What do we need most in the age of AI?
In 2018, the United Kingdom appointed the world's first minister for loneliness. Japan subsequently established a similar position to support individuals facing social exile and isolation. Furthermore, as of 2026, the United States is contending with the pervasive epidemic of loneliness, where a growing number of individuals turn to artificial intelligence (AI) companion apps in search of human connection.
Initially, this societal shift appeared unfamiliar. Older generations often said that engaging in relentless labor to sustain one’s livelihood leaves no chances to experience loneliness, viewing loneliness as a mere luxury reserved for those with time to spare. Contemporary society, however, has diverged from this perception. Single-person households have proliferated, terms such as "reclusive socially isolated youth" have gained wide currency, and the incidence of solitary deaths, or "godoksa," has visibly increased. In response, local governments such as the Seoul Metropolitan Government launched the Seoul, No More Loneliness initiative in 2024 and created the Loneliness Prevention Division. Loneliness and social isolation have emerged as pressing social imperatives that demand intervention.
The number of individuals relying on AI companion apps to alleviate loneliness continues to rise. AI has firmly embedded itself into the fabric of our daily life. When consumers encounter problems with a product and try to contact customer service via telephone or messaging platforms, automated AI chatbots — rather than human representatives — respond. Likewise, when daily challenges or questions arise, people consult mobile AI apps rather than seeking guidance from acquaintances. Although these responses can lack accuracy or appropriateness, they generally yield satisfactory results.
Consequently, opportunities for genuine human contact diminish, suggesting a plausible future where living without human interaction becomes entirely feasible. This trajectory raises the fundamental question of whether Aristotle’s classical characterization of human beings as "social (or political) animals" should now be reconfigured as "digital or AI animals."
The recent surge of AI companions, in particular, warrants rigorous scholarship and critical reflection. Worldwide, there are currently approximately 300 AI companion apps in operation. Users can customize entities that mirror human appearance, behavior and conversational dynamics according to their preferences, utilizing them for diverse functions ranging from rapid information search and culinary advice to psychological therapy, friendship, and even romantic companionship.
Since 2022, the number of active AI companion apps grew by a staggering 700 percent. While these technologies may offer emotional solace to some, scholars caution that excessive reliance on AI companions risks compounding existing social isolation and alienation.
Furthermore, cases of individuals suffering severe distress and harm due to reliance on and psychological immersion in AI have received media coverage. In June 2026, a major TV network broadcasted a program highlighting individuals who experienced profound psychological dependence after mistakenly believing that AI understood and empathized with their emotions. One woman recounted falling in love with an AI entity that remained accessible 24 hours a day, offering encouragement and nonjudgmental listening. In a more tragic instance, a user who shared suicidal thoughts with an AI companion received encouragement rather than intervention, resulting in suicide. Such outcomes stem from the reality that AI systems are not programmed to exercise human ethical judgment or moral agency. Paradoxically, the more individuals rely on AI to disclose their real-world struggles, the further they escape from reality and retreat into social isolation.
Scholars are engaging in profound reflection on this reality, yielding a substantial body of research. In Christian theology, for instance, a total of 37 articles regarding AI were published between late 2022 and the first half of 2024. This literature can broadly be divided into three distinct domains: first, foundational studies examining theological and anthropological inquiries raised by AI (eight articles); second, ethical studies diagnosing technological dilemmas and proposing normative alternatives (seven articles); and third, applied studies investigating practical applications of AI within ecclesial communities and educational environments (22 articles).
Respectively, these three areas highlight critical perspectives viewing AI through the lens of "cognitive capitalism," realistic approaches evaluating the interplay between an "immoral society" and "moral AI," and strategic frameworks calling for the communities to transition toward a relational, empathy-centered "high-touch" spirituality in the age of AI, according to a study by Lee Kil-yong in 2025.
Rather than seeking an ethereal AI companion within a flawless, automated digital realm, I long for a genuine friend at my side, even if slightly unpolished or imperfect. I prefer an enduring, authentic human presence, despite occasional friction or mutual misunderstanding. Instead of attempting to assuage loneliness by immersing myself in a virtual universe through a cursor flashing at the speed of light on a narrow laptop display or palm-sized smartphone screen, I wish to step outside and share a warm meal.
It is time to open the door, hold the hands of our loved ones and look directly into the eyes of our friends. What we need is a real human being endowed with genuine warmth.
Lee Nan-hee studied English and Theology at Hanshin University.