Why We Keep Tricking Ourselves Into Thinking A.I. Is Conscious; The New York Times, May 15, 2026

 Leif Weatherby, The New York Times; Why We Keep Tricking Ourselves Into Thinking A.I. Is Conscious

"Whenever there are large-scale shifts in media, humans have to adapt their cultural habits. Film and radio, for instance, meant voices of people not physically in the room with you may echo through. Adapting our reading practices to large language model output is a shift just like that one, where we change what we normally expect from our surroundings. We don’t expect meaningful and rhetorically powerful prose to come from anything but a conscious mind. But now it does. We cannot afford to believe the marketing message from A.I. companies that we may be dealing with some spiritual essence. In the age of cultural A.I., technical expertise alone won’t save us. We’ll have to add a new form of reading to make sense of our new world."

What palm readers and chatbots have in common; The New York Times, May 12, 2026

 Herbert Lin, The New York Times; What palm readers and chatbots have in common

Artificial intelligence doesn’t understand humans. It reflects them back to themselves. 

"A Pew Research Center survey conducted last fall found that around 1 in 8 American teenagers turn to artificial intelligence chatbots for emotional support — for the simple human need to feel heard. A 2025 Common Sense Media study went further: Thirty-one percent of teens said their conversations with AI companions were at least as satisfying as talking with real friends. Famed evolutionary biologist and science communicator Richard Dawkins spent many hours chatting with Anthropic’s Claude, after which he felt he had gained a new friend — a reaction that says less about Claude’s consciousness than about people’s readiness to find it.

But this is not only about technology. It’s an ancient human story. 

Chatbots are just programs running on computers. Yet we speak of them with a reverence that has little to do with engineering. AI “knows.” It “understands.” It “sees” patterns invisible to the rest of us. It delivers judgments on health, relationships, careers, grief — questions where facts and logic fall short. What makes these machines seem wise is a simple combination: fluency, confidence and frequent usefulness. That is enough. 

It is also the grammar of the occult...

None of this is an argument against using AI or chatbots. These systems are genuinely useful — for analysis, synthesis, translation, coding and cognitive reframing of problems that resist easy solutions. The concern here is not capability but epistemology: not what AI can do, but how we reason about what it is."