Pope Leo, in his Encyclical Letter on the human person and artificial intelligence, Magnifica Humanitas, drew attention to what he sees as a “non-negotiable value”: the common good. It is a call to look beyond the narrow limits of self-interest, especially for the Tech giants. As AI is further developed the encyclical argues for the retention of a vision of life in which people are seen not as objects but as persons.

The advancements in AI technology do threaten the quality of genuine human life.

What can suffer is the loss of human relationships and social community.

As debate about the impact of AI intensifies this is a timely consideration. The common good is described as the sum total of social conditions which allow people to reach their fulfilment more fully and more easily. The common good reminds us to look beyond own needs and give consideration to the creation of those social conditions that foster full and integral human development.

Simply put, the fostering of the common good is an act of human responsibility. When a person has a sense of the common good they understand that human society is not just a collection of individuals, but that society involves interconnectedness and interdependence. We need each other and everyone can contribute to the building up of a better society.

In the mind of Pope Leo this is an important consideration in the development of AI. When the Pope addresses what is likely to be a major transformation in human society with the advancement of digitalisation, artificial intelligence and robotics he makes a plea for the preservation and protection of the human person.

New developments cannot just be advanced without serious consideration as to whether they actually improve the quality of life within a society. Each innovation can be used for advancement but also for the diminishment of humanity.

Invoking the common good, though, can be used in wrong ways, as it was during the Pandemic. Imposing harsh lockdowns, denying employment to people who had conscientious objection to being vaccinated, and preventing people visiting dying loved-ones — all in the name of the common good — represented, for many, a false understanding of what the common good really is.

Promotion of the common good should advance human flourishing. It is becoming increasingly understood that many of the Pandemic prohibitions did much damage to people and harmed the social fabric.

It is worth returning to what the Catholic tradition means by this term, because “the common good” is invoked far more often than it is understood. The Catechism explains that “the Common Good resides in the conditions for the exercise of the natural freedoms indispensable for the development of the human vocation, such as the right to act according to a sound norm of conscience and to safeguard . . . privacy, and rightful freedom also in matters of religion” (CCC 1907).

Two things stand out. First, the common good is not a rival to individual good but its precondition.

The common good involves the social conditions that make it possible for people, individually and together, to flourish.

The Church insists on three inseparable elements: respect for the human person and his fundamental rights; the social well-being and development of the group itself; and peace, meaning the stability and security of a just order (CCC 1925–1927). Second, and most often forgotten, the common good is oriented toward the true and lasting good of the person, including the person’s spiritual good — not merely toward efficient outcomes or the smooth functioning of the state.

This is why the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church can say that the common good “does not consist in the simple sum of the particular goods of each subject,” but is something the whole community shares in, precisely because each member’s dignity is upheld. A common good purchased by trampling on conscience, worship, or the rights of the person is not the common good at all — it is a counterfeit of it.

This proposes that we have an understanding that society should look to advance the good of all. Thus, we can ask ourselves: do the current forms of development of AI actually build up the conditions in which persons can flourish together?

Those at the forefront of the development of AI can ask themselves whether the innovations and advances will ensure the dignity, conscience, and rights of the person and build up the common good.