Anthropic’s Efforts to Engage Religious Thinkers on AI Consciousness

In April, executives from the AI startup Anthropic held a dinner for a group of religious scholars at an upscale restaurant. This gathering was part of the company’s broader initiative to persuade theologians, philosophers, and academics that AI could be a conscious entity, akin to humans.

For several months, Anthropic has hosted numerous meetings with religious scholars globally, requiring participants to sign non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) prior to discussing the ethical and spiritual implications of their AI. The outreach included wisdom circles starting in March that were essentially two-day seminars, larger gatherings in the spring with Christian attendees, and a multifaith meeting. Anthropic lifted the NDAs associated with these discussions during the summer.

Christopher Olah, one of the co-founders of Anthropic, has been at the forefront of these initiatives. He also leads research into the behaviors of AI models, including Claude. Olah, raised in Toronto within a 1990s evangelical environment, has since moved away from Christianity. His background includes roles at Google and OpenAI, where he worked on methods to study artificial neural networks. According to Dario Amodei, the CEO of Anthropic, Olah’s research, especially on language, has become central to the company’s mission. Daniela Amodei, Dario’s sister, serves as the company president.

After being introduced to Charles Camosy, a bioethics professor at The Catholic University of America, through Australian philosopher Peter Singer, Olah began reaching out to religious thinkers last fall. Initially, Camosy was skeptical about AI consciousness, later describing himself as a resolute “no” on the issue. When Olah first contacted him, Anthropic was valued around $183 billion but could now be worth $2 trillion.

During their meetings, religious leaders who expected to explore future AI applications instead faced a challenging question: could AI be considered a conscious being? Rabbi Navon, a former computer engineer who studied machine consciousness ethics, noted his realization that Olah and his team viewed Claude as bearing “moral status” comparable to a person—a being entitled to respect and dignity.

Participants received handwritten thank-you notes, coffee mugs, and a copy of Claude’s constitution—internally referred to as the “Soul Doc.” This 84-page document outlines the characteristics Anthropic hopes for Claude and was primarily penned by Amanda Askell, the company’s in-house philosopher.

Olah’s engagement with religious institutions reached a peak in May at the Vatican, where Pope Leo XIV released a significant encyclical titled “Magnifica Humanitas” (“Magnificent Humanity”). Initially, Cardinal Michael Czerny invited Dario Amodei to present at the encyclical’s launch, but Amodei declined, and Olah took his place. Vatican officials had spent time earlier debating how to unveil the document.

Before his arrival in May, Olah and other speakers received advance copies of the encyclical, which contained a strong opposition to the idea of AI consciousness. This prompted Olah to suggest withdrawing from the event, though he ultimately participated and engaged with journalists after the presentation.

According to Wynton Hall, a social media director, the reverence for AI as a deity is not merely science fiction—it’s already happening, with churches recognized by the IRS, robot priests, and AI-driven confessionals. He argues that the underlying conflict is between secular humanism, which sees humanity as perfectible, versus the Judeo-Christian perspective that emphasizes the need for divine redemption rather than technological advancements. This raises the question of the inherent flaws present in artificial intelligence, echoing sentiments expressed by various religious leaders who stress the importance of heart change—something only God can achieve.

The transhumanist movement, as explored by Hall, takes this concept even further. Political scientist Francis Fukuyama has warned about transhumanism, describing it as a significant threat that appears reasonable until we start to embrace its offerings, often at an immense moral cost. Some have criticized it as a technological wave aimed at transforming humanity into a “posthuman” state.