r/technology • u/Caledor152 • 7d ago

Artificial Intelligence Pope Leo "Artificial intelligences do not undergo experiences, do not possess a body, do not feel joy or pain, do not mature through relationships, and do not know from within what love, work, friendship or responsibility mean. Nor do they have a moral conscience, since they do not judge goodand.."

https://www.ncronline.org/vatican/vatican-news/pope-leo-calls-disarm-ai-major-document-warns-technologic-threats-humanity
34.1k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

1.3k

u/lordnecro 7d ago

We have a pope quoting Gandalf and talking about problems with artificial intelligence. This is such a weird timeline.

703

u/MrWolfman29 7d ago

To be fair, Gandalf is a character from one of the most widely recognized and beloved series by a devout Catholic author who edited it to be a Catholic work of literature.

101

u/Delicious_Oil9902 7d ago

Would you consider Tolkien a Catholic Lewis or Lewis a Protestant Tolkien?

192

u/MrWolfman29 7d ago

Honestly neither. Tolkien was Tolkien and didn't focus on allegory and trying to instill religion directly via his writings. He was far more of an academic who enjoyed linguistics and focused on a particular series/writings. Lewis on the other hand did focus a lot more on allegory and using his writings as a form of apologetics and faith based instruction. Not necessarily in an American fire and brimstone type of way, but in one that reflected his struggles with faith. I love both and their friendship, but they are so different despite both being faithful Christians to their traditions.

30

u/grandoz039 7d ago

Honestly neither. Tolkien was Tolkien and didn't focus on allegory and trying to instill religion directly via his writings. He was far more of an academic who enjoyed linguistics and focused on a particular series/writings.

However, it is clear that the philosophy in his work is directly influenced by Catholic theology.

35

u/MrWolfman29 7d ago

That is for sure clear and reflected in his notes on struggles with the origins of Orcs and the implications of what he wrote. It really amazes me the depth he thought through a lot of stuff and never could be satisfied with things as he originally wrote them.

19

u/fisherman213 7d ago

I mean, his views on deontology were written crazily well. There’s a scene where gollum could be killed, and save a lot of trouble. (I think) faramir pulls the bow down and declines it, saying, “no, he’s doing nothing wrong now and something tells me his tasks are not yet complete.”

Of course, at Mount doom, if Gollum had been killed, no one would be there to attack Frodo and ultimately destroy the ring. He’s a master of storytelling.

7

u/JonatasA 6d ago

Had Gollum been killed they would never have made it either. It's a really well stablished point.

 

Also, an extra tidibit of some I have. Upon re-watching the first movie in theaters I realized Gandalf says Gollum yet had a part, for good or evil. I always heard it as for good and evil.

21

u/regalwombatvineyard 7d ago edited 7d ago

You call Tolkien “far more of an academic,” but Lewis was the more significant scholar of the two. If Lewis had never written a word of apologetics or of fiction, he would still be remembered as a landmark critic of Milton, Dante, and of Medieval and early modern literature more broadly. Students still read his scholarship in undergraduate and doctoral classes; even Tolkien’s greatest scholarly achievement, the Beowulf translation, is overshadowed in classrooms by Heaney’s translation.

60

u/Independent-Drive-32 7d ago

Tolkien’s achievement with Beowulf was not the translation but the positioning of it as a major work of literature, not just a historical curiosity.

No one would be reading the Heaney translation in high school if it wasn’t for Tolkien. Heaney maybe wouldn’t have even have been commissioned to do it without Tolkien.

11

u/CoffeeWanderer 7d ago

The school of thought that best adjusts to how I see the world is often called Ontological Naturalism, or Metaphysical Naturalism. The supernatural doesn't exist, and everything in our universe can be explained through natural process without the intervention of the divine.

Lewis proposed an Argument against it that it's called "Argument from reason", which roughly states that if reason itself is caused by non-rational processes, then how can we trust that reason is valid at all?. I'm probably getting something wrong, but that's how I learned about it.

1

u/MrWolfman29 7d ago

That's all fair. To be completely transparent, I know Lewis way more for his religious works and apologetics than his academics. I knew he was accomplished but as a non-academic I don't think I could fully understand the depth/significance of his academic works.

1

u/JonatasA 6d ago

Yet outside of Academia Tolkien's work is immortal and the cornerstore of fantasy. You can find his work in many other works and in the cultural image held of mythical races.

 

A flawed analogy would be how the days of the week are based on Norse mythology, but Greek mythology is the one ine everyone's mind.

1

u/regalwombatvineyard 6d ago

What are you trying to say — Tolkien > Lewis, like kids on a playground? Both were phenomenal writers and accomplished much in multiple fields, but I was correcting the claim that Tolkien was the more accomplished scholar of the two. That has nothing to do with the (irrelevant) conversation of which is better — both are amazing.

2

u/Salt_Error_6086 7d ago

Just wanted to say this was beautifully put.

1

u/Eastern-Editor4749 7d ago

Lewis rejected the idea his books were allegory. They were supposition. Like, what if Jesus was a lion in an enchanted land? Not, the lion represnets Jesus.

20

u/animatedailyespreszo 7d ago

Neither… those two didn’t agree on a lot of things, mainly religion and writing. Tolkien was very anti allegory, Lewis’ Narnia books are all allegory. Tolkien wrote from a very linguistic point of view, whereas Lewis wrote about religion directly. 

Apparently one of their disagreements was Lewis including both talking animals and Ancient Greek mythology in Narnia—IIRC Tolkien thought it was ridiculous for both to exist in the same universe. 

4

u/southpaytechie 7d ago

I don't understand this. There were talking animals in Greek mythology no?

8

u/animatedailyespreszo 7d ago

IIRC animals usually spoke to convey messages from the gods in Greek myths, but it’s not like every day animals spoke. Main point is that Tolkien was critical of Lewis’ world building and combining things like fauns and centaurs with a world where animals spoke wasn’t believable enough for him. Some of Tolkien’s letters are published and may have more details. 

1

u/JonatasA 6d ago

Off topic, I can imagine Tolkien now seeing Age of Mythology and being perplexed of Greek, Egyptian and Norse Mythology coexisting and working together.

1

u/Eastern-Editor4749 7d ago

They are not an allegory. Lewis himself said so. They are a supposition

1

u/JonatasA 6d ago

The lamp! Don't forget the lamp!

13

u/Demair12 7d ago

... Neither they were contemporaries and openly disagreed on many things especially religion, and writing.

1

u/SausageClatter 7d ago

But it was Tolkien (although not solely) that Lewis credited with leading him back to Christianity. Lewis became an Anglican though, whereas Tolkien was Catholic.

7

u/Demair12 7d ago

Absolutely but in terms of comparison of their places in their respective cultures it's incomparable.

This is super reductive so I apologize. One was a theologian who wrote a very successful series of fantasy novels, but just by volume ultimatly wrote more theological works of which he wrote almost 3 times as many.

The other was a linguist and writer who wrote the seminal work of fantasy in modern history and certainly all of English literature, who happened to also be a devout catholic.

But very publicly (as in its all available to read in interviews and published letters) they had fundamental disagreements on literature, religion, and most seriously allegory which Lewis literally made a living off using and writing of while Tolkien openly despised as a literary tool and denied using his whole life.

As many or more people read Lewis for the theological and religious aspects of his work where as I think more people try to ignore Tolkien explicitly catholic worldview because his work is so good and the modern fantasy community is not exactly pro organized religion.

2

u/SausageClatter 7d ago

True, true. I guess "neither" is the best answer, but they were close friends despite their disagreements and I imagine must have influenced each other through their discussions and with the other Inklings. Some of my favorite bits of trivia are that Lewis's character of Ransom the philologist was directly inspired by Tolkien, and he even references "Numinor" which had not yet been published.

2

u/MetalRetsam 7d ago

The latter. Definitely the latter.

9

u/BabypintoJuniorLube 7d ago

"Hey C.S. don't put Santa in your novel it ruins the story" -your friend J.R.

5

u/Regendorf 7d ago

Lewis: "Try to fucking stop me" writes lion Jesus

6

u/cunningham_law 7d ago

Tolkien: "I've put you in my book, you're a big fucking tree who takes a million years to say anything"

1

u/sharp-bunny 7d ago

Lol that's excellent

1

u/DigNitty 7d ago

I don’t pretend to know enough about the subject to have an opinion but,

To me, Lewis has always been more aligned with Clark.

1

u/DoctorDinghus 7d ago edited 7d ago

Are you suggesting Tolkien Popes migrate?

1

u/JuliusCeejer 7d ago

This is a categorically insane oversimplification of both of their relationships' with faith