A Theistic Alternative to Secular Human Rights Theories: Addressing the Crisis of Human Rights in the Age of AI

This article argues that responding adequately to the crisis of human rights in the age of artificial intelligence requires a theistic alternative to secular human rights theories. As AI systems increasingly classify, rank, and govern human beings according to measurable performance, utility, predictability, and social significance, longstanding forms of inequality are intensified through unequal access, algorithmic bias, data colonialism, and the marginalization of vulnerable populations. Although contemporary AI ethics frameworks frequently presuppose human rights as their normative basis, this article contends that the secular accounts of human dignity underlying such frameworks often lack the resources to sustain a genuinely universal and non-discriminatory conception of human worth. To develop this argument, the article first examines concrete forms of human rights violation in the age of AI and then turns to major secular attempts to ground human rights. In dialogue with Nicolas Wolterstorff, it argues that capacity-based theories such as those of Kant, Dworkin, and Gewirth remain vulnerable to exclusion because they ground dignity in distinctively human capacities that are unevenly distributed or variably exercised. In dialogue with Michael Perry, it further argues that secular approaches grounded in impartiality, compassion, or evolved sociality fail to overcome the moral limits of “us-ism,” in which concern remains partial and bounded. As an alternative, the article proposes a theistic account of human rights centered on divine love. Drawing especially on Wolterstorff, it argues that human worth is grounded not in rational capacity, social recognition, or moral achievement, but in God’s unconditional love for every human being. In critical engagement with John Milbank, the article finally contends that such a theistic grounding of rights need not undermine the common good but can instead provide a more adequate moral foundation for confronting the human rights crisis intensified by AI.