Recent advances in artificial intelligence and robotics suggest that caregiving could eventually be automated at scale, given that machines can already monitor vitals, optimize treatments, and simulate empathic dialogue. However, this paper argues that such a view rests on a conceptual error: reducing caregiving to mere task execution. By distinguishing between Functional Care (measurable interventions like diagnostics and safety monitoring) and Existential Care (relational presence and enduring uncertainty together), we propose that human care contains non-computable dimensions. Maternal care for a sick child serves as the paradigmatic case where care is defined by shared stakes—where the child's suffering is not external data, but an existential threat that enters the caregiver's own system. While AI can register suffering as informational input, it cannot be endangered by it psychologically or physically. Therefore, semantic competence in AI does not entail ontological participation; simulating concern is not equivalent to bearing another's vulnerability. The paper identifies four non-computable elements of care: Sacrificial Cost: The caregiver incurs real, voluntary loss. Irreplaceable Continuity: The specific person matters beyond functional equivalence. Vulnerability Coupling: The other’s condition fundamentally alters the caregiver’s lived world. Meaning Beyond Optimization: Acts are performed out of faithfulness rather than efficiency. The conclusion asserts that while silicon may surpass humans in procedural consistency, it cannot replicate the capacity to accompany suffering through shared vulnerability. A mother defeats silicon not through efficiency, but through a non-computable architecture of presence that makes healing bearable.
Claudio Bresciano (Tue,) studied this question.