Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Writers Notebook Sophia Razavi
Writers Notebook Sophia Razavi
The Human Experience: Emotions, Ephemerality, and the Entanglement with AI- Sophia Razavi
our instinctual reply might most likely consist of a slight eye-roll and an inner-dialogue
Y
of:Obviously. What kind of question is that?
umans are not only able to feel and experience, but rationalize and learn, consequently
H
perceiving the world differently from another. This diversity is naturally due to the genetic,
environmental, and biological predispositions we are brought into this world with. And yet, we
all share the same phenomena of experiencing all kinds of emotions, regardless of what factors
your specific identity may play a role in determining your reality.
his shared experience is pretty much unavoidable; no matter how someone may try to
T
avoid feelings or thoughts they are uncomfortable with, they will always cycle back at one point.
As Brian Doyle writes inJoyas Voladoras, “You canbrick up your heart as stout and tight and
hard and cold and impregnable as you possibly can and down it comes in an instant, felled by a
woman’s second glance, a child’s apple breath, the shatter of glass in the road, the wordsI have
something to tell you.” Regardless of what couldbe considered ‘bad’ or ‘good’ in regards to
emotions or any fact of life, there seems to reside an underlying beauty.It could be reasonable to
hypothesize that life is defined by the ability to sense and perceive the world around us, along
with the uniqueness each human being holds and the rarity of each experience. Intertwined with
thinking, rationalizing, and experiencing moments through our five senses, the marvel of feeling
consequent emotions ultimately creates a remarkable phenomena: the human experience.
s o to what extent can AI truly encompass someone’s unique soul, and how might these creations
affect the human experience of those still on our Earth?
hatbots of dead loved ones were created to alleviate the pain and tremendous grief one
C
goes through after losing a loved one. Two main dilemmas arise: Just how authentic could a
mirrored replica of a human being truly be? And would this be diverting from part of the human
experience to feel the entire scope of emotions?
Source: Vox
ypothetically, to speak or get in touch with a version of a dead loved one could be
H
emotionally soothing, but only if the copy really does seem like their ‘presence.’ Grief chat bots
only use a ‘summary’ of who you really are; texts, videos, pictures, and any kind of data points
to help it create a shadow of the person you really are. It does not, and cannot know everything
about you… or can it? If what drives human individuality and existence is our diverse identities,
then who would that ‘version’ of you be?
I n aCNBC article, Elon Musk disputes the idea thathuman individuality is a rarity, a
belief based from his endeavors to preserve the human consciousness through artificial
intelligence. Musk said in an interview that “we could download the things that we believe make
ourselves so unique… as far as preserving our memories, our personality, I think we could do
that.” Now, whether or not scientific advances have made it thus far to create something like this,
we have perhaps reached a halfway point. In apublishingby the San Francisco Chronicle, author
Jason Fagone delves into the experience of a man named Joshua who decided to try out a grief
chat bot designed to process and output the character of a human; in this case, it would attempt to
4
r eplicate Joshua’s passed lover. Chatbots like this have been described as an innovation “so good
at impersonating humans that its designer - OpenAI… has largely kept it under wraps.” Joshua
was able to experience the essence of his loved one from a chatbot so creepily similar, that it was
paralleled to “paintings or essays-algorithmic sketches that preserved some spark of an
extraordinary person.” So, it does seem that AI may indeed have the capabilities to encapsulate
‘some spark’ of the original human. If that is the case, then what differentiates a human being
from their successive artificial creation? Would the uniqueness human beings seem to embody
not be a factor of determining the core concepts of life?
Source: SF Chronicle
I n any case, the laws of nature and time, dictating that there must be both a beginning and
an ending to everything, would be defied. Can someone’s existence truly be infinitely prolonged?
As of today’s day and age, to try and dance around observable laws and inevitabilities like death
cannot be sustainable. Kneese points out how the lifespan of something online, AI or not,
“requires vast resources, including raw materials, water, and energy pointing to the folly of
maintaining chatbots of the dead in the face of catastrophic climate change.” Needing immense
amounts of resources and being financially costly, any creation involved with such would only
exist for a short period of time, AI creations included. As a result, manufacturers and producers
must take account of these factors in regards to the success of their company, and consequently
generate an end-date to the lifespan of these grief chatbots.
5
he fact that someone else, someone who has no relation with the deceased, would be in
T
charge of the consequent grief chatbot’s life and death, could be extremely problematic for those
who do have connections. If someone is mourning their dead loved one and uses the chatbot that
has a marked ending they cannot control, they may end up grieving two ‘deaths,’ and
unpredictable psychological results. So, would it be wise to try and divert around the inevitable
experiences of loss and grief?
I t may feel nice in the moment to prolong someone’s life, to prolong the feeling of still
having them, the feelings of warmth and love, and deny the feelings of loss and grief. But by
seeking to defy the natural order of life, death, and inevitable decay, are we not also destroying
the profound beauty of life’s impermanence? We cannot truly consider ourselves to be alive if we
do not allow ourselves to experience the full scope of emotions and thoughts the human mind
lends itself to offer.Albert Einstein, in his essay“T he World As I See It,” expresses that“The
most beautiful experience we can have is the mysterious… Whoever does not know it and can no
longer wonder, no longer marvel, is as good as dead, and his eyes are dimmed.” Just because we
candivert around ‘the mysterious,’-death, fear, grief,any phenomena that we do not understand
nor can-does not mean that weshould. The way we feel,process, and think, has to exist with the
opposite.To try and avoid grief, loss, and the transienceof life in an attempt to solely feel the
positive and comfortable aspects of our world would only subject one to an unfulfilled life. To be
granted the gift of dying, the gift of grief, the gift of pain, simply affirms we are alive. Stripping
away elements of the roots of our soul only exposes us to a myriad of potential psychological
obstructions one could not fully predict.
his is the best case scenario-experiencing possible psychological effects that stems from
T
an AI creationsuccessfullymatching the originalhuman in some way. But what if a misaligned
recreation of someone you know is produced? How would that affect the people connected to
them?
e can see the potential predictions in a Black Mirror episode called “Be Right Back.”
W
Although fictional, Black Mirror is a tv series that predicts near-future possibilities and dystopian
outcomes through dramatic stories that sometimes have not occurred (yet). In this episode, a
woman’s partner, someone she loved so deeply, passed away. Later on, she found out that there
was a service that had the ability to ‘reconstruct’ an AI model of him through pretty much the
same methods done for the chatbot. At first, everything was great. But as she continued to talk
and spend more time with him, she could not shake the chilling reality that there were
dissimilarities in the model compared to her actual partner. This misalignment bothered her so
deeply that she demanded the AI to ‘commit suicide.’
6
fter all, any impurity in a replica, however small, possesses the weight of inflicting
A
extreme emotional damage to the living. Given that the artificial duplicate of someone would
solely be based on fragments of data points inputted into a processor, the chance for such
‘mistake’ would be very high. How would the data be collected, and would such a series of
information truly define someone’s identity?
et us widen the scope of our view on this matter. We all own pieces of technology,
L
whether it be phones, laptops, cameras, or others. And on these devices, we portray some version
of ourselves, whether it is our full authentic selves that exist in the real world, or some aspect
that may or may not exist. In any case, this portrayal of self would be defined by the perspectives
of others, including ourselves, thus making it biased. How well can the technology we own really
showcase our true identity? And what if the identity we show online consists of pieces of self we
prefer remain hidden?
he process of recreating a person that dies involves their personal data to be picked
T
through and revealed. Unfortunately, someone who has passed may not have wished for such
preservation of self. Not only is this a violation of privacy, but it could also have detrimental
effects to the family of the deceased. Information that may best stay private could be exploited,
along with the memory of the person they were. “Identity… is not something that we innately
possess and reveal, but something we understand through narratives provided to us by others,”
author Jia Tolentino expresses in her book, “TrickMirror: Reflections on Self-Delusion.”
Someone’s entire identity cannot be well-defined, nor be fully narrated through what they
portray, or do not, online. The identity of the person who has passed, once perceived in a certain
way by loved ones, would now become altered and bare. On top of that, their loved ones would
consequently be burdened by millions of questions and thoughts would never get answered.
n the other hand, maybe some would want or have no issue with their data being used.
O
Unless explicitly said, there would be no way of knowing whether that is true for someone or
not. Therefore, people should be given a chance to consent to the revelation of their personal data
while they are still living, but that still does not change the outcome for those who have already
died and had their data sorted, even though they never gave consent.
I n any case, the amount of potential issues to everyone involved is monumental, and that
only covers what we can predict and observe. The quality of what it means to be alive would
thus decline from trying to bend the fundamental laws of nature and the full human experience.
Perhaps, in trying to elude the natural processes of life, death, and emotions, repercussions must
coexist as well.
haping our perceptions and interactions with the world around us, life is a series of
S
fleeting moments composed of the good, the bad, and the gray. Think about the people, places,
and moments that have come and gone, leaving behind memories, traces of laughter, colors,
moments, ideas, in our minds. From the moment we are born, we continue along a trajectory that
is marked by change, loss, and eventual decay. This path is a crux of existence, as, “Everyone
knows decay has a purpose… More elegantly: death iswhat gives life shape,” (Miles Klee,Ever
After: Solving the Problem of Mortality). The question,'Are you alive?' confronts us not only
with what ‘life’ might really mean, but also with its fragile ephemerality. Everything we hold
dear to our hearts, or try so hard to forget, is subject to the passage of time, susceptible to the
inevitable processes of decay. Yet, it is within this fragility that the beauty of life resides. We
cherish each moment knowing that it is temporary and that it will eventually fade into a distant
reverie of a memory. And it is only when they are accompanied with the full scope of every
emotion that we can fully understand the enigma of what it means to be living.
8
Works Cited
Brooker, Charlie. “‘Black Mirror’ Be Right Back.” Edited by Owen Harris,IMDb, IMDb.com,
Doyle, Brian. “Joyas Voladoras.”The American Scholar,Phi Beta Kappa, 2 Dec. 2019.
Fagone, Jason. “He Couldn’t Get over His Fiancee’s Death. so He Brought Her ...”The Jessica
Simulation: Love and Loss in the Age of A.I., SanFrancisco Chronicle, 23 July 2021.
Kneese, Tamara. “Using Generative AI to Resurrect the Dead Will Create a Burden for the
Sauer, Megan. “Elon Musk Says Humans Could Eventually Download Their Brains Into Robots
— and Grimes Thinks Jeff Bezos Would Do It.”CNBC,9 Apr. 2022,
www.cnbc.com/2022/04/08/elon-musk-humans-could-eventually-download-their-brains-i
nto-robots.html.
Tolentino, Jia.Trick Mirror: Reflections on Self-Delusion. Vol. 42, no. 2, 2020, pp. 33–35,
dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=7240901.