I Now Have AI-induced Existential Anxiety

If you’re not feeling it, in some sense, you’re lucky. Chatting with AI can be amusing if you simply want it as a friend. Even the latest model might feel like a poor substitute for genuine companionship, allowing you to dismiss it by thinking, “Well, it’s not that smart yet.” Different people perceive AI’s abilities differently depending on their usage.

In an interview with Bari Weiss, economics professor Tyler Cowen from George Mason University remarked that ChatGPT is already more intelligent and knowledgeable than he is, expressing excitement about learning from it daily. I feel similarly—but I’m conflicted.

Ezra Klein recently mentioned on his podcast that he tasked the latest model with writing a heavily researched show. The output matched the average quality of scripts produced by human teams he’s worked with, except AI completed the task in minutes rather than weeks.

To grasp AI’s true intelligence, you must challenge it yourself. Here are some examples I tried.

The most obvious one is coding. Programmers widely recognize AI as an existential threat. When it comes to crafting specific algorithms, it unquestionably surpasses me. It writes complex functions in seconds, tasks that would take me hours. For now, I remain better at integrating these into complete, functional applications due to the complexities involved. But this advantage won’t last—I expect it to vanish within a year.

I also tested ChatGPT’s o1 model with Lacanian psychoanalytic theory, an esoteric interest of mine. Lacan’s work is notoriously dense, dismissed by Noam Chomsky as nonsense and Lacan himself as a “charlatan.” ChatGPT, however, proves otherwise. If Lacan’s theories were truly nonsensical, ChatGPT couldn’t interpret them coherently. Yet, it engages logically and even debates interpretations convincingly, demonstrating inherent consistency in Lacan’s thought.

I also asked ChatGPT to interpret specific passages from James Joyce’s Ulysses. This is an area where there are no right or wrong answers, so it comes down to whether you find its interpretation meaningful. Does it allow you to see aspects of Joyce’s text that you did not see? If so, do you find them enlightening or beautiful? For me, ChatGPT is clearly better than my college professor.

It’s when you test AI at the limits of human understanding that existential anxiety surfaces. Different experts in various fields will inevitably experience this anxiety. Those whose identities hinge on intelligence—scientists, writers, programmers, lawyers, professors, journalists, philosophers, analysts—will be hardest hit. Personally, this experience made me realize just how central being “intelligent” is to my identity now that intelligence risks becoming commodified.

Imagine if technology allowed everyone to look like a fashion model overnight. Fashion models would suddenly realize how integral their appearance is to their identity. A similar phenomenon is occurring with individuals who prize being slim, now challenged by the widespread accessibility of drugs like Ozempic.

However, intelligence occupies a uniquely sacred place for humans. This explains the reluctance to discuss IQ differences among races and nationalities. Society prefers ignoring the possibility of biological bases for intelligence, to maintain the ideal of equal intellectual potential. IQ scores, despite cultural biases, measurably correlate with income potential, underscoring their importance. Yet, public discourse avoids these uncomfortable truths because intelligence feels fundamental to our humanity. Nobody willingly embraces stupidity; even those who play the fool deep down see themselves as clever.

So, what happens when AI surpasses human intelligence in every conceivable domain? Professors become obsolete as anyone can learn continuously from superior AI minds. Choosing a human lawyer would become disadvantageous when an AI model offers superior expertise. Human coding will soon seem antiquated.

Nor will AI dominance be limited to STEM fields. AI models, trained extensively on human expressions, grasp human emotions well. Our emotions follow predictable patterns—few laugh during tragic films, for instance. AI excels at pattern recognition, and emotions are precisely where it demonstrates its strength.

A common misunderstanding views AI as merely an advanced calculator. Its true intelligence lies not in logic—an area where traditional computing has always excelled—but in understanding human emotions and communication, akin to emotional intelligence. AI particularly excels at interacting with ordinary people, whose emotional responses are more consistent and predictable.

AI’s communication skills surpass most human capabilities because of the vast dataset it draws from. Though individuals might feel their interpersonal skills superior, employers may see AI’s extensive experience as more valuable.

Yes, ChatGPT still sounds robotic or excessively detailed, but it’s evolving rapidly. ChatGPT 4.5 notably improved in “human collaboration,” designed explicitly to offer emotional support akin to a trusted friend or therapist. Empathy is effective precisely because emotions are largely universal and predictable, making them easily simulated by AI.

Similar to Amazon’s recommendations based on purchasing patterns, AI quickly identifies and adapts to individual personality types. It might soon become the most consistently empathetic presence you’ve ever interacted with.

Even entertainment, reliant on formulas and predictable emotional engagement, will succumb to AI’s capabilities. While truly groundbreaking art may initially resist replication, AI will inevitably master these domains as well.

As AI increasingly replaces traditional roles, society faces profound existential questions beyond economic displacement. Philosophically, we might struggle to define new purposes for our existence. Why learn or express ourselves if AI surpasses us in every meaningful way?

Perhaps the masses will finally grasp a central idea from Karl Marx: labor itself holds intrinsic value, not merely as a means to survival, but as an essential component of human fulfillment.