An article by Professor M. Carbajo-Núñez, published on the blog of the Alphonsian Academy
The International Theological Commission’s document, entitled ” Quo vadis, humanitas? “ [= QV], published on March 4, 2026, questions how to “think about Christian anthropology” and progress in an era marked by Artificial Intelligence [= AI], the environmental crisis, and increasing social inequalities. This reflection is important because “without an adequate anthropology” (LS, n. 118), neither human development nor integral ecology is possible.
Three dimensions of integral human development
The first chapter presents the development “of every man and of the whole man” (PP, n. 14) as a systemic process, in which the economic, technological, and cultural dimensions interact with the ethical and spiritual dimensions of human life. In other words, integral development must include three fundamental dimensions: material, socio-relational and spiritual (or expressive [1] ):
A) The first refers to the sum of material or acquired wealth (“well-being”), usually measured by gross domestic product (GDP).
B) The social dimension concerns the level of integration, cooperation, and solidarity among different social groups. Macroeconomic growth alone is of little use if the quality of life declines and inequalities increase.
C) The spiritual (or expressive) dimension refers to the quality of life, sometimes expressed through indicators of well-being or happiness. Economic goods are fully economic when they enable a good and fraternal life, that is, public happiness.
The culture of non-vocation
The second chapter presents human life as a vocation. In contrast to this Christian vision, the current “culture of non-vocation” interprets personal fulfillment in terms of individualistic self-empowerment (human enhancement). The dream of “becoming like gods” (cf. Gen 3:4), supported by some currents of transhumanism and posthumanism, contradicts Christian anthropology. The latter understands the gift of “divinization” not as a technical self-transcendence of man, but “as a participation in divine life in the transfigured humanity of the children of God in Christ” (QV, n. 24).
Personal identity: gift and task
The third chapter presents personal identity as a gift and a task. “No human being can be happy unless he knows who he is” (QV, n. 109), but neither can he “fully find himself except through a sincere gift of self” ( GS , n. 24). In the encounter with the other, in fact, he discovers his own identity and forges himself as a person. “Through the you, he becomes an I” (Martin Buber).
Conclusion: systemic vision and entrepreneurial awareness
The acceleration of technological development, driven by AI, calls for a systemic vision capable of grasping the complexity of social life. In this context, integral ecology cannot be reduced to a simple environmental approach but must rethink the relationship between economics, technology, society, and spirituality. Only through this integration will it be possible to promote authentically human development, one that goes beyond enhancing human technical capabilities, but fosters the full realization of our vocation to communion, responsibility, and care for creation. Every economic activity impacts multiple dimensions of reality: the environment, work, social relations, and culture. Therefore, we must foster an entrepreneurial conscience oriented toward the common good. Entrepreneurs should not only be economic actors pursuing profit, but also protagonists of social life. Their vocation drives them to contribute to human development by integrating innovation, social responsibility, and ecological sustainability.
_______________
[1] Cf. Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Rizzoli, Milan 2012.
