Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) call for a renewed examination of the ontological meaning of the human being and the nature of psychoanalytic treatment.AI-based mental health interventions show potential for improving the accessibility and efficiency of care; however, current AI systems generate verbal responses on the basis of statistical patterns, and it remains difficult to regard them as capable of performing, in the same manner as human therapists, the embodied emotional experience and relational internal transformation that psychoanalytic treatment entails.This paper conceptualizes the persistent delegation of psychological functions to external systems as the "outsourced ego" and examines the possibility that this phenomenon may, over time, lead to a weakening of ego functions and a delay in the formation of subjectivity.It also discusses the structural problems of AI-based treatment, including the lack of explainability, the reinforcement of self-deceptive narratives through hallucination, and the absence of ethical responsibility.In addition, this paper considers the difficulty of implementing, in an AI-mediated environment, core mechanisms of psychoanalytic interaction such as containment, transference and countertransference, and the analytic third.In response, it proposes four practical virtues for preserving humanity in the age of AI: reflexivity, negative capability, relational courage, and responsible subjectivity.In conclusion, the development of AI technology should not remain confined to the question of whether human therapists can be replaced; rather, it should serve as an opportunity to reflect more clearly on the distinctiveness of human existence, which lies in the capacity to endure imperfection and live with others.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hwagyu Suh (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: