A family dinner scene featuring a robot figure in place of a parent, symbolizing raising the AI generation.

The Allure of Automation: AI’s Intrusion on Parental and Family Agency

Does AI undermine parental agency? It shifts reliance onto digital tools that erode genuine family bonds.

This is our next article in our Proclamation series. To read the last one: Why Marriage, Sex and Family are Keys to Sanctification

I’m still startled by an electronically declared “Hello, Master” whenever I turn on my truck. The artificial intelligence sweeping our society impacts me daily with a casual, “Hey, let me do that for you” or “I’ve got this” availability when I pick up my mobile device or log online. While technology connects us in infinite ways, the physical and psychological effects of reduced in-person, one-on-one relationships loom large, potentially impacting individuals, families, and the broader society.

 The prospect of singularity caused me to consider artificial intelligence’s potential impact on parental relationships and the doctrinal verities of agency and truth.

Approaching Singularity

 AI advances will offer even more opportunities to intertwine self and technology. Artificial intelligence is defined as “the simulation of human intelligence processes by machines, especially computer systems” or “automation based on associations.” Those simulations and associations are astonishing.

The more far-reaching, socially-shifting aspects of AI may require increased engagement by involved parents.

 Artificial intelligence’s rapid advancement causes most technology experts to predict that singularity will happen in the near future as AI’s capacities surpass human cognitive capabilities enabling its autonomous function. For now, technology right out of the movies to real life materialized in the form of brain-computer interfaces which enable a neurally-linked brain implant to translate a person’s neural signals into computer commands.

 In 1999, technological prophet Ray Kurzweil predicted AI would impersonate human beings by 2029, asserting that Artificial General Intelligence, or AI with the ability to reason, will soon be a reality and promising that by 2029 “AI will be ‘better than all humans,’ in ‘every skill possessed by any human.’” Noting humans’ propensity for failure and weakness, Kurzweil optimistically looks forward to AI-enhanced and linked minds and bodies. “If we can meet the scientific, ethical, social and political challenges posed by these advances, we will transform life on earth profoundly for the better. … [Humans] are far from optimal, especially with regard to thinking.” Kurzweil advocates for transhumanism “where we are partly organic tissue and partly mechanical parts, the natural progression will be toward greater and greater dependence on ever more rapid computer-augmented thinking and consciousness.” For Kurzweil, transhumanism enables immortality.

 Singularity and Parenting 

 As AI advances forward, a flurry of articles and books about its foreseen impact on parenting emerge. “The rapid acceleration of AI capabilities signals a paradigm shift where traditional models of parental engagement may no longer suffice.”  A paradigm shift isn’t necessarily negative. Certainly, every generation experiencing technological advances adjusts its parenting styles. 

 Parents embracing AI find tools to more effectively manage time, automate repetitive tasks, monitor and enhance their family’s health and safety, and receive recommendations specific to their particular family’s circumstances. And while incredibly convenient apps exist to streamline the everyday household’s functionality, the more far-reaching, socially-shifting aspects of AI may require increased engagement by involved parents. In studying the family response to interactive AI, Druga, Christoph, and Ko suggest eight roles parents play as they navigate AI with their children: cheerleader, mediator, mentor, student, teacher, observer, tinkerer, and collaborator. 

 Some not-too-far-in-the-future hypothetical scenarios parents may face could include these proposed by Murchú:

  • Emotional Synchronisation: Parents could experience their child’s emotional state during learning in real-time through neural feedback loops. For instance, a parent might directly sense their child’s frustration with a mathematical concept, allowing for immediate intervention.
  • Thought-Based Tutoring: Parents could engage in direct thought-to-thought tutoring sessions where complex concepts are shared through neural visualization. Example: A parent explaining photosynthesis by sharing their mental model directly into their child’s cognitive space, enhanced by AI-generated interactive molecular visualizations. 
  • Decision Impact Visualisation: Real-time modeling of how parental decisions affect cognitive development. For instance, an AI might show parents a neural network visualization of how choosing between coding classes or music lessons would differently shape their child’s synaptic development.
  • Manage Cognitive Enhancement Choices: Parents could face decisions about implementing various cognitive enhancements for their children.
  • Emotional Intelligence Programming: Parents could help children develop enhanced emotional capabilities through AI-mediated emotional training.
  • Bio-Digital Balance: As children integrate more deeply with technology, parents would need to guide the harmony between biological and digital aspects of their children’s development.

While many parents will step up to the role of shepherding their children through increased technological influence, after a long day at work, other parents may prefer to let their kids navigate AI themselves in an increasingly leveled-up version of screen time. Murchú posits that “While the transformative potential of AI in parental engagement is undeniable, the risks of dependency and societal inequity cannot be overlooked. Over-reliance on AI could erode critical parental skills, reduce human autonomy, and create disparities between technologically advanced and underserved communities. … Failure to address these challenges risks undermining the fundamental human aspects of parenting and education. As we approach technological singularity, maintaining a balance between leveraging AI capabilities and preserving human agency will be critical.” 

 Considering Singularity within the Doctrines of Agency and Truth

 The Father’s plan of happiness and Jesus Christ’s atonement champion human agency. Lehi taught his children that God “created all things … things to act and things to be acted upon. And to bring about his eternal purposes … the Lord God gave unto man that he should act for himself.”

The principle of agency will help parents navigate AI with their children.

The Family: A Proclamation to the World is a divinely directed, prophetic guideline that combats technologically-induced decreased parental interactions by explaining our renewable relationship with Heavenly Parents and the relationships that should flourish in mortality as we “act for [ourselves].”

 Parents have a sacred duty to rear their children in love and righteousness, to provide for their physical and spiritual needs, to teach them to love and serve one another, to observe the commandments of God, and to be law-abiding citizens wherever they live. Husbands and wives—mothers and fathers—will be held accountable before God for the discharge of these obligations.

 Elder David A. Bednar reiterated that the principle of agency will help parents navigate AI with their children. “God’s creations include both ‘things to act and things to be acted upon.’ And, importantly, moral agency is the divinely designed ‘power of independent action’ that empowers us as God’s children to become agents to act and not simply objects to be acted upon. … Because AI is cloaked in the credibility and promises of scientific progress, we might naively be seduced into surrendering our precious moral agency to a technology that can only think telestial. By so doing, we may gradually be transformed from agents who can act into objects that are only acted upon.”

Parents bombarded with options and gadgets can still turn to an ever-reliable source of truth.

 Becoming agents to act stimulates the creative prowess within. According to Brigham Young, “Every discovery in science and art that is really true and useful to mankind has been given by direct revelation from God. It has been given with a view to prepare the way for the ultimate triumph of truth, and the redemption of the earth from the power of sin and Satan.  We should take advantage of all these great discoveries … and give to our children the benefit of every branch of useful knowledge, to prepare them to step forward and efficiently do their part in the great work” (Deseret News, 22 Oct. 1862, 129).

 Though creations and discoveries are neither intrinsically good nor evil, they can become tools for both good and evil. From his prophetic watchtower, David O. McKay aptly described our day: “Discoveries latent with such potent power, either for the blessing or the destruction of human beings, as to make men’s responsibility in controlling them the most gigantic ever placed in human hands. This age is fraught with limitless perils as well as untold possibilities” (David O. McKay, in Conference Report, Oct. 1966, 4).

 While an incredibly useful component of society, in this stage of its development, this simulation or associative intelligence is still artificial, and humans create its data stores with inherent biases and predispositions. However, parents bombarded with options and gadgets can still turn to an ever-reliable source of truth. The Lord declared, “I am the way, the truth, and the life,” and that true intelligence is “the glory of God … or, in other words, light and truth,” and while it cannot be created or made, it is the power by which everything in our universe is made.  God’s “work and glory to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man” relies on parents’ knowing truth about eternal identities and then conveying that truth within eternal relationships.

Artificial intelligence can be a powerfully supportive or destructive tool for parents trying to fulfill this “sacred duty.”

 AI “has the potential to obscure our true identity as sons and daughters of a loving Heavenly Father, distract us from the eternal truths and righteous work necessary for spiritual growth, engender pride and a diminished acknowledgment of our dependence upon God, and distort or replace meaningful human interaction,” Elder David A. Bednar warned. “Truth is knowledge of things as they really are. Artificial intelligence cannot simulate, imitate, or replace the influence of the Holy Ghost in our lives. No matter how sophisticated and elegant AI technology ultimately may become, it simply can never bear witness of the Father and the Son, reveal the truth of all things, or sanctify those who have repented and been baptized.”

The opportunity to raise children “in love and righteousness, to provide for their physical and spiritual needs, to teach them to love and serve one another, to observe the commandments of God and to be law-abiding citizens” is an incredible trust given by God to parents.  Artificial intelligence can be a powerfully supportive or destructive tool for parents trying to fulfill this “sacred duty.” While AI prophet Ray Kurzweil’s general assessment that humans are “far from optimal” may be realistic, our Heavenly Father, the divine source of real truth, compensates for the natural man’s failings by underpinning His parent-child relationship with us by providing a Savior whose atoning grace enables us to navigate parental roles amidst technology’s singularity with agency and truth.

About the author

Delisa Bushman Hargrove

Delisa Bushman Hargrove is a freelance writer and editor. On her channel at Patheos.com, she explores various aspects of faith-based living and is especially drawn to doctrinal symbolisms effectively interspersed within the Father’s plan of salvation.
On Key

You Might Also Like

Most Religious Groups Support Abortion

Nearly 2/3 of Americans support legal abortion,  This even includes religious Americans.  The outliers are white evangelicals, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Latter-day Saints and Hispanic Protestants.

Upcoming Religious Liberty Cases

With the Supreme Court at the front of center stage in the American public eye, the upcoming religious liberty cases are seeing a lot of light.

When Did We Stop Trusting the Media? A Review of “September 5”

When did we begin to lose trust in the news media? There are plenty of theories. Some suggest March 6, 1981, Walter Cronkite’s last broadcast. Others suggest it was the coverage of President Bill Clinton’s perjury and impeachment. Others suggest it was the advent of 24-hour news stations. The newest film from Paramount Pictures suggests another option in its title, “September 5.” September 5, 1972, is the day that the Black Sabbath militant group kidnapped Israeli Olympic athletes. In total, eleven Israelis were killed. But according to the journalists at the center of the movie, none of that was nearly as important as making sure the “ABC” logo was on the TV screen while the coverage went on. A brief epilogue about how the incident turned out ends with these eerie words, “900 million people watched.”  “September 5” is interesting because, in a movie presumably about the attacks, we see none of it ourselves except through camera lenses and TV screens. It’s not a movie about the attacks at all; it’s a movie about watching the attacks. The film opens as Geoff takes over the control room for ABC Sports. He’s running the night shift, when word comes in about the attacks.  The ABC studios are yards from where the attacks are happening. So they rush Peter Jennings into the Olympic village, and put their own studio camera on top of the building so they can keep a camera on the room where the hostages are being held at all times. Geoff wakes up his bosses, Marvin and Roone, who often debate the relative merits of their decisions, such as whether to turn the story over to ABC News rather than the sports division or whether or not to call the attackers “terrorists.” These compelling arguments make for thoughtful viewing. Ben Chaplin, who plays Roone, an American Jew, does particularly good acting work as he tries to find a nugget of morality in what they are doing.  But every argument ends with the decision being made that will best help ratings and ABC. No matter how many times they argue about good practices, such as waiting for a second confirmation that the hostages were all safe before reporting, the better angels of our trio of decision-makers always lose.  By the way, the hostages weren’t safe, ABC did get the story wrong because they were relying on German state news, and Germany was trying to look safe and less militaristic in their first major international attention since the end of WWII. But for a moment, when the station thought the hostages were safe, their only concern was getting them in the studio for interviews.  Marvin Bader tries to use the language of “the story” as though his audience deserved to have “the story” in real-time. And no matter what decision they made it was in pursuit of capturing the story. But this justification rang shallow as the movie moved on. When the German police burst in to get them to stop telecasting their rescue attempts live because the militants were watching, they stopped to get them to put their guns down, but turned the feed back on nearly as soon as they had left. All of this makes this an engaging movie that is worth watching. When journalists are the main characters, we expect them to be the good guys. “All the President’s Men,” “Spotlight,” “The Post.” Even the film “Shattered Glass” about a dishonest journalist, spends more time highlighting the good journalists who caught him. “September 5” doesn’t offer the media such a convenient way out. By making its characters clear-headed and conflicted, they are more than simple villains. They are exactly what the pressure of studio news would naturally produce. There are real powerful forces driving the decisions of the news industry that are at odds with what is right or good, and all too often, there’s nothing we can do about it. If we are curious about how the spiral of trust began, this film serves as a worthwhile primer while being entertaining as all get out. The film is rated R. It is thematically tough, dealing with questions like whether to broadcast an execution live, but none of the violence of the incident is actually seen the movie. In terms of a ratings feel, I might compare it to the film “Gravity” while using the word “f***” three more times than is allowed in a PG-13 film. I wouldn’t recommend this for young children or young teens, but the themes about how media manipulates us would be important for older teens, and I might consider watching this film with my kids once they turn 15 or so.  If I did, I’d ask them questions about the nature of journalism. Is getting the story more important than the lives of the kidnapped Olympic team? Do we need to know about what’s happening in real-time on the other side of the world? How has constant news coverage made the world a better or worse place? What motivates those who choose what to show on the news, and how they tell those stories? Four out of Five Stars. September 5 has already had a limited release, and it is rolling out in individual markets across the country through January. 

Subscribe To Our Weekly Newsletter

Stay up to date on the intersection of faith in the public square.

You have Successfully Subscribed!