Hello,

Andrew West here from the Religion and Ethics Report.

Artificial intelligence is the most momentous change in human civilisation since the industrial revolution of the 19th century.

That's what Pope Leo XIV says in his first-ever encyclical, a letter to the whole world, officially titled Magnifica Humanitas or The Grandeur of Humanity.

It nails the potentially indiscriminate, non-human and non-feeling nature of AI when it's built without carefully inbuilt ethical programming. It rips into the inequality of power and influence between the "have" and the "have-not" cultures and peoples. It sets out an agenda critical of unbridled capitalism.

And it warns very directly that we are at a crossroads: we can build an AI future based on dialogue, generosity and love, or one based on profit and power. The Pope knows artificial intelligence can deliver either.

Leo XIV argues that governments and transnational corporations must be alive to the critical choices when it comes to AI. Our future depends on it.

In the 43,000-word document, Pope Leo takes direct aim at the self-styled gods of the 21st century, warning that whatever good AI might bring, it must never be controlled by a tiny group of ultra-wealthy tech titans.

The Religion and Ethics Report unpacks it all: what the Pope is really asking of us, and what it means for the rest of us who'll have to live with the choices being made right now.

In his first encyclical, Pope Leo has issued a striking warning about artificial intelligence arguing that whatever good it might bring, it must never be controlled by a tiny group of ultra-wealthy tech titans. The 43,000-word document takes direct aim at the self-styled gods of the 21st century.

How can we tell the difference between sincerity and bad faith? And how should we respond to the latter?

NASA's Earthrise photo sparked an environmental movement. Now, Artemis II's Earthset offers a similar moment, yet in the intervening decades, the crisis has only deepened. What are we still missing in how we relate to our planet?

We talk about the "return" of nationalism, but nationalism doesn't return, it surges. It's always there beneath the surface, gathering force, cresting and crashing. So the real question isn't why it's back, it's why we keep being surprised when it rises again.

Can you fly? Are you real? The answers seem self-evident, but this week we're exploring philosophical thought experiments that pull the rug out from under common sense.

Digital technology seeps into everything. Reaction videos are a perfect example: split-screen content where someone's face watching something becomes as compelling as the thing itself. But when emotions are performed for an audience, what happens to our capacity to actually feel them?

Is prepping a sign of prudent foresight or a loss of faith in society? And how do ethics and religion shape ideas of survival?