Those gathered at Dartmouth that summer of 1956 had the brilliant idea of putting into circulation the term Artificial Intelligence, which was to become a great success as the years went by. However, to have officially coined the notion of Artificial Intelligence was a poetic license, a way of speaking: it was a creative way of searching, from analogy, for a name to baptize a creature, when for the time being it was nothing more than a project of dreaming scientists.

Properly speaking, only human beings have intelligence. Without any prurient boast of any kind -we know it for a fact, we are fragile and our intelligence is limited, contingent, hyperbolic and fallible-, the objective fact is that we are the only beings endowed with those logical and noetic structures; characteristics that singularize us and differentiate us from the rest of living beings and that constitute anthropological features that configure us, precisely, as subjects capable of intellection. That is: to read within, which in Latin means the combination of the adverb intus -within- and the verb legere - to read. In other words, intelligence constitutes an essential characteristic of the being that is capable of reading within and extrapolating. But to read what? and from where? To make a long story short, we will say that what we are talking about is to read what is universal, evoked from the concrete.

Let us give an example: before me I have this glass of fresh water but I could well have that other glass of cider. One or the other comes to me through sight and touch: I apprehend them through the senses. Now, how is it possible that, starting from that simple apprehension, one succeeds in passing from concrete objects to the universal concept of glass, if there is no physical sense to grasp the universal "glass"? The answer seems clear: If, starting from the senses, we can understand, it is possible to assume that in addition to sensibility we have intelligence; that is, something human, exclusively human; something spiritual and, never more properly said, connected with a meta-physical and ultra-biological dimension of the personal living being. How this can take place is an intricate matter that we cannot go into at this time. It is an exciting problem to whose approach and attempted answer some of the greatest minds in the history of philosophy have devoted great effort.

Having said this, let us move forward in our discourse by formulating three theses that will serve as a frame of reference for us to face these new realities with a positive spirit and a well-discerned attitude. In doing so, we seek to avert a twofold danger that we observe in public opinion more often than we would like. On the one hand, that represented by the risk of being fascinated - and trapped! - in a naive and hasty manner by the goodness and benefits that the development of Artificial Intelligence could end up bringing with it, if it is oriented from Axiology and placed at the service of all people and of the whole person.

The other stumbling block, the opposite of technophilia, is that of an irrational technophobia, typical of the catastrophic and hopeless discourse that we do not share. And this despite the fact that fear is certainly more than justified: it stems from the fear of a polymorphic cybercriminality and, above all, from the risk that the leadership in the development of Artificial Intelligence will end up in the hands of unscrupulous people and to the greatest glory of spurious interests.

Let us therefore state the promised theses and let the reader draw the theoretical consequences and practical applications from them:

1. Artificial Intelligence is a human product and, as such, can be used for good just as it could be used for evil.
2. Artificial Intelligence in its present state - and, in all probability, even more so in the future - is, at the same time, a producer of humanity, not only because it transforms civilizations and cultures, but also because it could even give rise to the emergence of new trans or posthuman entities.
3. Artificial Intelligence is an objective reality that we must strive to understand in depth, from a multidisciplinary approach that, going beyond the technocratic narrative, takes into consideration other equally necessary voices: political, legal and ethical.

As we can see, conscience and ethical reasoning with a view to a prudent exercise of freedom are essential elements in the face of the possibilities offered by Artificial Intelligence. Consequently, people endowed with Natural Intelligence have a voice to say and an attitude to take in favor of the human and the responsible use of Artificial Intelligence.

Moreover, a company that wants to keep up with the times will necessarily have to deploy what, by analogy, could be called Business Intelligence. A characteristic that consists of learning to read the signs of the times - the intus/legere of Human Intelligence. In this case, the company would have to be able to understand the social and cultural reality in order to adapt well - strategically, structurally and organizationally - not only to the demands of the market but, above all, to the aspirations and expectations of society as a whole, if not of the entire human race, globally considered and framed, moreover, in an ecological environment that is already too wounded.

Here the will to take advantage of Artificial Intelligence in favor of the work and ensure that the production of humanity that it can bring to effect, ends up resulting in the resolution of some of the most intricate problems that we have on the agenda of the moment in which we live: the environmental challenge, on the one hand; and the achievement of a stable peace guaranteed by justice and respect for the dignity of people, on the other. The condition of possibility is twofold: Human Intelligence and the deployment of Business Intelligence.