Authors

Walter Sisto¹;  ¹ D'Youville University, United States

Discussion

In 2017, President Vladimir Putin ominously declared, “Artificial Intelligence is the future not only of Russia but all of mankind,” adding that “[w]hoever becomes the leader in this sphere will become the ruler of the world.” While Putin’s prediction has yet to fully materialize, the Russian war in Ukraine has already showcased the deadly potential of AI, especially in warfare, where AI is increasingly used to pilot lethal drones. Additionally, there is strong evidence to demonstrate that Russia's Foreign Intelligence Service recently exploited AI during the 2024 US presidential campaign to create and distribute millions of deceptive, albeit customized ads. By tailoring these ads to the biases and preferences of individual users, they sought to sow discord and manipulate the election outcome, exploiting American voters and possibly influencing the outcome of the US presidential election. 
>Putin's remarks, rather than serving as a warning, appear more like personal aspirations, especially given the Russian government's dubious uses of AI. However, they also reflect broader fears that AI could be manipulated to erode human rights, dignity, and integrity. This makes it all the more crucial to engage in continuous debate and discussion regarding the ethics and regulation of this technology, which, in the wrong hands, could enable someone like Putin to become a proverbial "ruler of the world." 
To address some of the ethical challenges posed by AI, this paper draws on the work of Russian religious thinker and Orthodox theologian Sergius Bulgakov, a prominent figure in the Russian Religious Renaissance. Specifically, I aim to apply Bulgakov’s theological framework to help establish values that can guide both Christians and the general public in responding to technologies like deepfake AI and "deadbot" technologies. Deadbot technology refers to the practice of uploading a deceased person’s digital data and social profile to a generative AI platform, creating a form of digital resurrection in which the deceased can appear to communicate. Alongside deepfake AI, this technology can generate lifelike images of the deceased, allowing them to speak and act as though they were still alive. 
The central ethical question is whether we should "leave the dead to the dead?" Does this technology require regulation, or is it a valid expression of a bereaved person’s grief—perhaps even a glimpse of the future of mourning in the digital age? By drawing on Bulgakov’s speculative theological and philosophical insights, I will argue for the regulation of this technology and explain why caution is necessary, particularly given its potential psychological impacts as well as potential to exploit a vulnerable population: the bereaved.