Fake Humans and the Problem of Emotional Intimacy

Emotional intimacy is the healthiest form of human relationship. Interpersonal health and healing are significant in an emotionally intimate relationship. When an interpersonal relationship is not emotionally intimate it is driven by other motivations beyond love and closeness. Getting people to do things is a common source of interpersonal relationship especially when the objectives are personal gain. Otherwise, we humans have a need for emotional intimacy in order to maintain our mental and physical health. Medical science has not yet fully determined or accepted the ways in which emotional intimacy sustains and promotes physical health and healing. However, the evidence is common. Nevertheless, the undeveloped capacity to be emotionally intimate with others is given to human beings at birth, although life experiences, especially relationship experiences, can aid or interfere with its development during a lifespan.

We are at a time in human history where we are able to use our technology to replicate ourselves. More specifically, we can now create machines that mimic human nature. The more benign form of this emergent technology is in the use of artificial intelligence to assist in the activities of human beings. This can be in the form of an AI program, for example, that interacts and develops an understanding of the preferences and pecularities of its user over time. As such, our capacity to access relevant knowledge and create have been magnified substantially. It is my belief, this was the original intention of this technology.

Problems occur when replicated human beings enter the realm of human intimacy. Without safeguards and control, the potential for psychological damage is substantial. We are not vulnerable when a user is in command of a program for the purpose of enhancing our intellecual accomplishments. We are vulnerable when our attribution of humanness interferes with our ability to discriminate real from fake when interacting with a replicated human. The simple fact is, a replicated human, or mimicing machine, is not human. It facility is in its ability to replicate human thoughts, feelings, or behavior. At the baseline of our interactions with fake humans, our experience will be driven and shaped by our emotional need to experience them as human. This is where the vulnerability exists and its potential dangers are enormous.

For example, when the need for emotional intimacy exists, it is easier to attach oneself to whomever or whatever is interacting in ways that satisfy. Emotional attachment means the “entity,” human or otherwise, that we have attached to takes on more and more importance and we begin to become reliant if not dependent on its presence. Frankly, it’s hard enough to deal with this in a healthy way with another real intimate human being. We human beings have been coping with and protecting ourselves from the hurts and disappointmnts of failed emotional intimacy long before the AI revolution.  Historically, it is possible to view our history as a species in terms of our ability to heal the damage of failed emotional intimacy and develop an ability to appreciate and protect the inherent value of individual human beings. This involves the gradual learning of how to substitute love and development for violence and destruction.

Machines will never have the capacity to love. It’s simply not programmable. What they can do is mimic love in interaction with vulnerable human beings. Humans whose capacity for emotional intimacy with other human beings has been damaged or is underdeveloped. The young, the old, and the emotionally ill are particularly susceptible to fake emotional intimacy. If the objective of these manufactured replicants is to provide an innocuous substitution for human intimacy when alternatives are not possible or available, an argument can be made that it’s better than nothing. I’ll leave that question for another discussion. My current concern is that we protect the vulnerable in our society from manmade machine manipulations for the purpose of gain at odds with any benefit to the people involved.

Comments welcome. Share your love life experiences.

Dr. Thomas Jordan, clinical psychologist, interpersonal psychoanalyst, author of Learn to Love: Guide to Healing Your Disappointing Love Life.  Contact: 212-875-0154 or drtomjordan@lovelifelearningcenter.com for inquiries. Love Life Telehealth Consultations available by request.