Context:

• There is a striking convergence between -
  • Pope Leo XIV’s 2026 encyclical Magnifica Humanitas: On Safeguarding the Human Person in the Time of AI and
  • The Indian PM’s MANAV framework articulated at global AI forums (India AI Impact Summit, 2026 and the AI Action Summit, 2025).
• Despite emerging from different civilisational traditions, both frameworks advocate a human-centric, ethical, inclusive, and globally accountable approach to Artificial Intelligence (AI).

Core Argument - Human Beings Must Remain at the Centre:

• AI governance should not be driven solely by technological efficiency or commercial interests.
• Both Pope Leo XIV and the Indian PM emphasize that technology must serve humanity rather than replace it.
• The Pope views AI primarily through the lens of human dignity and moral The Indian PM stresses that AI should remain “human-centric rather than machine-centric.”
• The central principle is that the value of technology must be judged by its impact on human welfare.

Seven Areas of Convergence:

• Human-centric AI:
  • Both leaders reject the idea of treating humans as subordinate to machines.
  • Their key message is AI must augment human capabilities while preserving human dignity, freedom, and agency.
• AI for the common good:
  • Both frameworks evaluate AI not by its sophistication but by its contribution to society.
  • Catholic social teaching emphasizes the “common good.” Indian philosophical thought emphasizes “Sarvajana Hitaya” (welfare of all).
  • The objective of AI should be inclusive development, social welfare, and improved quality of life.
• Addressing inequality:
  • AI could widen existing inequalities if access to data, computing power, talent, decision-making institutions, remains concentrated among a few actors.
  • Both leaders advocate inclusive participation so that AI benefits are distributed equitably.
• Preventing reduction of humans to data:
  • A major concern highlighted is the tendency of AI systems to view individuals merely as data points.
  • The Indian PM cautions against reducing human beings to raw material for algorithms.
  • The Pope warns against assuming that all aspects of human existence can be translated into data and performance metrics.
  • Significance: Human identity, values, emotions, and dignity transcend quantifiable data.
• Tackling algorithmic bias:
  • Both frameworks move beyond the simplistic recognition that bias exists.
  • They emphasize that AI bias becomes particularly dangerous when it appears neutral and objective.
  • The Pope notes that exclusion and discrimination can be hidden behind claims of neutrality.
  • The Indian PM highlights the risk of AI systems trained primarily on Western datasets failing to reflect India’s linguistic, cultural, and regional diversity.
• Work, labour and human dignity:
  • AI-driven automation has generated concerns about job losses and de-skilling.
  • Both leaders present a balanced perspective. For example,
    • The Indian PM argues that technology changes the nature of work rather than eliminating it entirely, creating new employment opportunities.
    • The Pope stresses that meaningful work is fundamental to human dignity and must be protected.
  • The focus should be on skill development, reskilling, and a just transition for workers.
• Global governance of AI:
  • Both leaders view AI governance as a collective global responsibility.
  • They advocate ethical governance, participatory decision-making, international cooperation, protection against domination by a handful of corporations or countries.

The Indian PM’s MANAV Framework:

• The framework comprises:
  • M – Moral and Ethical Systems
  • A – Accountable Governance
  • N – National Sovereignty
  • A – Accessible and Inclusive
  • V – Valid and Legitimate
• The framework seeks to balance innovation with ethics, inclusivity, and sovereignty.

Significance for the Global South:

• Developing countries should not remain passive consumers of AI systems designed elsewhere.
• Key concerns include:
  • AI models trained on unrepresentative datasets,
  • Governance rules shaped without Global South participation,
  • Cultural and linguistic exclusion.
• Frameworks suggested by both leaders argue in favour of greater representation of developing nations in shaping global AI norms and standards.

Conclusion:

• The convergence between Magnifica Humanitas and the MANAV framework demonstrates that diverse civilisational traditions can arrive at common ethical principles for governing emerging technologies.
• The challenge is not to invent new moral frameworks but to apply existing ethical wisdom to AI development. This will reduce algorithmic bias, ensure data justice, and promote inclusive AI.