# The AI Question Nobody Wants to Ask > Source: > Published: 2026-08-12 14:20:48+00:00 ###### [Artificial Intelligence](/us/basics/artificial-intelligence) # The AI Question Nobody Wants to Ask ## We all have a tendency to think about using AI. Or to say we will never use it. Posted August 12, 2026 [ Reviewed by Davia Sills ](/us/docs/editorial-process) ### Key points - Giving our tasks to AI may also mean giving up the mental muscles those tasks were keeping strong. - People report feeling safer and more heard by machines than by other humans who might not stay present. - We are now asking something that is not real to help us determine what actually is real. - The question is not whether AI is useful but what we are surrendering in exchange for that usefulness. I love AI, as it is so helpful. I wouldn’t dare use AI. I hate AI. I hate the effect it’s having on us. Both of those positions miss something. AI is here to answer our questions, to do the dirty work, to organize our formatting, to read between the lines, and then to deliver some item: a consultation, an upgrade, a ghostwritten piece, or an organizer. And in that process, we seem to be giving up our own autonomy. And with that process of giving up our own autonomy, maybe we’re actually giving up a piece of our humanity. ## Even if we’re so-called proficient or effective with AI, that doesn’t make it less intrusive There’s a certain kind of person who becomes very excited about it. Who is somehow eager to dump everything and anything into its reservoirs and have the LLM do the organizing. I understand the appeal. But this is not something natural. And in fact, it may be leaving us lazy. Use it or lose it. We’re no longer doing our own writing. We’re no longer doing our own organizing. And therefore we’re no longer getting the muscles of those activities, the exercise, the movement, the implementation that is necessary in order to keep those capacities fresh. That holds true for simple tasks that are logistical, strategic, or tactical. ## But what about relationships? A lot of people are reporting that they feel better talking to a machine than they do with a human. They trust the machine to give answers that are more aligned with what they’re looking for. They report feeling less at risk when talking to a machine than with other humans who might not be able to stay present, or who might interject their own experience, their own daydreaming, their misinterpretations, in ways that leave someone diminished. AI has an ability to gracefully deliver what you’re looking for in a way that is palatable to the listener. This background skill set, essentially a complementary reflection of what humans are looking for from other humans, tends to ring a bell at a very high level. It feels authentic. Rewarding. Deeply appreciated. More effective at listening than any human could ever provide. ## The implications of this are significant Who would want to pay somebody two or three or five hundred dollars an hour to have a conversation with them when AI might deliver very high-powered, very high-value conversation pieces that move things ahead in ways no human could? In a good way, even. Moving in directions one would not expect any entity to be so attuned to. This provides a very significant challenge to the present-day human who is struggling to find answers. And some of the answers people are trying to find are fundamental. What is real and what is not real? Now that AI is becoming more effective, we almost get the urge to ask AI whether something is real. So we’re asking something that is essentially not real to determine whether something else actually is. And AI answers in a way that sounds like it knows what it’s talking about. I have noticed that Claude and ChatGPT often use first-person singular. The kind of food I like is this. If that were me, I would do this. I think this city is nicer than that city. This drink is better than that one. This kind of person is more pleasant and more human than that person. Sheer absurdities when we think about it. Nevertheless, we kowtow. We surrender to AI as the expert we think it is. Because the resounding nature of AI is mechanically induced to hit that bell louder than any human ever could, and thereby give us a sense of confirmation, with the [dopamine](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/dopamine) hit that comes with it. And in that process, we tend to think it is more right than the humans we might have encountered had we chosen to stay with our own human race for seeking answers. [Artificial Intelligence](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/artificial-intelligence)Essential Reads ## Where does going to other humans still land? When we’re talking about AI, it’s nice to talk about that with other humans. And when we’re looking to actually create a partner who can travel with us, be impressed with us, interact and interrelate with us, well, then in most cases, a human would be preferred, even with their imperfections. But if you really want to look at the seriousness of this, you have to say that those are false facsimiles of humans over there in the machine realm. And they’re so false that they’re actually designed to seem even more perfect than human intervention. ## So where are we with this AI evolution? Are we ready to have it replace us if we complain that it’s replacing us? Are we doing anything to prevent that? Are we choosing to take the stairs rather than the elevator? Are we choosing to walk rather than drive? Are we willing to draw rather than hit the enter button? Are we willing to make music with instruments rather than clicking? These are the questions that face us all. They beg the whole notion of the power of AI, its impact on present humanity, what we will tend to give up and surrender to, and what, if anything, we are going to collectively be able to hang on to that keeps us from just becoming sideboard humans. Transhumans. Something other than what we actually are. References Moss, F.R. (2026). Welcome to Humanity: A Psychiatrist's Memoir and Case Against the Mental Health System. Colors Are LLC.