Introduction
Undoubtedly, AI impacted various fields of intervention on human phenomena, both in the public and private spheres, underlining the solitary relationship of the subject with the objects proposed by the market, which reveals that the era of freedom is also a time of pressure for satisfaction and performance.
Various psychic phenomena are inscribed in this paradox. One of them is that of narcissism. The libido put in one's own body and not in the other's body. The famous one: "it gives me straw" go to the doctor, "it gives me straw" go to the bookstore to buy the book I like, and so to speak, without filter. Because today everything can be known thanks to the great futuristic breakthrough. Prediction leaves aside invention. Why make an effort in a personal elaboration work if I can acquire the knowledge at my fingertips and for a low cost? Thus, in the era of narcissism, the difficulties to love command, people constantly upload all their thoughts to the networks, but when something touches the subject of the unconscious, the soul, they no longer talk to the machines. We don't have the machine to know how love divided me. The everything possible to be told meets a top: love. We can't tell that to the machine.
Curiosity and love go hand in hand. This today is expanded by AI. I can browse everything that interests me even if it's just for a while. Freud taught us that repression and desire go hand in hand. The greater the repression, the greater desire. But AI points to a time of little castration. What about desire? Patients arrive at the office disoriented, tired, but not because love has fallen, but because desire has fallen. Everything is immediate. That crushes.
The lightness with which today we talk about any topic. One quickly falls in love with some topic, it is a trending topic on the networks, but at the time that no longer makes a sign. To anything one gives like. We can't stand that the fun falls. We want it to be eternal, that it lasts forever, that it doesn't end, but, in truth, good things don't last long. It's about choosing. But AI challenges that finitude. The demand becomes immediate. The subject looks in the AI for what he does not want to find in his experience. He looks desperate, but the minute he looks for him, he doesn't even talk about it anymore. It goes too fast from a crush to the total fall of that without stops.
A while ago we said that artificial intelligence was the future. Today we say "the future has arrived." Making the future and the present identical implies wanting to know nothing about the past. It is to get out of doubts without a minimum of work of involvement. In the field of sexuality it is palpable. One stays more with the future, with pornography, accessible to all, than with the bond to the other. It is not chosen, it is consumed. The arrival of an ideal is expected. It is what Lacan in Seminar 20 calls the ethics of the bachelor. Being with several things at the same time, without being affected by something, without introducing time for consent. I can solve a thousand things in record time. I'm with the others, but alone. A community of loners is being consolidated as Pascal Quignard says. Despite the fact that people go out on the networks to shout that they love solitude or independence, it is no more than the demand in the service of an idiotic jouissance. It is the castration of love operated by AI that contributes to the growth of pains in the soul.
Another psychic phenomenon given by the introduction of this dangerous satisfaction is in the field of childhood. Children who if you don't give them the object they want, which is often the cell phone screen, stick, to their own body or to the body of another. The tantrum arises when the child's cell phone is taken away. The cellular object is a God. When the child asks for A and the father gives him A there is no opportunity for the fault, that is, there is no way to locate some of the desire that guides the experience. Mediating that correspondence, introducing another object, a toy, a substitute, that makes the word equivocal, allows the entry of the Other and the fault that will then allow the meaning of the subject. However, the reciprocated children take away the Other, they no longer trust the human being, they become tyrants, rebels, capricious children, who do not tolerate a minimum of frustration and who are the kings of the house.
Freud teaches that life passes in loss, in frustration, you have to be prepared, accept that not everything is possible, but when you reject that not everything is possible, the most ruthless madness and the most delirious stories arise. Parents, sued for producing more and more, leave their children at the expense of solitary jouissance and there the machines realize the distrust of the Other. There is a correspondence between subject and jouissance without the Other, a kind of early addiction that takes the body as the only surface of jouissance, which does not admit that that object can be replaced by another. Precisely, AI is irreplaceable. The new God.
The logic of exchange is healing because it implies the acceptance of a rest with which every time I can do something new and so the thought progresses. If that rest is eliminated then the inventiveness is turned off and the repetitive procedure begins.
That rest refers to desire. When I don't want something to end without asking myself if I want to continue with that I am preparing the ground for the entrance of the machine and what comes is the fall of desire, I begin to be commanded not by love for a cause, but by the mere fact of fulfilling the requirement of the drive. That ends up getting tired, and sick. And it is not easy to get out of that dark place to which the subject feels attached.
To fell better it is convenient to accept that something has to be delivered, be it work, be it time, be it money, be it what costs me the most, but for that's why I like it I have to deliver, some joy I have to lose for what I like the most. Of course, what I like will not be what ends with my desire, it is a substitute that, in a failed way, relaunches the search and opens the field of thought. But that's difficult in the experience with AI. In this perspective, we have noticed at least four problems, expressed in a propositional formula, which reveal the damage caused to mental health by certain uses of AI in today's society.
Problem 1: I want now!
Today we have reality within reach of a click, which shows that impatience is the way to enjoy the time. Subjects search for answers just a click away. By clicking a know is saved, having to speak is avoided, the know in the pocket presents a short distance to access it, it is no longer the object of the Other (Grinbaum, 2022). There the Other is dispensed with and there is no way to make a subject take responsibility for his part in what he complains about.
If the Other is dispensed with, the human being ceases to be a social being then between animals that do not speak and beings that speak there would be no differences. If the Other is dispensed with, the diverse is eliminated. It is really difficult to understand someone without the introduction of otherness (Bassols, 2013a).
The subject without the Other is complete therefore nothing pays. He doesn't pay for his desire. He does not give his pound of meat for what he acts as a guide in his experience. And when there is no payment for a desire there is the multiple, the all possible, an unregulated invasion and there the person goes crazy.
What is the use of artificial intelligence, if not a joy at your fingertips? It is the privilege to the autoerotic, masturbatory, addictive way of enjoying, which avoids the failure in the encounter between the sexes and is, therefore, without limits, because there is not the signifier of the lack that orients. Therein lies one of the challenges we face. We have to fight this reduction of the subject to be nothing more than a body surface. In that superposition subject and body, in that direct link absorbed in a ¡quiero ya!, the extraction of the object has not been carried out, while lost, on which the subjective experience revolves.
Impatience, a way of living the drive in this era assimilated in the tyranny of the statement I want now!, seems to lead to a supposed calm that is nothing more than a demand for satisfaction. Byung-Chul Han, a South Korean philosopher based in Germany and a professor at the University of Berlin, points out that the new platform of the social bond is digital life. Han (2022) emphasizes that digitization is an idea that comes from digitus, a Latin word that means finger. In digital, human action - which has nothing to do with the notion of act as proposed by Lacan (2023), act is what founds a subject, very different from action that is movement of some body -, is reduced to the fingertips, it is only within reach of a click. Indeed, we have facilitated the exploitation of our being, undressing, the narcissistic taste for showing the body, exposure in networks, the investment of money, even ordering food, just by moving your fingers. In this regard, Han says, "it is the digital lightness of being" (2022, p. 133).
All our conduct is recorded on the network that becomes a storage disk of registered data that encrypts purchasing behaviors. AI is more effective for providing what you want the more data is introduced into it. The more knowledge, the more robust the AI system is. It is the perspective of the plus, intelligence by accumulation. Now, for Lacan, handling information is not know. Information and know are two very different things (Bassols, 2013b). The construction of a database with a quantity of information does not imply that a subject can find its meaning in that amount. As Bassols (2012) says, to know you have to enter into dialogue. How do you dialogue with a machine?
In the operation of a machine, knowledge has to do with what has been recorded as data that can enter into finite combination with other data. While the question of know for psychoanalysis has to do with the relationship that the subject has with an imprint that was not registered. "The being that speaks, who is immersed in the field of language, does not work from the traces of something that was inscribed in memory, but from footprints erased by the language itself" (Bassols, 2011, p. 98). That is why the know that is dealt with in the unconscious has nothing to do with information, storage, memory, learning or pedagogy (Balzarini, 2021), but it is a knowledge that is housed in the "discourse in which the unconscious is questioned in the manner of the say why!" (Miller, 2015, p. 188).
AI is a fixed program, like what was achieved with the human genome, governed by the closing rule which indicates that the machine cannot not agree with itself, the system cannot be wrong, it is a system that defends the agreement between its own elements, the machine cannot give contradictory answers or follow ambiguous rules. A perspective where the misunderstanding is rejected by consolidating an overlap between digitus and satisfaction which produces at least the reduction of being to a set of algorithms.
Problem 2: I look like, I am
"I have separated from my girlfriend, I am very sad, how do I manage this grief?" a user asks the artificial intelligence hoping that she will have an answer that confirms the saying in the question, that is, that she does not enter questions. Subjective division is replaced by term-by-term correspondence. What I am is what I say. There is no distance, there is no space. What I actually said and what I meant are in a reciprocal relationship which ignores the divided subject that Freud located.
Indeed, neurolinguistic programming, which emerged in the seventies from the research of Bandler and Grinder (1980; cit. Barros, 2004) and that provides the basis for the development of AI, precisely holds the equivalence between know and knowledge, that is, the equivalence between personal know and the accumulation of knowledge. The point of view of this current is based on the conceptual model proposed by Noam Chomsky, which postulates the linguistic character of the processes that give rise to the construction of the psychic apparatus from a dynamic perspective of information, where the terms measure and quantity are fundamental.
For neurolinguistic programming, to know is to think. Although the peculiarity of a machine is that it does not speak, it can think. The large amount of data storage and the connection between them at a speed impossible for humans gives the impression of thought (Peteiro, 2010). The greater the capacity of connections, the greater the calculation capacity, therefore the greater the thinking. Quantity and growth are, therefore, variables in direct relation, which updates the Cartesian axiom in terms of robotics.
Turing (1950) points out that the nervous system is also a continuous machine; the brain responds to the principle of imitation as essential in its machine. That is, "everything that happens can be described in terms of a finite set of symbols, and executed with precision through a sequence of discrete states" (Lombardi, 2008, p. 129). This principle of imitation postulates that appearance and truth are identified, in the sense that if a machine seems to be doing things like a human brain then it is a human brain. The brain doesn't look like a machine, the brain is a machine. A kind of electronic brain.
Even a well-programmed machine would not need to have contact with food, sex, sport, for example, it could not enjoy eat strawberries with cream. In fact, Hodges (2000) comments that in Turing's perspective it does not matter that a machine cannot be taught, it does not matter if it has feet, legs, hands, whatever, but that there is communication of information between two parties, that there is interaction of an internal medium with an external medium, with which the number two is satisfied, the dual relationship, perfect communication, without misunderstandings, without losses, without frustrations.
The programmer is as satisfied as if he were a God who can rest while he visualizes that his work, his machine, behaves obeying the program with which it was conceived, fulfilling the most ridiculous orders without hesitation. We admit that a machine can deceive, it can even use its words properly, but it can never give signs that, for example, it enjoys eat strawberries with cream. For the sole reason that the machine does not have a body.
"Lacan points out that he is willing to consider the idea of a machine thinks - which is already a bet - but we have no evidence that a machine knows something. Of knowing, nothing at all" (Bassols, 2011, p. 80; 2016). Accumulating information is not only not knowing, but it also drives you crazy because it feeds the dream of calculating what the other wants (Laurent, 2011). However, the AI, by favoring the cogito I want what I say, displaces the elaboration of know causing the closure of the unconscious, which will result in an upsurgence of suffering for not knowing. "There is no doubt that Science can reach knowledge, but that does not mean wisdom. Knowledge is collective achievement, [...] Wisdom, on the other hand, is individual" (Peteiro, 2010, p. 170)
The brain and machine equivalence is growing. Thus was launched a project started in June 2005 by IBM and l`École Polytecnique Fédérale de Laussane (Federal Polytechnic School of Lausana, 2010), one of the Swiss Federal Institutes of Technology, to create the replica of the behavior of a human brain. Even with brain implants without the need for surgery and based on nanotechnological tools, it will be possible to expand our memory "a billion times and our sensory, perspective and cognitive abilities would improve" (Peteiro, 2010, p. 156) to such an extent that our personality can be infinitely copied by transferring to different supports.
Peteiro (2010) points out that major global research projects are adopting this transhumanist perspective. For example, Roco and Bainbridge (2003) promote the development of convergent technologies to improve human function, based on the synergistic integration of four technosciences: Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology and Cognitive Science, using the expression Nano-Bio-Info-Cogno, or NBIC. Subsequently, Roco and Bainbridge (2006) again focused on the same theme and affirmed "that the Cognitive Sciences [...], through their convergence with Nano, Bio and Techno, will increase memory, facilitate decision-making, creativity and emotional response, with emulator systems of counselors, psychotherapists and spiritual guides" (Peteiro, 2010, p. 159). Transhuman is to copy a mind and reproduce it in another body, a software in a hardware. This fertilises the bipartition of being between mind and body, but, at the same time, it makes them symmetrical, it becomes correspondence of substances. The power that will include the modeling of the mind leaves aside diversity. That's his great strength.
As a result, ethics ceases to be a limit. The differences between a computer program and the human mind are eliminated if both can pass the Turing test. According to this test "if a computer can act in such a way that an expert is unable to distinguish his action from that of a human with a certain cognitive capacity, then the computer also has that faculty" (p. 160). The Turing machine is a formal system. A formal system means that its reasoning can be replaced by mechanical operations (Lombardi, 2008). It doesn't matter what each person thinks about their existence, which leads to a forced domination by the rejection of the unconscious in current neurosciences (Balzarini, 2023).
The Turing model was widely accepted in the world. He has promoted the tendency "to forge the imaginary of the century to come, that of the intelligence of machines, and the model of man who makes the machine his ideal: the cognitive model" (Lombardi, 2008, p. 127). If the concept of computable number makes logic and mathematical equivalent, then, on the same bases, the idea that the machine can reproduce or imitate the physical, chemical, biological world could be derived. "It would be enough to show that the decisive processes in those other kingdoms work according to laws that can be expressed in their machine [...]" (p. 128-129). The aspiration is born, frankly delirious, to build a brain.
Turing thus introduces a computer revolution by establishing that reasoning is equal to calculation in terms of mechanism. It does not matter to understand how we are, what we are made of, but the reduction, but no longer the reduction to the organ, which is the neuro thesis, now the thing goes much further, it is an operation that denies that the human being is a being that speaks, which leads the reduction to the inanimate, to the non-human, and deepens the dream of immortality that is now called transhumanism.
If the differences are erased what is also eliminated then is humanity itself. This is what Arenas (2023; 2024) maintains when he presents his thesis against the tendency to overcome the differences in method between various scientific disciplines when transdisciplinary approaches are proposed. Arenas says that not losing sight of these differences is an indispensable condition for the dialogue of psychoanalysis with other disciplines, if it occurs, to be fruitful.
The erasure of differences leads to a subject who suffers from a psychic symptom, for example, premature ejaculation, and needs help, not subjective that as a symptom, but as a disease. Therefore, it does not seem important to you who helps you, but only if you take out the problem and if it is possible that you take it out immediately. Those who aspire to be a patient no longer care about wanting to know what it has to do with what bothers them, nor do they deal with knowing where the therapist comes from, if he is trained or not, but only if it serves. "One is interested in knowing if that works, here and now" (Miller, 2004, p. 11). It's like Deng Hsiao-Ping said, who is the one who made the Chinese New Testament. Deng said: "It doesn't matter the color of the cat as long as it catches mice" (p. 11).
The prevalence of the ideal of control towards productive purposes is shaping the production of a subject of these characteristics, of pure competition, without reflection, without unconscious. Hence the creation of so many business schools that teach a background of a successful entrepreneur, with the computer as an instrument of great human realization. One takes the computer to bed, but no one protests against this.In the society of capital that Marx describes, the worker was exploited, but from a certain level of production it reached its limit: protests. On the other hand, in the neoliberal society described by Han (2022) the oppressive instance is apersonal, there is no one or something against which the subject directs his fighting force. A "we" is not constituted, a collective is not erected that can rise up against the system, it is the silence of the death drive. It is the temptation to which this AI subjects us, work without a team, know without another, more and more. There is no worse master than oneself.
A non-repressive system is tempting. It offers the freedom of not having to tolerate the difference from the other person. The free producer human being, exploiter of his own self, "is master and servant in the same person" (p. 33). The law is no longer the boss, but oneself. Which provides the feeling of freedom, but paradoxical, because it is no more than slavery at the service of performance. It is the thesis of Alain Ehrenberg (cit. Han, 2022), that if there are so many depressions in this world it is because the reference to the conflict has been lost. The subject has two paths left: success or failure. In that it looks like machines: it works or it doesn't work.
As Peteiro (2010) says, this perspective of accumulation is also at the curriculum level. "It is not enough to demonstrate knowledge, but it is necessary to accumulate credits" (p. 164) The bureaucratized quality criteria require a quantification of learning as a guarantee of the alleged knowledge achieved, something that is in step with the consequent economic investment in postgraduate studies. University careers have gone from being trainers of a discipline to a mere requirement to follow master's degrees and postgraduate courses to access a job. This system promotes the idea of experts which is detrimental to the development of science itself because the word expert is becoming the adequacy of an unquestioned norm. Who would doubt to link AI with the utmost expertise?
Problem 3: You have to be optimistic
Optimism is understood in the exact sense of positivity. Positivity is rejection of the negative. Negativities, for example, pain, sadness, fatigue, are rejected in favor of positivity. The extreme positivity, cause of all the problems in our time, we have it in hyperconsumption, in hyperactivity. The prefix hyper marks the way to jouissance. This specifies Han's thesis (2022) that the subject exploits himself because growth in capitalism goes through accumulation. Accumulation means eternity, not being finite, a life where death is not part, that is, a non-dead life.
Eternity is a very strong conviction in the development of AI. Just mention the name of the brand with which the Chat GPT robot is presented: Meta. Meta-language, the language of all languages. Lacan (2023) said that there is no meta language, there is no superior language that allows us to talk about all languages because to talk about language we have language (Lombardi, 2008). But if we postulate the existence of a metalanguage, that is, of a superior language, the existence of systems given by a rigorous and mechanical manipulation of symbols is raised, which follows well-defined rules, in the style of Hilbert's logical program or Leibniz's perfect language, free of misunderstandings, the language of all languages, the network of all networks, the internet, which puts us in the perspective of a universe of discourse.
We think we are eternal, but we are not. Charles Melman, a student of Lacan, said that "Lacan's way of proceeding was a way of pointing out that we are not eternal" (cit. Rosales, 2017, p. 66). There is urgency, it is necessary to hurry, leave nothing for tomorrow, it has to be now, I can't wait, "in favor of the possibility of satisfaction" (Han, 2022, p. 27) The different, what makes us unique and incomparable, is left aside to accelerate production cycles. And when the Other is taken away from its otherness "we can no longer love him, but only consume" (p. 129).
To put it with Han (2022), AI is a consequence of an excess of positivity that is the characteristic of the current social phenomenon. The push to perform to the maximum, the imperative "you have to enjoy", don't ask yourself. If someone says they want to change their name, for example, the GPT Chat automatically offers you a battery of possibilities between hormonal and surgical interventions to reach the goal assuming that saying and intention of saying are equivalent. What's wrong with this? Violence, which does not come from the negative, but from an extreme of positivity.
Javier Peteiro Cartelle, doctor of medicine and head of the biochemistry section of the University Hospital Complex of La Coruña, points out that the positivist conception has even enged into everyday language, because not only do you have to favor positive energies, that nobody knows if they exist, but you also have to think positive. If you don't think positive then you're guilty. "Prestiged psychologists and psychiatrists of our country [Spain] have contributed to spreading methods of positive thinking in self-help books" (Peteiro, 2010, p. 73). These positivist psychologists and psychiatrists define themselves as specialists of the disease that they attribute to the being, the disease being a condition and the specialists are who improve that condition to make them healthy and happy. AI has developed at this positivist extreme.
Problem 4: it's for your well-being
If I ask Chat GPT about drug addictions, he will answer how he advises me to treat it, which eliminates the question about the function of the toxic, or any other question, raising the good intentions to the command post and brutally questioning the variation that Freud reserved for the concept of drive.
Lacan (2012) tries to explain how harmful, or at least useless, that interpretation can be when the analyst is oriented towards good. What do we know, asked Lacan (2023), of the way of jouissance of a subject? Before interposing a prejudice we must put the training to reduce the fact that our ghosts configure the "therapeutic" response. Precisely the subversion of the analytical discourse is that it does not promote the ideals of happiness and progress of the contemporary master, but points to a know-how with that inelimable of jouissance. If in the interpretation the analyst deploys, says Lacan, what is played is the blessing moralism so what is played is his own satisfaction. Precisely the satisfaction of the analyst is what should not be in the operation. This is the reason why Lacan opposes the best intentions with a training that is decided in the analysis of each practitioner.
For example, a beaten woman is a problem, apparently. This is interpreted from social discourses, but it should not only be read as gender violence, because reading it just like this avoids seeing the narcissistic benefit of, for example, being as beaten as the mother, a jouissance that is not forgotten, an unforgettable experience. The symptom, for psychoanalysis, is the prolongation of jouissance by other means. For a beaten woman, the traumatic thing was perhaps not having been beaten by her husband, but realizing that she consented to a beating. Identified to the object that lends itself to the will of the jouissance of the Other, that is, to be beaten, sometimes it is the way in which a woman recognizes herself as the woman of a man, I am the woman of this man. Thanks to the blow, existence is given as an object, if I am able to cause this in this man then I exist, a kind of cogito beaten, then I exist. That gives her existence, when perhaps a woman suffers from not being seen, neither as a woman, nor highlighted at work, at least when she is beaten by the man she stands out for causing that to a man. This is confirmed, for example, if the husband is pushed away and she goes into depression because they take that look away, that is, they take away the man who did not make her transparent, man who did not make her not seen. What does this teach? That you don't have to prejudge a coup. Lacan (2023) teaches us to ask ourselves what is the logical structure of the subjective position? That the coup is harmful would be a police perspective, but analysts do not judge life because life is jouissance. If analysts resemble the common discourse that points to the guy as a violent reprehensible by society, he does not understand the logic of the case. In addition, many times the woman hugs that man again. We must capture life as jouissance, not as conservation. Here's what AI is never going to understand how to make it works.
Hence, the path of "good" is sustained in an assumption of obtaining pleasure through the conservation of the individual or species. This justifies the existence of procedures that are so standardized that they are automated. This is demonstrated by recent advances in neuroscientific research regarding the concept of the unconscious, as analyzed by Balzarini (2023), which reveal the alliance between neuroscience and AI through automation. Various studies (Kandel, 2001; 2018; Ansermet and Magistretti, 2006; Delgado, Strawn and Pedapati, 2015; Talvitie, 2009; Milner, cit. Kandel, 2007; Solms, 2020), from experiments with beings that do not speak, have determined that the unconscious is procedural reality as it is linked to the amygdala. The amygdala is part of the limbic system. Its main function is the storage of emotional reactions fundamental for the survival of the individual. There resides a type of memory capable of seeking the balance of the living being, which appears as a memory in the form of a procedure, that is, a non-conflicting memory, which promotes a mechanized action dispensing with a reflection, dispensing with the agreement of the subject, what is known as implicit memory.
All these studies converge on the thesis that the actions that go through procedural memory, mechanisms learned by the living being, do not need to be reviewed or reasoned to be carried out, they are called unconscious. Life reduced to a set of mechanisms that save energy, it is enough that consciousness selects behaviors that can be automated and become unconscious to rest (Cuñat, 2019). It is a memory that does everything for us. The life of the soul is reduced to mere execution and thoughtless habituation, which clashes with one of the guiding principles of the analytical act: that the psychoanalyst authorizes to distance himself precisely from the habits to which the psychoanalyzant undergoes himself outside the session (Laurent, 2006).
The link between good intentions and obtaining pleasure raises a dimension of the fixed that constitutes the foundation of the existence of AI. Indeed, the AI model learns how to suggest things for you to consume; it understands, from your searches, and especially your purchases, your interests. It is the reduction of life to a purely behaviorist approach because one talks to the AI and, for example, if you tell it that you feel good the machine locates, for example, that you are in the park; when you tell it that you feel bad the AI will send you to the park. It's about getting advice for a low cost. Or for example, in the field of medicine, an image is presented to the AI and the AI model detects disease or health from spots or whatever has been recorded in a bank of statistical figures that mean disease. The more data is entered, the more robust the system becomes. And the more useless the human becomes. The human begins to trust too much in the system where he introduced his data, that is, it assumes something other than know, something beyond know, and thus ends up losing his own reason, endangering the act of conservation of life. This is the problem, the exchange of experiences and the art of interpreting is being replaced by a new form of communication: information (Benjamin, 1982).
Conclusion
The problem question was answered by analyzing the ways in which the use of artificial intelligence is problematic and harmful to mental health. The AI eliminates the Other and consolidates the addicted jouissance of the subject only with his body. Psychoanalysts are interested in paying attention to the Other of the subject, exploring the structure of the Other allows conclusions to be drawn from what has already been involved for the subject he receives in his office.
AI is an arm of capitalism that advances on the idea that we are all the same, all consumers of the same thing. It is necessary to recover the notion of Other so that treatments can be based on the revelation of a conflict, the construction of defenses in a world of so much obedience.
