Qualitative analysis reveals AI's influence on colour choices in Christianity, Islam, and African Traditional Religion, suggesting ethical integration.
This study investigates how Artificial Intelligence (AI) is influencing the interpretation and application of religious colour symbolism in Nigeria, focusing on Christianity, Islam, and African Traditional Religion. Colours have long carried deep theological, ritual, and cultural significance in these traditions, yet digital technologies now shape how they are presented and perceived. The research examines the extent to which AI tools affect colour selection in religious texts, worship environments, and digital media, and how these choices may overlook indigenous cultural meanings. A qualitative approach was employed, using interviews, observations, and visual analysis. Participants included 30 Christian clergy and worship leaders (Anglican, Catholic, Pentecostal, and Aladura), 30 Muslim scholars and religious artists, 30 traditional practitioners rooted in Yoruba heritage, and 30 designers or software users engaged in AI-driven cultural projects. Purposive sampling ensured the involvement of individuals with direct experience in religious symbolism and familiarity with technological applications. Findings reveal significant differences across generations, denominations, and urban–rural contexts. Younger and urban participants tended to favour visually attractive and commercially oriented colour schemes, sometimes at the expense of sacred meaning. This has generated tensions between theological interpretation and media appeal, as well as concerns about cultural displacement and the transfer of symbolic authority from religious leaders to software developers. The study concludes that AI can contribute positively to the preservation and renewal of religious symbolism if informed by cultural sensitivity and theological insight. It proposes an ethical framework for integrating AI into religious practice while safeguarding Nigeria’s diverse spiritual heritage.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
David et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: