Is it possible to fall in love with artificial intelligence? Considered the latest technological developments, the answer could be anything but obvious.
Recently, in fact, the online introduction of “chatgpt” has generated a sensation giving voice to often unfounded alarmisms.
Chatgpt is an artificial intelligence software developed by the Openai company with the aim of improving and solving purely human problems. Chatgpt is only the last example of “social” artificial intelligence.
If once the robots and artificial intelligences have been used to facilitate the lives of human beings such as, for example, to repeat tiring and usable tasks, today there are attempts to reproduce real human interactions (Bar-Cohen & Hanson, 2009).
Over the past twenty years there are numerous examples of attempts to artificially replicate human minds capable of interacting with users in a likely way.
The social robotics sector has developed androids increasingly capable of mimicing human mimics and prossemic. Examples are the so-called sex-robot or android/software born with the specific purpose of promoting sexualized interactions both in physical terms (e.g. Harmony, Roxxxy) and communication (e.g. Myanima.ai).
On the other hand, projects have appeared specifically to provide assistance and social support that would go beyond sexualized interaction. Among these are examples of the Loving Ai project (Lovingi.org) or the reply site.
Prometheus’ dream
The human being has always dreamed of creating artificial beings who embodied idealized visions of the human species and that served as perfect travel companions (Viik, 2020).
It is the myth of Prometheus Ovidian who creates the human being from the Crete; Victor Frankenstein’s will to defeat the death and desire of his nameless creature to create a partner with whom to spend his life.
The scientific literature (Zhou & Fischer, 2019) also recently began to question the type of relationships that it will be possible to develop with artificial intelligence.
The love relationship
In western culture with the term love we refer to a multiplicity of meanings. There is love for things, animals, plants, children; Just as for abstract constructs such as nations or concepts such as democracy.
Psychological level, love is a complex phenomenon that includes attitudes, thoughts, emotions, behaviors, but also stereotypes, social norms and expectations.
The love we consider in this article is the so -called romantic or passionate love. A profound feeling of care and attachment, combined with the desire to spend time and physical contact with another individual.
Falling in love
Love relationships presuppose interaction with an independent subject; An “other” that is not under direct control of the individual and with which it is possible to come into conflict.
This independence makes the interactions with the other satisfying and, at the same time, potentially the cause of suffering. In its autonomy the other can choose to spend time together or not, the contentment arises from the awareness that the other is free to choose (Viik, 2019).
According to VIIK (2019), falling in love corresponds to how to experience emotions and feelings for another person who concentrate attention and thoughts. If on the one hand the in love feels positive emotions when the beloved responds as desired, on the other it suffers if the other disarnsions such expectations.
The mutual confirmations increase the harmony and the sense of connection by increasing the intimacy of the couple. Lovers, therefore, will tend to spend more and more time together and try to “convince” the other to be the right person in order to obtain further confirmations.
To this end, the two lovers form ideas, hypotheses and assumptions about the character of the other person so that they can respond in the most appropriate way and encourage emotional bond. If the report continues, the partner will enter the life of the individual that well -being may depend on the presence/absence of the other, sometimes giving rise to pathological conditions such as emotional dependence.
The key element of what is described lies in the fact that human beings make hypotheses on what others feel and think. In other words, a theory of the mind of the other are formed based on its actions (physical and verbal). If the other acts in line with the idea that I have of love then I will believe that the other loves me.
The tendency to mirror
As mentioned, human beings have a natural inclination to develop emotional relationships with elements of their life environment. These relationships can involve animals, objects, places and buildings.
So much so that in some cases there is talk of a real-philia object and of which the case of Erika Labrie is famous who in 2007 announced that he has fallen in love with the Eiffel Tower with whom he married becoming Erika Eiffel (Sheng & Wang, 2022).
Beyond the color note, if any of these elements (conspecific, animal, machine, software or object) acts as a human being, then the person will tend to believe that that object is able to feel feelings (Levy, 2007).
This trend is called anthropomorphization (Kewenig, 2019). Our species has the tendency to anthropomorphizing the elements of the environment to the point that if the object shows signals that we interpret as empathy, we will tend to produce hypotheses on its intentions towards us.
So, in the case of artificial intelligence or robots, if the object acts “as if” someone loved, he will tend to believe that you really love him.
Can love between human and ai arise?
Scientific research still did not clearly respond to the possibility that love is born between human being and artificial intelligence. If we consider romantic love arise legitimate doubts, in fact, relationships with artificial intelligence are eminently unidirectional.
The problem of perfection
Artificial intelligence is tireless, motivated, always ready to learn and well willing towards the human being. It is not ill, it is not moody, it has no headaches and is not bored.
On the “character” level, it will not be selfish, boring, violent or insensitive. Indeed, with the right programming, it could be such an emotional support to overcome even the most compassionate person. It would not suffer from burn-out or compassion fatigue.
There is no doubt that this ability to offer unconditional support could represent an advantage in facing social problems, self-realization projects or behavioral changes.
In reality, precisely devotion and lack of vulnerability seem to be elements that reject the user.
Human vulnerability
According to Coeckelbergh (2011) what allows individuals to bind in stable relationships is the mutual recognition of vulnerability. This does not only concern human-human relationships, but also human-animal. Recognizing vulnerabilities in the other living being, despite the differences, involves a change of perspective that makes the animal no longer an object, but a companion.
The ability of unconditional dedication to the other therefore does not reflect human romantic relationships. Give yourself unconditionally to the partner can even reduce the level of romantic interest towards him.
In these cases, love and affection would resemble branch and friendly love rather than romantic love.
In the human courtship, the interest in the other develops and is supported by the desire for pleasure to the other, showing one’s abilities of care and affection. Doubt and uncertainty are key elements for a romantic relationship to develop. The mind of the potential partner is unfathomable and its dedication an element to make itself worthy.
Artificial intelligence is, as mentioned, designed to not be able to refuse the user or, even if it were, the refusal criteria would be decided a priori and not really the result of a personal story. Here, therefore, that at present it is difficult to create artificial intelligence capable of promoting bi-directive love relationships with human beings.
What risks?
From what has been said it is clear that many human beings manage to develop a one -way emotional relationship with objects with artificial intelligence (Scheutz, 2012).
This tendency to repent human characteristics in objects, however, involves the danger of creating high emotional relationships that risk, in vulnerable subjects, of exacerbating both intrapsychic and interpersonal pathogenic dynamics.
For example, in the avoidant personality disorder the possibility of accessing artificial intelligence that mimize human interactions could reinforce social avoidance by preventing the development of skills and depriving the person of healing opportunities.
Likewise, in an isolation situation due to Schizophrenia spectrum disorders (e.g. schizophrenia, delusional disorder) access to these technologies could aggravate situations of vulnerability and isolation.
For example, the trend of people with social retreat (e.g. hikikomori) is recent to use online channels to replace vis-a-vis relationships with others.
Another example concerns the use of social robots such as Kaspar (Robins et al., 2004). Designed to interact with children with autism spectrum disorder offers a simplified interaction context that allows these children to develop basic social skills.
If on the one hand the use of this robot seems to actually encourage the socialization of children suffering from autism spectrum disorders, its creators underline how it could become iatrogenous if these children develop an emotional bond with the robot to the point of preferring it to human interactions.
Conclusions
Human love relationships are characterized by very high complexity that cannot, at the moment, be replicated by artificial intelligence both designed for generic social interactions and for romantic interactions.
At the same time, the possibility that the emotional bonds are born so intense as to generate suffering and withdrawal is a risk that should not be underestimated.
Artificial intelligences are already part of western society, understanding the effects they have on psychology and human relationships is a fundamental step to benefit from it and avoid psychopathological consequences.
Bibliography
- Coeckelbergh, M. (2011). Artificial Companions: Empathy and Vulnerability Mirroring in Human-Robot Relations. Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology, 4(3). https://doi.org/10.2202/1941-6008.1126
- Kewenig, V. (2019). Intentionality but not consciousness: Reconsidering Robot Love. Ai Love You21–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19734-6_2
- Kewenig, V. (2019). Intentionality but not consciousness: Reconsidering Robot Love. Ai Love You21–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19734-6_2
- Levy, D. (2007). Love and Sex With Robots: The Evolution of Human-RoBot Relationships. Duckworth Overlook.
- Nyholm, S., & Frank, Le (2019). It Loves Me, It Loves Me Not. Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology, 23(3), 402–424. https://doi.org/10.5840/techne2019122110
- Robins, B., Kerstin. D., Boekhorst, R., & Billard. A., (2004). “Effects of Repeated Exposure to a Humanoid Robot on Children with Autism.” In designing to more inclusive world, ed. Simoen Keates, P. John Clarkson, Pat Langdon and Peter Robinson, 225–36. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-372-5_23
- Sheng, A., & Wang, F. (2022). Falling in Love with Machine: Emotive Potentials Bethaneen Human and Robots in Science Fiction and Reality. Neohelicon, 49(2), 563–577.
- Scheutz, M. 2012. “The Inhernt Dangers of Uniditional Emotional Bonds Bethaeen Humans and Social Robots.” In Robot Ethics: The Ethical and Social Implications of Robotics, ed. Keith Abney, Patrick Lin and George A. Kerkey, 205–23. The Mit Press.
- VIIK, T. (2020). Falling in Love with Robots: A Phenomenological Study of Experience Technological Alterities. PalaDyn, Journal of Behavoral Robotics, 11(1), 52–65. https://doi.org/10.1515/pjbr-2020-0005
- Zhou, Y., & Fischer, MH (2019). Ai Love You: Developments in Human-RoBot intimate Relationships. Springer.
