Artificial Intelligence and the Dignity of Work: A Thomistic Perspective

Introduction

The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) in the workplace poses pressing ethical questions. Chief among them is: Is it wrong to use AI to replace human jobs? From a Thomistic perspective – drawing on St. Thomas Aquinas’s theology and natural law – this issue must be examined in light of the moral order, the dignity of human labor, and virtues like justice and prudence. Aquinas provides guiding principles such as the bonum commune (common good), ordo caritatis (order of charity), and the notion that every will acts sub ratione boni (under the aspect of the good)​

. Applying these principles helps us discern whether replacing human workers with AI serves or undermines the God-given order of justice and human dignity.

The Dignity of Human Work

Aquinas regards human work as an integral aspect of human dignity and divine providence. Even in the state of innocence, Adam’s labor was part of God’s plan: Aquinas notes that man was placed in paradise “to dress and keep it,” a task that “would not have involved labor, as it did after sin; but would have been pleasant… All of which was for man’s good”​

. Work allows humans to exercise their rational nature and virtues, participating in God’s creative governance of the world. It is through meaningful work that people contribute to the bonum commune and provide for themselves and their families. Thus, any decision to reduce or replace human labor must consider this inherent dignitas of work and the role it plays in human fulfillment and the common good.

Common Good, Justice, and the Ordo Caritatis

In Aquinas’s moral framework, society should be ordered toward the common good (bonum commune). He warns that “the common good should not be set aside for the private convenience of an individual”​

. Replacing workers with AI solely to increase profit, while disregarding the welfare of employees and communities, would violate this principle. Justice in Aquinas’s view demands that we give each their due; a just economy cannot treat human persons as disposable. Moreover, the ordo caritatis requires an order of love and responsibility: those in authority have a greater obligation to care for those under their charge. Aquinas, citing St. Paul, observes that one who “hath not care of his own… is worse than an infidel,” concluding that “charity regards those who are nearer to us before those who are better”​

. In a business context, this means employers and leaders should prioritize the well-being of their workers and neighbors over mere financial gain. To knowingly throw people out of work without provision or care for them offends both charity and justice, undermining the moral order. Indeed, Aquinas teaches that the goods of creation are ultimately destined for everyone’s benefit – “according to the natural order established by Divine Providence, inferior things are ordained for the purpose of succoring man’s needs”​

. Excess resources (or profits) are owed by natural law to help those in need​

. By analogy, if AI increases productivity or profits, moral duty urges that it not come at the expense of the vulnerable. The bonum commune is served when technology’s benefits are shared and workers are retrained or assisted, rather than simply discarded.

Prudence and the Moral Use of Technology

Determining whether replacing humans with AI is wrong in a given case requires the virtue of prudence (prudentia). Aquinas defines prudence as “right reason about things to be done”​

– the habit of wisely directing actions toward morally sound ends. Prudence applies universal moral principles to particular situations, discerning the proper means to achieve the good. Any use of AI must therefore be evaluated sub ratione boni – under the aspect of authentic good, not just apparent benefit​

. An AI implementation might promise efficiency (a bonum in a limited sense), but prudence asks whether it truly serves the higher goods: Does it uphold or damage human dignity? Does it support families and the community (bonum commune) or only private profit? A prudent discernment will consider long-term effects on society, the risk of increased inequality, and whether the change harmonizes with the broader moral order intended by God. Technology should remain a means for human flourishing in accordance with virtue, never an end in itself. In Aquinas’s terms, art and technology are good when ordered by right reason towards righteous ends. Thus, a morally sound integration of AI would seek ways to enhance or complement human work, respecting the worker’s dignity, rather than simply replacing people to maximize efficiency at the cost of justice.

Conclusion

From a Thomistic perspective, it is not categorically evil to use AI in the workplace – for artificial tools can be part of God’s providential gifts – but it can be wrong if done in a disordered way. The replacement of human jobs by AI must be judged by how it aligns with the bonum commune, the demands of justice, and the ordo caritatis. If such replacement treats laborers unjustly or as mere means, it violates the moral order and natural law. As Aquinas would argue, all human actions, including technological innovation, should be directed toward the good under the governance of prudence and charity. In practice, this means that adopting AI should come with efforts to uphold the dignity of work: finding new roles for displaced workers, sharing the benefits with society, and ensuring that economic progress does not trample upon human welfare. In light of Aquinas’s teaching on human labor, natural law, and virtue, using AI to replace human jobs is morally permissible only if it serves the higher purpose of human flourishing and the common good. Otherwise, it strays from the path of justice and charity, and thus would be considered wrong in the Thomistic moral vision.