosa? Revista latinoamericana de derecho y religión 19(2):1-23. https://esla.letras.uc.cl/index.php/RLDR/article/view/85690
Carbajal, I. (2025b). Explorando las fronteras digitales de la religión: un análisis de las fronteras de la inteligencia artificial y la teología. Cuadernos de Teología, 17, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.22199/issn.0719-8175-6558
Chen, L., Zaharia, M., & Zou, J. (2024). How is ChatGPT’s behavior changing over time? Harvard Data Science Review, 6(2), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1162/99608f92.5317da47
Coeckelbergh, M. (2010). Robot rights? Towards a social-relational justification of moral consideration. Ethics and Information Technology,12, 209-221. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-010-9235-5
David, G. (2023). Los derechos de las plantas: Aportes teológicos en la teoría de la justicia de Nicholas Wolterstorff. Anales de Teología, 25(2), 259–269.
Dorobantu, M. (2024). Could robots become religious? Theological, evolutionary, and cognitive perspectives. Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science, 59(3), 768–787. https://doi.org/10.16995/zygon.16902.
Evans, E. P. (1906). The Criminal Prosecution and Capital Punishment of Animals. W. Heinemann, pp. 18–19.
Gagliano, M., Abramson, C. I., & Depczynski, M. (2018). Plants learn and remember: Let’s get used to it. Oecologia, 186(1), 29–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-017-4029-7.
Hefner, P. (2022, May 8). The greatest challenge: The created co-creator creates a co-creator. Lutheran Alliance for Faith, Science and Technology. Retrieved June 2, 2025, from https://www.luthscitech.org/the-greatest-challenge-the-created-co-creator-creates-a-co-creator/
Herzfeld, N. L. (2012). In whose image? Artificial intelligence and the imago Dei. In J. B. Stump & A. G. Padgett (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to science and Christianity (pp. 500–509). Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
Hogan, K. (2017). Is the machine question the same question as the animal question? Ethics and Information Technology, 19(1), 29–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-017-9418-4
Jones, C. R., & Bergen, B. K. (2025). Large language models pass the Turing test. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.23674
LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y., & Hinton, G. (2015). Deep learning. Nature, 521(7553), 436–444. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14539
Li, O. (2025). Should we develop AGI? Artificial suffering and the moral development of humans. AI and Ethics, 5(1), 641–651. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-023-00411-4
Martin De Blassi, F. G. (2015). Plotino y la potencia desasosegada del Alma: ¿Dispersión o contemplación? Tópicos. Revista de Filosofía, 48, 169–199
Monterde Ferrando, R. (2021a). Nostalgia de futuro: el transhumanismo y la libertad trascendental. Studia Poliana, 23, 129-150. https://doi.org/10.15581/013.23.129-150
Monterde Ferrando, R. (2021b). El ocaso de la humanidad: La singularidad tecnológica como fin de la historia [Tesis doctoral]. Universidad Católica de Valencia San Vicente Mártir. https://riucv.ucv.es/handle/20.500.12466/1926
Paracelso. Libro de las ninfas, los silfos, los pigmeos, las salamandras y los demás espíritus (5.a ed.). Obelisco, 2004.
Park, J. S., O’Brien, J., Cai, C. J., Morris, M. R., Liang, P., & Bernstein, M. S. (2023). Generative agents: Interactive simulacra of human behavior. In Proceedings of the 36th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST ’23). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3586183.3606763
Ruiz Osuna, P. (2021). Guía de los seres mitológicos españoles (2.a ed.). Círculo Rojo.
Ruiz Osuna, P. (2022). Duendes, diablos y espíritus familiares. Nyktelios.
Ruiz Osuna, P. (2024). El mito del autómata inteligente: Gólems, Homúnculos y “vida artificial en la Edad media”. Acta Maleficarum, I, 2–4.
Ruiz Osuna, P. (2025). La personalidad jurídica de los autómatas inteligentes. Aranzadi La Ley S. A. U.
Saerens, P. (2020). Le droit des robots, un droit de l’homme en devenir ? Communication, technologies et développement, 8, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.4000/ctd.2877
Sparrow, R. (2012). Can machines be people? Reflections on the Turing triage test. In P. Lin, K. Abney, & G. A. Bekey (Eds.), Robot ethics: The ethical and social implications of robotics (pp. 301–315). MIT Press.
Terka, M. (2018). Man’s animality in the light of St. Augustine’s philosophical works. Vox Patrum, 67, 631–652. https://doi.org/10.31743/vp.3419
De Torquemada, A. (2012). Jardín de flores curiosas. Lemir, 16, 605–834. https://parnaseo.uv.es/Lemir/Revista/Revista16/Textos/07_Jardin_Flores_Torquemada.pdf
Vestrucci, A., Lumbreras, S., & Oviedo, Ll. (2021). Can AI help us to understand belief? Sources, advances, limits, and future directions. International Journal of Interactive Multimedia and Artificial Intelligence, 7(1), 24–33. https://doi.org/10.9781/ijimai.2021.08.003
Zatta, C. (2024). Is the embryo a living being? (Aët. 5.15): Embryology, plants, and the origin of life in Presocratic thought. Mnemosyne, 77(7), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1163/1568525X-bja10268