1. In the hands of those who believe everything is permissible and their ambition knows no bounds, artificial intelligence (AI), to which they are willing to dedicate the necessary resources to create the framework for dominating society, is becoming the great redemption that points to a genuine mutation of the human condition. Right now, some are already saying that AI can have feelings and sensitivity, that is, that it can challenge human uniqueness. Is it possible to believe that AI can replace the complex and arbitrary economy of human desire? A machine, however capable of capturing and combining information, will it be able to experience love and hate, desire and fury, fascination and horror, pleasure and sadism, as is characteristic of living beings, and particularly humans, through their complex perceptual system? And what would become of this world if we reached this point, with powers capable of imposing upon us, with supposed scientific legitimacy, the way we are here? This is nothing new: there have been tragic and botched attempts at these kinds of endeavors. Without going too far back, what were the totalitarian regimes of the 20th century, with their Nazi, fascist, and communist variants?

1. Limits. “I had a friend who, like me, wasn’t particularly interested in priests and their teachings, but rather in what he called ‘the sacred within me.’ When I asked him what he meant, he told me that the sacred were his limitations as a human being, ‘that there are things I could never do.’” This is how Theodor Kallifatides, first recipient of the Diari ARA International Prize, began his presentation last Saturday at the Cap Roig Encounter.

"The extreme right represents the reaction against a left woke which has perhaps gone too far." This commonplace is not normally used to introduce a debate about the Left and the challenges it faces, such as reconciling the defense of individual identities and universality, or like the debate around the uncritical importation of concepts from an Anglo-Saxon postmodernism that feels a lack of the complexity of the complexity of complexity. made by the thick beak of the contemporary Left that consolidates a powerful idea instrumental in the rise of the extreme Right: the existence of a supposed cultural hegemony (what the extreme Right calls Cultural Marxism) of a condescending and authoritarian Left that imposes a new unnatural morality on the average citizen. YouTubers and influencers, there are a number of opinion makers in the traditional media, disguised asenfants terribles although they are often over sixty and have had their lives sorted out for years, who complain that freedom is threatened by the wokismIt is common for the same people who make fun of the "offended woke"They find it intolerable that a feminist corrects them or that someone suggests some formula of "inclusive newspeak", often trying to convert, in the name of exasperating narcissism, their daily pettiness into definitive proof that there are legitimate reasons to rebel. woke and good-natured that violates their freedom.

Forgiveness, compassion, respect for others, work ethic, humility, love... These are values that, whether we like it or not, have permeated us for centuries. And that, despite the death of God and the triumph of depersonalized AI, refuse to disappear. Nostalgia for faith? No. Perhaps nostalgia for the good life. President Salvador Illa, like a leftist hill, shamelessly proclaims these values. President Donald Trump, in practice, loudly denies them every day. By action or omission, both remind us of this undercurrent of Western history that draws on the classical Greco-Roman world and the redeeming figure of Jesus. Christian humanism: the person, with their contradictions and weaknesses, at the center.

"If society relies too much on AI to think, it could end up losing critical skills. It's not so much that AI will replace human intelligence, but that humans will stop exercising it." This is what AI tells me when I ask if it will one day replace human thought.