Affordances, Paradoxes of AI, and Antiqua et Nova
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15633/pch.16105Słowa kluczowe:
artificial intelligence, Antiqua et Nova, ethics, affordances, paradoxAbstrakt
In the still insufficiently understood relationship between human beings and machines within the AI environment, the concept of AI affordances offers a useful analytical lens and a perspective for further inquiry, particularly when enriched by the analysis of epistemological paradoxes and aporias. The examination of the evolution of AI affordances and of selected key paradoxes in AI development reveals not only the limits of the moral intuitions underlying this development, but also the problem of autonomous decision-making in AI systems. These paradoxes enable a deeper understanding of ethical conflicts, such as those between efficiency and justice, and of the status of human subjectivity. They also help sustain attention to both the positive potential of AI and the fact that its development remains rooted in human imperfection and in the imperfections of human creations, which may instrumentalize other persons and their works, even to the extent of treating them as substitutes for God. As such, these paradoxes and AI affordances have become part of the broader discussion outlined by Antiqua et Nova — a document that establishes an ethical framework for the development of AI technologies in respect for human dignity and the common good.
Bibliografia
Binder, Werner. 2024. “Technology as (Dis-)Enchantment: AlphaGo and the Meaning-
-Making of Artificial Intelligence.” Cultural Sociology 18 (1): 24–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/17499755221138720.
Christensen, Clayton M. 2016. The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail. Reprint ed. The Management of Innovation and Change Series. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
De Cremer, David, and Garry Kasparov. 2022. “The Ethical AI — Paradox: Why Better Technology Needs More and Not Less Human Responsibility.” AI and Ethics 2 (1): 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-021-00075-y.
Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith and Dicastery for Culture and Education. 2025. Antiqua et Nova: Note on the Relationship Between Artificial Intelligence and Human Intelligence. Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana. https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_ddf_doc_20250128_antiqua-et-nova_en.html.
Dörr, Konstantin N., and Katharina Hollnbuchner. 2017. “Ethical Challenges of Algorithmic Journalism.” Digital Journalism 5 (4): 404–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2016.1167612.
Du, Bingxin. 2026. “Reverse Affordances and Reflexivity of Smart Media — Reflections on Smart Media Affordances.” Journal of Media Ethics. Published online January 6, 2026. https://doi.org/10.1080/23736992.2025.2610996.
Grossman, Jerrold W. 2026. “Some Famous People with Finite Erdős Numbers.” The Erdős Number Project, April 30, 2026. https://sites.google.com/oakland.edu/grossman/home/the-erdoes-number-project/some-famous-people-with-finite-erdoes-numbers.
Kemper, Jakko, and Daan Kolkman. 2019. “Transparent to Whom? No Algorithmic Accountability without a Critical Audience.” Information, Communication & Society 22 (14): 2081–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2018.1477967.
Kitchin, Rob. 2019. “Thinking Critically about and Researching Algorithms.” In The Social Power of Algorithms, edited by David Beer, 14–29. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351200677-2.
Klenk, Michael. 2020. “How Do Technological Artefacts Embody Moral Values?” Philosophy & Technology 34 (3): 525–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-020-00401-y.
Kolata, Gina. 1996. “Paul Erdős, 83, a Wayfarer in Math’s Vanguard, Is Dead.” The New York Times, September 24, 1996. https://www.nytimes.com/1996/09/24/us/paul-erdos-83-a-wayfarer-in-math-s-vanguard-is-dead.html.
Kosmyna, Nataliya, Eugene Hauptmann, Ye Tong Yuan, Jessica Situ, Xian-Hao Liao, Ashly Vivian Beresnitzky, Iris Braunstein, and Pattie Maes. 2025. “Your Brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of Cognitive Debt When Using an AI Assistant for Essay Writing Task.” arXiv:2506.08872. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2506.08872.
Kreft, Jan. 2019. Władza algorytmów: U źródeł potęgi Google i Facebooka. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego.
Kreft, Jan. 2023. Władza misjonarzy: Zmierzch i świt świeckiej religii w Dolinie Krzemowej. Kraków: Universitas.
Kreft, Jan. 2025. Dziennik(AI)rstwo: Jak sztuczna inteligencja zmienia najciekawszą profesję na świecie. Kraków: Universitas.
Landrum, Jonathan, Jr. 2025. “AI Country Hit ‘Walk My Walk’ Built on Blanco Brown’s Sound Sparks Questions of Attribution, Ethics.” AP News, November 29, 2025. https://apnews.com/article/walk-my-walk-blanco-brown-2c9bbde6e88434365640c50e2998cfe2.
Llorca Albareda, Joan. 2025. “The Ethical Paradox of Automation: AI Moral Status as a Challenge to the End of Human Work.” Topoi. Published online August 20, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-025-10250-z.
Mezzadri, Daniele. 2025. “The Paradox of Ethical AI-Assisted Research.” Journal of Academic Ethics 23 (4): 2653–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-025-09671-7.
Montero, Barbara Gail. 2025. “A.I. Is on Its Way to Something Even More Remarkable Than Intelligence.” New York Times, November 8, 2025. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/08/opinion/ai-conscious-technology.html.
Morgan, Imogen. 2025. “Deezer: 28% of All Music Delivered to Streaming Is Now Fully AI-Generated.” Deezer Newsroom, September 11, 2025. https://newsroom-deezer.com/2025/09/28-fully-ai-generated-music/
Murtagh, Jack. 2024. “Paul Erdős: Matematyk nomada i ekscentryk.” Pulsar, May 1, 2024. https://www.projektpulsar.pl/czlowiek/2253763,1,paul-erds-matematyk-nomada-i-ekscentryk.read.
Santibanez Gonzalez, Ernesto D. R. 2025. “The Ignorance Machine: How Our Stupidity Defines AI’s Limits (Opinion Article).” Medium, September 21, 2025. https://medium.com/@santibanez.ernesto/the-ignorance-machine-how-our-stupidity-defines-ais-limits-opinion-article-20848cc9f6cf.
Sothanaphan, Nat. 2026. “Resolution of Erdős Problem #728: A Writeup of Aristotle’s Lean Proof.” arXiv:2601.07421. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2601.07421.
Tomlinson, Bill, and Andrew W. Torrance. 2025. “A Universal Declaration of AI Rights.” Florida State University Law Review 52 (2): 367–404. https://ssrn.com/abstract=6074406.
Vrabič Dežman, Dominik. 2024. “Promising the Future, Encoding the Past: AI Hype and Public Media Imagery.” AI and Ethics 4 (3): 743–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-024-00474-x.
Wang, Yuntao, Jianle Ba, Han Liu, Yanghe Pan, Jintao Wei, Zhou Su, Tom H. Luan, and Linkang Du. 2026. “Security of OpenClaw Agents: Fundamentals, Attacks, and Countermeasures.” arXiv:2605.25435. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.25435.
White, James M., and Rolf Lidskog. 2022. “Ignorance and the Regulation of Artificial Intelligence.” Journal of Risk Research 25 (4): 488–500. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2021.1957985.
Xing, Shuo, Junyuan Hong, Yifan Wang, Runjin Chen, Zhenyu Zhang, Ananth Grama, Zhengzhong Tu, and Zhangyang Wang. 2025. “LLMs Can Get ‘Brain Rot’: A Pilot Study on Twitter/X.” arXiv:2510.13928. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2510.13928.
Pobrania
Opublikowane
Numer
Dział
Licencja
Prawa autorskie (c) 2026 Jan Kreft
Utwór dostępny jest na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa 4.0 Międzynarodowe.
Autorzy publikujący w czasopiśmie udzielają jego wydawcy zgody o następującej treści:
- Autor zachowuje autorskie prawa majątkowe do utworu, a jednocześnie udziela wydawcy czasopisma zgody na jego pierwszą publikację w wersji drukowanej i wersji online na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa 4.0 Międzynarodowe oraz zgody na wykonywanie opracowań, w tym przekładów.
- Autor ma możliwość udzielania zgody niewyłącznej na opublikowanie utworu w wersji, która ukazała się w czasopiśmie (np. zamieszczenia go w repozytorium instytucjonalnym lub opublikowania w książce), wraz z informacją o jego pierwszej publikacji w czasopiśmie.
