Authors : Nomenjanahary Jenny Patrick

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 5 - May

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/5n8ht8k9

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/464vypwj

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26May467

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : The relationship between human intelligence and artificial intelligence (AI) is often framed competitively, but a rigorous comparative analysis reveals fundamental differences in origin, substrate, consciousness, embodiment, intentionality, emotionality, creativity, ethical reasoning, learning efficiency, autonomy, and spiritual capacity. Drawing on theological perspectives (Okoronkwo & Dike, 2025; Olaore et al., 2014), empirical AI studies (Chen et al., 2025; Lima et al., 2023), and computational cognitive science (Boden, 2004), this study demonstrates that AI surpasses human intelligence in speed and pattern recognition yet lacks subjective experience (qualia), intentionality, emotional depth, embodiment, and moral agency. As Olaore et al. (2014) state, "the limitation of AI should be easily understood since it stems from a 'limited' being, human" (p. 2). Boden (2004) adds that while AI can "appear to be creative" through exploratory processes, genuine creativity requires "conscious self-reflection" and evaluation (p. 21). The article concludes that human and artificial intelligences are incommensurable, belonging to different ontological orders, and that the future lies in complementarity, not replacement. A schematic visualization of hypothetical intelligence evolution (Figures 1 and 2) illustrates task-specific performance trends while underscoring qualitative incommensurability.

Keywords : Human Intelligence; Artificial Intelligence; Consciousness; Embodiment; Intentionality; Qualia; Moral Agency; Complementarity; Imago Dei.

References :

1. Aquinas, S. T. (2012). Summa Theologica Part I ("Prima Pars"): Extended annotated edition. Jazzybee Verlag. (Original work published 13th century)
2. Boden, M. A. (2004). The creative mind: Myths and mechanisms (2nd ed.). Routledge.
3. Calvin, J. (2009). Institutes of the Christian religion: The first English version of the 1541 French edition. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing. (Original work published 1536)
4. Chen, Y., Wang, Y., Wüstenberg, T., Kizilcec, R. F., Fan, Y., Li, Y., Lu, B., Yuan, M., Zhang, J., Zhang, Z., Geldsetzer, P., Chen, S., & Bärnighausen, T. (2025). Effects of generative artificial intelligence on cognitive effort and task performance: Study protocol for a randomized controlled experiment among college students. Trials, 26(1), 244. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-025-08950-x
5. Lima, B. C. D. S., Omar, N., Avansi, I., Castro, L. N. de, & Silveira, I. F. (2023). Use of artificial intelligence in biblical citation recommendations in the New Testament. Revista Científica Multidisciplinar Núcleo do Conhecimento, 8(7), 123–143.
6. Okoronkwo, M. E., & Dike, U. A. (2025). Ethics of artificial intelligence and the Judeo-Christian practices: Toward a theology of thinking machine. Futurity Philosophy, 4(1), 71–85. https://doi.org/10.57125/FP.2025.03.30.05
7. Olaore, I. B., Nwosu, J. C., Oladipo, S., & Oyenuqa, E. O. (2014). Artificial intelligence (AI): The Christian perspective. Journal of Information Engineering and Applications, 4(11), 94–100.
8. Simmerlein, J., & Tretter, M. (2024). Robots in religious practices: A review. Theology and Science, 22(2), 255–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/14746700.2024.2351639