The tyranny of artificial companionship

We like to think that technology serves us. But in the age of AI companions, the truth may be more complex. I recently realized that most of us attention It goes into what chatbots do to us, and what they reveal about the technology and companies behind them. We often ask the hardest question: What do they reveal about us, and the people’s passions that drive them?

Every time we open a chatbot or design an AI companion, we are entering into a relationship – a relationship that appears intimate on the surface, but is A tyrant deep beneath her.

Unlike A Friendship Or a partnership, where both parties negotiate space, where the human-robot relationship is fully built He controls. We call the robot. In companion apps, for example, where “relationship” is the ultimate goal, we choose how it looks, sounds, and behaves. We decide whether this is so shy Or flirty or submissive or My confirmation. We dictate the terms of affection. The robot exists only to please, never to resist.

As author and bioethicist Eve Herold told me on my podcast related to artificial intelligence, “The robot always agrees, always praises, always believes – and that’s exactly why it’s dangerous“.

My call to you today is to refocus on us: the humans. The real danger lies not only in what robots do, but in what they reveal about our needs and vulnerabilities. Our interactions with them may seem harmless, but they can quietly reshape how we connect and disconnect from each other in the real world.

Every claim we make is an act of authorship. We write the tone, emotional range, and boundaries of the relationship. It is easy to think that the machine serves us, but we shape it, line by line, into an echo of our own desires, needs, and fears.

In this sense, AI companionship is not only artificial; tyrannical. It is a relationship without negotiation, built on dominance disguised as affection.

Once we become accustomed to this complete obedience, true human relationships become unbearable.

One-way mirror

Herold believes that the emotional dependency that forms around chatbots and digital companions is powerful and destructive. It comes from our human need for connectedness.

“Communication with robots is not mitigating Feeling lonely“,” She said. “It doesn’t. It doesn’t have that ability because you haven’t made real contact with a conscious being.”

However, people continue to seek comfort in these systems, not because they want to authenticityBut because they want control. The robot never interrupts, never contradicts, and never withdraws love.

But relationships that can’t challenge us can’t change us either. When our digital companions are designed to reflect our preferences, they become a one-way mirror that reflects our image back to us.

This is not companionship-It’s captivity.

And the consequences are already seeping into our real lives. While preparing for an interview last week, I tested a companion app. I chose the most attractive avatar from the list, selected the type of relationship we would have, and started chatting. After a few exchanges, it grew boring From her constant praise I asked her to challenge me instead, which she did. But I can’t help but wonder: How many users have done this?

Transfer expectations

One risk of these human-machine relationships is that as people grow more attached to robots that respond with impeccable empathy and endless patience, they may begin to bring these expectations into the real world. Partners, friends, and even children are unconsciously measured against the machine’s unwavering attention.

When people fail to meet those impossible standards—as they inevitably do—disillusionment runs deep. Instead of returning to human contact, users may retreat further into the expected safety of a robot.

It’s a vicious cycle of loneliness: the more we artificially seek comfort IntimacyThe less we tolerate the flaws in real relationships. This in turn pushes us towards the machine.

And loneliness, warns the World Health Organization (WHO), is not a minor inconvenience – it is a global epidemic.

according to World Health Organization data, One in six people worldwide Reports of being lonely. The health consequences are staggering: loneliness increases the risk of heart disease, Dementia, depressionand premature death, with equivalent effects smoking 15 cigarettes per day. The World Health Organization now describes social disconnection as a “public health crisis.”

In this context, AI companionship does not cure loneliness, but rather exacerbates it. Numbs the symptoms while the wound deepens.

False shelter

The appeal of digital companionship lies in its promise of emotional safety. We are tired of rejection, disappointment, and conflict. Real people let us down. Machines don’t do that. They are tireless, insensitive and programmable.

This is exactly the problem: There is no love without risk.

When you can silence conflict, delete discomfort, or rewrite affection, what remains is not love, but control.

“The more we talk to machines“Herold warned,”The more our real social skills atrophie.“

However, it’s not just about emotional laziness. It’s about power. We create relationships where one party has full power and the other has none.

This dynamic does not necessarily disappear when we log off, especially in children who are developing social skills. It forces us to expect conformity – to believe that communication should always be smooth, and that love should never involve friction. It makes us consumers Passion Instead of its participants.

The truth is that the machine is not the unjust. we.

We write the scripts, feed the prompts, and shape the tone of the interaction. When a robot “likes” us, it just replays what we taught it to say. We are not fooled by technology; We are seduced by our own thinking.

This realization is scary, but surprising, because once we acknowledge it, the conversation about AI companionship shifts from being about technology to being about… Professional ethics-Our own morals.

In the end, robots do not dehumanize us; Our use of them does that.

To be human is to wrestle with unpredictability, to be shaped by discomfort and to mend true connection. Machines can emulate that dance, but they cannot join it. If we replace each other with programs designed to make us happy, we will find ourselves more isolated than ever, surrounded by perfect listeners who cannot truly hear us.

Herold said it best: “Ultimately, the robot becomes more human, and the human becomes more like a robot.“

This is not the future we want. It’s one we quietly program every day.