This article offers a theological ethics of surveillance in its form as social sorting. The skill of visibility is deployed as an analytical device to critique the saliency of privacy rights-talk, given the focus of surveillance having shifted from a panoptic gaze to actionable intelligence. The claim is made that an ideology of normativity and the political categories of ‘evil’ and ‘risky’ persons can be addressed by the notions of relational knowledge, the resurrection of the non-person and the power of (...) the future. Three biblical vignettes illustrate visibility and offer imaginative responses. (shrink)

The essay considers contemporary surveillance strategies from a Christian ethical perspective. It discusses first surveillance as a form of speech in the light of biblical themes of truthfulness, then draws on principles of subsidiarity and solidarity. Surveillance is dignified as human work whilst its dehumanizing outcomes are challenged. It is concluded that surveillance must contribute to human dignity and that accountability for data must follow a revised model of subsidiarity, appropriate to network rather than linear socio-political relationships. Mutual responsibility for (...) one another's data-image is derived from solidarity which, further, offers a response to the angst of a culture of suspicion. (shrink)

This article considers the relationship between Christian pastoral care and Artificial Intelligence systems. Four aspects are identified from definitions of pastoral care: the horizon of contingency in mortality, the role of wisdom rather than mere information, the oppressive and/or liberatory potential of AI and the importance of empathic presence. In rejecting a transhumanist argument that mental processes are substrate-independent, it is contended that pastoral carers embrace, rather than seeking to circumvent, their crucial finitude in being humans who care. A distinction (...) is drawn between probabilistic reasoning and judgement in retaining a vital place for decision-making that is social. Whilst not eschewing value in AI systems, this article argues for critical evaluation of technologically framed contributions to addressing barriers to people's participation. The importance of empathy is highlighted—in the light of claims not only of robotic mimicry but of interindividual models of emotion. It is concluded that the notion of artificial care be ruled out although the possibilities of AI-assisted care are not dismissed. Opportunities for humans to abdicate from the responsibilities to care, in favour of AI substitutes, are deemed to be best avoided. (shrink)