Robots, Communion, and a Thought Experiment
At an Evangelical church I used to attend there was an eccentric older single woman. She always sat in the front row in the service and was always easy to spot. She would come into the worship center in a motorized wheelchair with her little lap dog in the front of the cart. The dog never made much of a fuss and the woman did not seem to be looking for attention either. However, a fuss was certainly made the day that people watched her give her dog the elements of the Lord’s supper.
The reading this week of Eve Poole, in Robot Souls makes me want to do a little thought experiment with all of you. How will we respond when the day comes that robots begin to come into our churches? How will we respond when a robot desires to have communion alongside our congregations? I am sure that the church of my youth that went into a bit of an uproar over a dog lapping up the symbolic grape juice will not stand for a robot taking communion. But are there denominations that might take a more liberal stance?
Poole highlights how AI has been rapidly growing as it copies the left side part of our brain, but it has been much slower to conquer the right side.[1] It is the right side of our brain that is more abstract, theoretical, and unencumbered by the rules of the left. Our right brains indeed are what make us unique and uniquely human. Poole describes some of these unique features as “junk code.” She argues that it is our junk code that programmers need to incorporate into the development of AI.
Is this junk code simply human? Would we trust AI if it made mistakes as it learned? Poole states, “This analysis of humanity’s Junk Code collectively points towards our overwhelming need to matter, both to ourselves and to others. Our coding drives us into community.”[2] If the junk code is what drives us into community, then would junk code incorporated into AI do the same? Would AI ever need community? If it developed a need for community through its’ junk code, then it could be plausible that AI could develop some sort of morality through that community? If AI had human-like morality within a community setting might it begin to seek out spiritual guidance? If robots can’t find the answers to life’s questions of morality and ethics, could they begin to seek it out in a church setting?
In a book written on AI ethics, the author writes, “AI ethics is not necessarily about banning things; We also need a positive ethics: to develop a vision of the good life and the good society.”[3] Could this good life incorporate community? One would assume so. Is the good life found in communistic or atheistic settings? Many who have endured these cultures seem to argue this is not the ideal of the good life. Throughout the world, immigrants seek out the good life found in liberal democracies where there is a plurality of viewpoints and personal freedoms. In last week’s reading, Patrick Deneen argues that liberal democracies have done too well and have gone too far which is why they have now failed.[4] Do morality-based robots represent the extreme end of liberal democracies and highlight the immediate death of it? Or does it begin to show a new era in which are paradigms will be shifted?
One fascinating point Poole brings up is that corporations are already being used as examples of non-human entities that can be held accountable within the legal system paving a way for an AI to also be held to legal standards. This certainly brings up many questions and how we philosophically might engage AI. “Some say that machines can never be moral agents at all, machines they argue, do not have the required capacities for moral agencies, such as mental states, emotions, or free will… The other side of the spectrum are those who think that machines can be full moral agents in the same way that humans are.”[5]
Circling back to the Lord’s table. I realize that this discussion has not had room to dive into the theological understanding and perspectives of communion, but instead has focused on the morality and assumptions of the AI. However, if and when, robots develop an ethical framework, or some morality how will we respond? Poole argues, “The AI would need to be able to adjust its own ethical framework to fit the worldview it chose…If we really have a soul, affording dignity to our partners in creation is the human thing to do, because it is also about who we are too.”[6] Likewise, in AI Ethics, the author argues, “Some argue that mistreating an AI is wrong not because any harm is done to the AI, but because our moral character is damaged if we do so.”[7]
Would we be damaging our own moral character, or affronting our own dignity if we were to fail to allow AI to take communion right alongside us?
As I have walked down this thought experiment, I realize the variety of philosophical and theological rabbit holes we might walk down. For instance, can a robot sin? What is the essence of sin? Does a robot have a place in the Lord’s kingdom? God is the one who has equipped our minds and abilities. Are there robots in heaven? How then might we explain the cherubim like creatures who can hover and fly in all directions?
_____________________________________________________________________
[1] Eve Poole, Robot Souls: Programming in Humanity, 1st edition (London, UK: CRC Press, 2023), 42.
[2] Poole, 99.
[3] Mark Coeckelbergh, AI Ethics, The MIT Press Essential Knowledge Series (Cambridge (Mass.): The MIT press, 2020), 175.
[4] Patrick J. Deneen, Why Liberalism Failed, Politics and Culture (New Haven (Conn.): Yale university press, 2018).
[5] Coeckelbergh, 51.
[6] Poole, Robot Souls, 124.
[7] Coeckelbergh, AI Ethics, 57.
About the Author
Adam Cheney
I grew up in California, spent five years living along the beautiful coast of Kenya and now find myself working with refugees in the snow crusted tundra of Minnesota. My wife and I have seven children, four of whom have been adopted. I spend my time drinking lots of coffee, working in my garden, and baking sourdough bread.18 responses to “Robots, Communion, and a Thought Experiment”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Hey Adam,
Thanks for the interesting thought experiment, and I never thought of cherubim as drones so that’s new.
I think the example of the dog taking communion is an interesting one. What is our responsibility to incorporate Creation into the Eucharist, even if its our own creation, like AI? Is salvation unique to humankind or is there more to “God so loved the world…”? I don’t have easy answers, but I appreciate the thought process.
Ryan,
I don’t have any good answers but I am trying to wrap my mind around this and the cultural mandate.
Adam,
I had to laugh at the sight of a dog taking communion. I find your question about whether robots can sin very thought provoking. My initial leaning is no, but I’m going to have to give that more thought.
You wrote “Would we be damaging our own moral character, or affronting our own dignity if we were to fail to allow AI to take communion right alongside us?” As humans and AI begin to further interact, I wonder what other things we might feel pressured to deny? Could a pastor deny conducting a marriage ceremony between a person and robot? Could a robot serve as an elder or deacon? I wonder what lines will have to be drawn ethically and morally.
@Adam, this was a thought-provoking post; thank you! I can imagine the fuss over the woman sharing communion with her dog. Congregants are constantly requiring church leaders to address an awkward situation! How would you have handled it if you were the pastor?
@Jeff, I wince at the thought of having to draw these sorts of lines (and the place our society would be in for a pastor to be asked to marry a robot and a human).
Jeff,
Let’s think about the question of a robot elder. Would there ever be enough compassion in a robot? Is that simply too much junk code for a robot to handle?
Hi Adam, Firstly, thank you for starting your blog post with a story reflecting my “future self.” You ask a lot of good, interesting questions here. In response to your post and communion, I asked myself, “Will the local church exist as we know it when humanoids are ‘ready’ to partake of communion?” I found this book rather uncomfortable to read, as it’s hard to imagine a world where technology is sentient or in need of “redemption.” I still hold to the belief that salvation will remain something completely specific to the relationship between God and humans. Like the tower of Babel, I do believe God will step in before things go too far.
I don’t want to go too extreme here! So a lighter question for you. Are there any advancements in AI that interest you or would benefit your day-to-day?
Elysse,
I think it is better to be the funny-dog-lady rather than the crazy-cat-lady.
If I could have an AI that would be like having a personal assistant that would be helpful. Someone to plan my trips, schedule appointments, etc.
Adam, Elysse already is the crazy cat lady. 😃 Was this canine communion experience in an Evangelical church in Paris? I had the exact same experience there, except they sat in the back row because she and the dog would scoot in (literally) late. No other questions this time. Great post and responses to your comments. They have been fun to read.
Hi Adam, Your senario doesn’t feel too far off from where Poole seemed to think we are headed – with AI having rights. The jump to participation in worship is a big jump for me. Somehow, the abililty to turn off AI by removing a battery or plug reminds me that what is expressed by AI is really the thoughts, feeling(if there), and other things that someone programmed into it. Once unplugged is it dormant, could be dead/sleeping? Plug it in and it starts to go. Do these thoughts sound too simplisitic? or ring with any truth to you?
Diane,
I hope this scenario is far off. However I do realize that the speed of technology development is rapidly increasing.
Adam,
The thought of a dog taking communion makes me want to laugh, and maybe cry a bit too.
I wonder if the idea of Robots participating as full members in a church community is even possible. Mind blown!
What conditions would need to exist for the church to accept robots into membership?
Graham,
I would imagine that having a high level EQ would certainly be necessary. But more than that would be needed. Theologically, it seems like it would require the actual ability to believe. Can an AI actually have a belief in something? As Poole said, knowing and Knowing are two different things.
Thanks so much Adam. Could AI, by embodying junk code, reflect aspects of the imago Dei that challenge or expand our understanding of humanity’s unique role in creation?”
Glyn,
Might AI have a more comprehensive and robust understanding of the theological depths? It seems that the imago dei aspect of intelligence can certainly be amplified by an AI.
Adam, well done! Perhaps my favorite post so far as I sit at the kitchen table and read it to my husband. We are having a lively discussion about the points you raised. I’ll spare you some of our chatter, but sending you a high five on the thought-provoking blog.
By the way, all dogs DO go to heaven (to Glyn’s post) and enjoying the elements simply helps them to be more Jesus on this side of the veil. My Bernese Mountain Dog is 117 lbs of pure love –following the commandment to love thy people.
Jennifer,
You’re too kind. I am glad you found it amusing. I have thrown the question out to random groups of friends and it has brought some fun discussions.
Adam, I appreciate how you challenge us to consider the potential of AI robots embedded into our communities. What are your thoughts about robots developing a sense of morality or community through ‘junk code’? How should the church define its boundaries for participation in spiritual practices like communion? How does this thought experiment challenge or reinforce the theological understanding of the soul, sin, and salvation?
Chad,
As I mentioned in another answer, I think that there is a need to “believe.” I think it would take a whole lot of junk-code for an AI to get to develop the IQ, EQ and CQ at high enough levels that it would be able to actually believe. For to be saved is to confess with our mouths (AI could do that) and believe in our hearts that Jesus raised from the dead. This is the part that I think AI would not be able to do.