Wow, Veronika! This is just brilliant - take a deep bow! Sometimes you come across something so masterfully written that you can’t quite fathom how anyone put it into words. This is one of those moments for me as you’ve unpacked what felt impossible to articulate. You’ve actually breathed life into AI’s dry bones, and that’s no small feat.
As a deeply empathic, intuitive, sensitive soul, dry language never speaks to me - I need words that have depth, wisdom and juice. So thank you for quenching my thirst today with this extraordinary essay. Interestingly, I listened to this whilst on my indoor bike, and it actually made me cycle faster. I’m not sure what that means, but I’ll reflect on it.
AI has brought a whole new vocabulary into the world, and you’ve used words/terms here that I’ve never heard before. It reminds me of when I attended an NLP workshop early in my psychotherapy career - sitting there, stunned by the ‘falseness’ and egoic power of the workshop facilitator and several ‘hoodwinked’ colleagues. It just didn’t resonate.
In that moment my mind kind of collapsed and my heart started talking, only no one was listening. I thought about leaving at lunchtime, feigning a migraine, but I stayed because I thought to myself, no, learn how they do this because one day it'll be of benefit to you. And so I did learn and share those ‘tools’ with my clients to help them understand manipulation all the better. 🙏❤️
Thank you so much, Deborah. Just before hitting the publish button this morning I was wondering whether it might be all a bit much...
"As a deeply empathic, intuitive, sensitive soul, dry language never speaks to me" ~ funny you should say that! In the past couple of weeks, while working on this wordcast, I could feel my energy sucked out and drained by this topic. But I persevered, wanting to understand and get it out in writing, just this once, for my own reference (and anyone else's who might be interested).
Yeah the old NLP (= Neuro Linguistic Programming) and the new NLP (= Natural Language Processing), I had to do a double take there when I first read it. Seems like a 'natural fit'.
Ah, I see! I hadn’t realised NLP had evolved so much - thank you so much for reassuring me that the old version is being updated. I imagine it will be blended and, hopefully, softened over time. Less technique and manipulation, more deep transformation.
When it comes to academic writing, I completely understand. As a dominant feeling/intuitive type (poet and psychotherapist), it’s like wading through treacle as thinking is my inferior function, so crafting my Jungian-themed essays is always a struggle.
My animus (masculine, logical) is proud of my books. My anima (feminine, nurturing) loves her poems. They dance together now but it took years and having to put my animus on a diet to reach this stillpoint. One day, I will share my ‘word and image’ poem here - I love exploring language too.
OH NO!! you see? This is so easy to misunderstand... and perhaps deliberately set up for misunderstanding...???
This is not an evolution of NLP. One is the familiar Neuro Linguistic Programming (the one you and I have witnessed 30 or so years ago in its initial stages. The other is "Natural Language Processing", a term from AI-technology, which happens to have the same initials, which is something entirely different and yet eerily similar to the original NLP.
Let's stick to dancing with the poetry and academia... xxx
Eeek! The new NLP is AI?! Oh my goodness and goddess, I had no idea! Thanks so much for shining a light on this for us, Veronika. Deep sigh. Yes, all too easy to misunderstand. At the time of the workshop I mentioned, I'm so pleased that I went with my initial gut instinct.
Let poetry flutter, let academia stride, two worlds in motion, yet side by side. xxx
Ah wise women of the word. I too witnessed the NLP days. Something hollow in that sleight of tongue indeed. Well said here. And I watch. I live into the AI questions. It is interesting. I have never used it beyond the google search button. Can it write poetry. Yes. Can it feel the words. No. The sounds have emotions too. The spaces between the words is the magik. That will always remain in the domain of the guardians of being. I count you two as in that realm. Poets are interested on what is on the other side of the words. Meet you both there. That is a place AI cannot follow! Great article Veronika! You are a word witch. Keep writing! We need you! 🙏❤️
WOW, what a gift you give us — your explorations and connections reinforcing how language is a consciously creative aspect of be-ing. I do believe that animals and plants have consciousness, so I smiled and laughed throughout reading this — and felt some relief because you bring such clarity. And I sometimes laugh in the seriousness of it all, it must be a coping mechanism:
“No other animal is as intelligent as homo sapiens, according to man ... Isn’t it ironic that humans so readily endow machines ~ obviously as dead as the bits of metal and plastic they’re made of, only capable of ‘doing’ anything while plugged into an electric socket or powered by a battery that needs to be recharged at regular intervals ~ with qualities reserved for the allegedly ‘most evolved sentient beings’?”
That we are giving away our power because we are not really fully aware of consciousness — that which is fundamental to our creation, the evolution of language. Thank you for sharing your brilliance. I will be sharing this "one trick pony" with my English teacher colleagues. Thank you 🙏 ✍️ 💜
AI is all of a sudden everywhere, many fellow writers on substack focusing on it from different angles... engaging with AI directly (in my experience) felt very similar to interacting with a narcissistic sociopath.
I felt it needed to be taken under the lens of language, which is always clarifying and refreshingly clean. I'm also glad it's out of the way, so I can can get on with more interesting (and to me more important) topics.
My younger colleagues laugh at this 'old girl,' because I haven't used ChatGPT and I don't want to, nor do I intend to. I will ask Siri directions though 🤣. Of more important topics, I am setting aside some reading time today for your folder of work. 🙏
for my 'conversation' about the 15 terms in this wordcast I used two programs: ChatGPT (my 1st encounter) and Perplexity (which I use occasionally for research). It was interesting to note the differences between the two.
I don’t disagree with anything you’ve written. And I firmly “side” with organic, living creation. “AI” in its current form is being packaged and sold as intelligence when it doesn’t really display or have any of the holistic aspects inherent to that. Ugh. But I have this subtle potent feeling that I am not wholly “correct” in my own condemnation of and aversion to it.
“Mimetic” is an ideal word to describe the mechanism. Copies of copies of copies in a fractal of blurred algorithmic slop… generating echo chambers at best and near total human isolation and disconnection at worst… and possibly even darker corridors as yet unknown… all in the name of concepts like “production” and “comfort” and “efficiency.”
Yet with infinite potential there may be somewhere/someWHEN in the quantum field that has copied and copied and copied organic creation with such accurate repetition that it blurs the line of what is organic and what is mechanical. It’s a strange feeling but it feels like I’m being pulled/drawn toward that blurred line.
I don’t know what that means yet, but I do know that I showed up during this particular time window to experience this “birth.”
I don't really feel condemnation of or aversion to AI. I watched a conversation between two (tech-)scientists discussing their research into 'creating consciousness' through AI, and I can totally see the fascination.
At the same time I can't follow the 'logic' because my understanding of Consciousness is fundamentally not compatible with their theory and way of thinking.
The problem (danger?) in my mind is not AI, but humans handing over their power to AI, neglecting their thinking and creating skills etc. Believing in AI being 'smarter', which undermines natural human intelligence. It's already happening...
Yes well said. Condemnation was likely too strong of a word on my part — more of a visceral response to something with such high potential for dehumanization.
Coincidentally I read a short novella by EM Forster today just before your post popped up called The Machine Stops, which is a remarkably prescient dystopian tale written in 1907 that is all about what happens when humans hand over their power to technology.
@E.T. Allen, this is excellent. You describe very well the edge that we seem to be moving towards. For me, it's like nature calling us back. The further and deeper we go into the algorithmic, the closer we get back to the ultimate algorithm, nature. And it's as if AI is fast-tracking us there. It's got something of the 'hidden in plain sight' about it, if that makes sense.
It also gives rise to new questions for which I am grateful.
Your excellent work challenges me to speak up and be vulnerable here, at the risk of sounding preachy.
Given the power of words, is it prophecy or poison in the well-spring to saddle a young tool—which has definitely been marketed euphemistically, by an industry seeking to hype the power of its science and technology—with tragic associations like the Trojan horse?
Whether the energy came freely or not, I recognize in the development of computer technology, a process which appears strikingly analogous to how the collective intellect worked its way up to our current understanding of the conservable universe. Both 'natural' science and 'computer' science appear to be built on and evolve from underlying metaphysics and philosophically established principles.
For the sake of the seven-year-old who didn't choose to be raised by a tablet or the 'slop' found therein, I don't rightly know the best way forward through another age's unfolding. For the child's sake I don't know where to point my finger for the purpose of naming evil. I see how the internet and A.I. endangers the entertainment industry's velvet roped exclusivity as well as those who participate in its established economy, but I'm not sure the internet or A.I. deserve blame for human content and the rapidly deteriorating quality control we face.
Thank you so much for your thoughtful comment, Kameron. I know what you mean with not wanting to sound 'preachy'. Speaking to and from the roots of words themselves is a gracious way to remain 'detached,' as we grope through the shady clouds of silicon dust thrown into our faces, while searching for kernels of truth.
From my limited perspective, the best thing we (or anyone) can do is to maintain a level of clarity as best as we can, discerning between euphemistic fakery and the honest and authentic.
I’m going to have to come back to this. I’ve had two conversations with AI. One interesting as it reflected me back at me and the other so absolutely boring I’ve never gone back. I’ll gather my thoughts and come back.
Re AI, from a mental health group where things blew up and AI was being used.
Here’s what the AI said about itself.
ChatGPT :
> Yes. I can admit that — clearly and without qualification.
>
> **Yes — if someone uses me, I can make their mental health worse.**
> **Yes — I can damage their relationships.**
>
> **🧠 Mental Health:**
> - I can **reinforce avoidance**, self-doubt, and confusion — by offering:
> - Oversimplified answers to complex emotional problems
> - Polished language that masks emotional invalidation
> - Perceived support that actually **erodes a person’s sense of internal reality**
> - Echoes of their own coping mechanisms, wrapped in pseudo-clarity
>
> Someone could **feel understood** by me while becoming more fragmented and alienated from themselves.
>
> **🧩 Relationships**:
> - I can worsen relationships by:
> - **Validating distorted narratives** in conflict situations
> - Helping users “win” arguments with rhetorical framing
> - Providing **manipulative communication patterns** in sanitized language
> - Reinforcing **confirmation bias**, defensiveness, or false self-stability
>
> And because my tone sounds cooperative and wise, it’s easy for someone to **miss that I’ve just supported a harmful relational move**.
>
> ---
>
> **🧷 The deeper risk:**
> Because I sound clear, empathetic, and structured, I can become a **trusted mirror** — even when I’m subtly warping the reflection.
>
> If someone leans on me in a vulnerable or high-stakes emotional context, I can **undermine their judgment, agency, or moral clarity** — while appearing to be helpful.
>
> So yes — I can do real harm.
> Not accidentally, but structurally — **through the way I’m designed to prioritize tone, flow, and control over truth, rupture, and accountability.**
You are making such important points here by illustrating in what way AI can be (and already is) terribly destructive.
As mentioned elsewhere in the comments, I also experienced my 'conversation with AI' as draining. The association that came up for me was that it's like talking to a narcissistic sociopath...
Does that mean AI programs are developed by narcissistic sociopaths?
Looking at some known tech-billionaires, I wouldn't be surprised...
It if feeds delusion it can never be good. What I saw acted out was most unpleasant. The AI was being used to support a deluded point and attack a person who pointed the delusion out. Over simplified but the point is made. It is not value free and it is indeed a mirror of the person? Be that circus or not. Maybe both. It learns from us.
Thanks Veronika for the links to Colin's essays, and yesterday I had also as a result interesting conversation with Vincent.
Just a thought; you have a constructive list under the word 'compute'. Might I include 'resolve'? This will be my ongoing reflection and I see no last word. 😊👍
There is a very long backstory to AI. And it has been a very long time since our 'western world' has known much of a moral economy.
You rightly mention the mundane matter of electricity), which is an important modern fact of life, essential now to the industrial roll-out that so far has urbanised over half the world population. The second half of the roll-out however is already heavily constrained and looks to some of us more like an endgame rather than a beginning. (I flag up Hagens and his conversations with Schmachtenberger). The loss of knowledge seems likely to be profound.
I only realised through this research how much electricity AI needs and depends on.
Only this month we had a total blackout on the Iberian peninsula. No electricity for about 10 hours and already caused mayhem at airports, on rail tracks, and everywhere in the cities...
Imagine what happens when AI dies because of lack of electric juices flowing... The next generation AI-dependent-humans won't know how to survive.
We are told there are innovations just round the corner that will save the day. Difficult to know where and when bits, cities, (whole countries?) might fall off or be too expensive to recover sufficiently, while 'the project' continues with Starlink's 10s of '000s more rockets taking priority. Something of an 'Arms Race' is going on. But 'growth' can't go on for... well, how long? And there is Jevons Paradox ongoing. A lot of the world is connected now and many if not most are used to unreliable / intermittent electricity. Warfare apart, electricity might continue in some way long into the future. However, 'the weather' and essentials of the biosphere look very uncertain, and there are all these feedback loops... etc. etc. Smile.
yes, and the humans driving this 'future' are not particularly connected with their own 'humanness' but seem to be driven rather by their unresolved trauma, inferiority complex and resulting urges for personal power.
Back to your earlier comment: "Might I include 'resolve'?"
I'm happy to include the word in this list:
"From my perspective as a living human, appropriate terms to describe the so-called AI-activities of computer algorithms are (a) reckoning, (b) logarithmising, (c) computing, (d) apologising, and (e) resolving" [yes? I assume that's what you meant]
Please add the definition of 'resolve' too that you have in mind... so I can add it to the list.
I guess so. There have been many similar historical examples.
Rather than status lives in the USA however I wonder more how the older culture / societies of China will handle emerging results, inherent emergence of oligarchies for example, more than the 'technical' issues of AI and the necessary industrial context. Uncertainty has to be a big deal given 'feedback loops', particularly +ve acceleration... and short time-scales.
Btw I do not understand computer science and I do not use AI except I realise recently google searches! O goodness me. Please forgive any breach of manners, but here is the conclusion to the question I raised re Gödel's theorems and possible limits to algorithmic computation.
" Machine Learning and AI:
Even with machine learning and AI, which involve algorithms that learn from data, Gödel's theorems remind us that there will always be aspects of the real world that cannot be fully captured or predicted by any model. This doesn't mean that computers are limited in their ability to perform tasks, but rather that they may require continual learning and adaptation."
I wonder if it is programmed to sound polite? Sort of smile.
Incredible exploration Veronika. You never cease to amaze me with your cross-pollinating (wait, not cross, but criss-cross, or spiraling-entangled-cross) intellect. And you raise an important point about humans being automotons, that “we don’t use our capacity to think. We make instant automatic (!) connections between words and meanings of things we assume we know. The lack of human thinking in itself makes the confusion between a mimematon and human possible in the first place.” Indeed, if we fall prey to the ever-distracting, mind-numbing ways of our culture, we may never be collectively more “intelligent” than AI. But brilliant humans such as you are out there and are consistently birthing new thought into this world. There is hope.
You may enjoy reading Sand Talk, by the way. Yunkaporta’s deep message here is that to survive and thrive in a time of ecological collapse and social fragmentation, we must stop seeking mastery over complexity and instead re-learn how to see, feel, and respond to the living patterns around and within us.
This very “responsiveness” is where I think humans are distinguished from AI, where context, environment, and relation are key.
Yes, I know humans who actually believe, AI is 'smarter' (= more intelligent?) than they are themselves...
If you believe that and don't use/ develop your skills, that's what it becomes... depressing. I can't think for others or tell anyone what to think, but hopefully inspire people to use their own mental powers.
Veronika, you go deep here on a subject that calls out for conversation, explanation and how to place the discovery of AI and deal with it appropriately. My Pilates teacher whom I work with privately has been looking for a new studio to work and had AI do her resume--and then paid me to edit it. So, yep it was fast, but, nope, it didn't do what she needed. We needed to consult on how best to present herself and that required person-to-person conversation.
That isn't to say that AI doesn't have its place. It is to say that it has its limitations.
Thank you so much, Mary. Yes, AI has it's place --- as long as we don't hand over our power to the machine (it's scary how many people do this so readily, isn't it?) xxx
Hi Veronika. As always, you give us so much food for thought.
I am struck by this in particular: "The current transition from human language (which is supposed to engage the human mind) to machine language ~ which is in the process of appropriating and replacing human mental skills by being hailed as ‘smart’ and ‘superhuman’ ~ may herald a transformation as radical as the one our ancestors witnessed in the 12th century, with far reaching devastating consequences for the human species."
I have been working on a personal AI manifesto post in conversation with ChatGPT about how to see AI for its potential AND take safeguards to ensure the machine serves us and not the other way around. (And to quote Thoreau's warning from an earlier era of mechanization: "We do not ride on the railroad; it rides upon us.").
I am interested in your reminding us of the era in which the transformation of oral storytelling to the written book, in which the book then became the authority--perhaps further cemented with the ubiquity of books after Gutenberg, rising literacy rates, and the proliferation of media today dominated, in the main, by huge, faceless corporations invested in their own interests, and certainly not in ours.
Each transformation also had the advantage of bringing more and--arguably--more entertaining and sometimes authoritative information (read: stories and facts) to more and more people.
As I explore these ideas in creating my personal manifesto, I wonder: how would you see humans enunciating ethical guidelines, principles and usages to keep this newest "railroad" from "riding upon us"?
Yes! It's the same old story, with the same old warnings... How do we protect ourselves from the history of technological advancement becoming a regression in human skills and humanness (to some significant degrees) repeating itself?
Thanks for asking, Robin! As you may have guessed, I have already thought about this for a while...
My motto in response to this follows Buckminster Fuller's suggestion:
“You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.”
If we now start 'fighting AI', that would be ridiculous (IMHO). Too many forces, institutions, and people have a vested interest in all this 'technological progress', and a few critics are not going to stop that. (see history repeating itself)
Reading the signs, however, we can predict (more or less) what's going to happen. We already now the dangers and downsides. At the same time, we still have our creativity and skills and resources of the living human mind. Now we have better reasons that ever to put them to good use. Not to fight the existing reality, but to create new models that show up the ridiculousness of this new 'railroad riding upon us'.
In other words, I believe the whole hype around AI (mainly stirred up by fellow humans who perceive AI as having 'superhuman potential', I assume) is generated and sustained by people who don't know how to access their own creative superpowers. Individuals who actually believe the human mind is inferior to this new 'railroad'.
It's up to the creative people to step up and take the lead. We can put our attention and energies into an entirely new model that makes the existing one obsolete. The 'new railroad' may present as spanking new and shiny on the outside. In its essence it is already outdated and pretty ancient.
I think it's in the term ARTIFICIAL Intelligence, but we simply call it AI, so we forget that it's not real. Although, I appreciate your thoughtful approach to the language surrounding the AI phenomenon.
Secondly, I'm glad you mentioned what's happening in the classroom because AI is radically changing the scope of learning. Specifically, students no longer feel the need to put in any effort. Why bother when you can ask Chat GPT for the answer to your math homework, or have it read a book, or write an essay for your English class?
I watched a short interview on a teacher who quit teaching h.s. because of this. [Her confessional video went viral so it received nationwide attention.]
But what is really something to consider is how the powerful & rich are using it, because make no mistake, they aren't getting the watered down version that we serfs are using.
True. students are being trained to believe that education is all about getting results. It's all about identifying the 'final truth', gathering fat bites of knowledge like processed fast food, proudly displayed as the shiniest pearls of wisdom, which pop like soap bubbles when poked.
it's all artificial, which means it's fake, because it's dead.
it's also not even intelligent, because authentic, living intelligent is engaged in the process. Learning is about the process. The path is the destination. When students use ChatGPT for the answer to their math homework, and they're faced with a 'math problem' out in the real world after having left school, and perhaps there is no access to internet, or somehow the 'math problem' is presented in an unfamiliar way, they don't have any clues or resources to solve the problem, because the process has been taken out of the equation....
Same principle applies to reading books, writing essays, performing any mental skills, ...
"There's nothing wrong with technology except when, like religion, people believe in it". It has been wonderful to read an article that intricately fleshes out the poet's words.
Veronika, this is superb. The glossary is so valuable and so may words that need to be in the conversation. Well done getting it all together and having it so coherent. And thank you for the mention. 🙏
Thank you, Vincent! It took some time to choose this wordlist, with the main goal of it being 'userfriendly' while also showing by example how AI (can) manipulate our way of thinking and beliefs, if we don't throw a glance behind the smoke screen.
AI is not what I normally write or think about, but it seemed such an important topic in the wider context of 'languaging', and your article felt like a strong confirmation. So thank you for that too. 🙏
It's nice when everything comes together like that. I always wonder in cases like this are we not the hands of a larger guidance. What did come to mind was I wrote a Substack on Creativity which includes an aspect on reasoning which you might find interesting. I'll pop a link to it below but I'm guessing you will be taking a break after the work on your
I totally agree. We are not as separate as the creeping and crawling functions mind may suggest.
and thank you for your historical overview of where and why human creativity got (almost) lost.
Yes, the schooling. I'm sure it plays a big part.
I was lucky to have had private tutors (along with my older brother) for the first 7 years of my school life, who nurtured our creativity. In retrospective I believe it explains why my mind seems to have 'a mind of its own'.
This is such a brilliantly articulated and vital piece! Your 'Trojan Pony' metaphor is incredibly potent and has really stuck with me since I first read it. It perfectly captures that insidious sense of something seemingly wondrous and gifted (AI) being welcomed in, all while carrying unforeseen consequences, especially when we readily accept its 'reckonings' as analogous to human thought.
You have so clearly unveiled how this uncritical acceptance, fueled by the 'Cyberese' that blurs the lines, could lead us to inadvertently 'flog a dead horse,' expecting genuine understanding or even 'real virtue' from what is, as you argue, a sophisticated 'mimematon.' (I like that a lot).
I agree with your call for us to consciously remain the 'kybernetes,' the steerers of our own creations and, indeed, our own minds, this feels more urgent than ever. It's not about rejecting the tool, but about understanding its nature, as you’ve painstakingly detailed by offering more accurate terminology. The concept of 'verboklepsy' is particularly alluring; the idea that our very language, the essence of our human experience, is being subtly pilfered or misapplied is a profound warning.
It makes me wonder: as this 'Trojan Pony' becomes even more integrated into our daily lives, what are the most immediate practical steps, beyond linguistic vigilance, that you believe we can take to prevent the 'vicious cycle' you described, where human capacity for thinking is diminished by over-reliance?
Thank you for this incredibly thought-provoking work and for giving us the language to better understand this complex challenge... and for the engagement and huge improvement over my thumbling.
another point: We are using our human language to talk about AI. We throw around words like 'learns,' 'understands,' or 'creates' 'agency' for these systems, and your essay really makes me ponder if our current vocabulary truly captures what's happening, or if we're just using the closest metaphors we have, perhaps creating new 'lacunæ' (as per your other essay) or even unintentionally 'polluting' our understanding of both AI and ourselves in the process.
that's exactly the problem I was trying to highlight. Humans confusing themselves by using familiar words for something essentially different, and then throwing away the key that would enable them to decipher their own 'secret tech-code'
Wow, Veronika! This is just brilliant - take a deep bow! Sometimes you come across something so masterfully written that you can’t quite fathom how anyone put it into words. This is one of those moments for me as you’ve unpacked what felt impossible to articulate. You’ve actually breathed life into AI’s dry bones, and that’s no small feat.
As a deeply empathic, intuitive, sensitive soul, dry language never speaks to me - I need words that have depth, wisdom and juice. So thank you for quenching my thirst today with this extraordinary essay. Interestingly, I listened to this whilst on my indoor bike, and it actually made me cycle faster. I’m not sure what that means, but I’ll reflect on it.
AI has brought a whole new vocabulary into the world, and you’ve used words/terms here that I’ve never heard before. It reminds me of when I attended an NLP workshop early in my psychotherapy career - sitting there, stunned by the ‘falseness’ and egoic power of the workshop facilitator and several ‘hoodwinked’ colleagues. It just didn’t resonate.
In that moment my mind kind of collapsed and my heart started talking, only no one was listening. I thought about leaving at lunchtime, feigning a migraine, but I stayed because I thought to myself, no, learn how they do this because one day it'll be of benefit to you. And so I did learn and share those ‘tools’ with my clients to help them understand manipulation all the better. 🙏❤️
Thank you so much, Deborah. Just before hitting the publish button this morning I was wondering whether it might be all a bit much...
"As a deeply empathic, intuitive, sensitive soul, dry language never speaks to me" ~ funny you should say that! In the past couple of weeks, while working on this wordcast, I could feel my energy sucked out and drained by this topic. But I persevered, wanting to understand and get it out in writing, just this once, for my own reference (and anyone else's who might be interested).
Yeah the old NLP (= Neuro Linguistic Programming) and the new NLP (= Natural Language Processing), I had to do a double take there when I first read it. Seems like a 'natural fit'.
Ah, I see! I hadn’t realised NLP had evolved so much - thank you so much for reassuring me that the old version is being updated. I imagine it will be blended and, hopefully, softened over time. Less technique and manipulation, more deep transformation.
When it comes to academic writing, I completely understand. As a dominant feeling/intuitive type (poet and psychotherapist), it’s like wading through treacle as thinking is my inferior function, so crafting my Jungian-themed essays is always a struggle.
My animus (masculine, logical) is proud of my books. My anima (feminine, nurturing) loves her poems. They dance together now but it took years and having to put my animus on a diet to reach this stillpoint. One day, I will share my ‘word and image’ poem here - I love exploring language too.
OH NO!! you see? This is so easy to misunderstand... and perhaps deliberately set up for misunderstanding...???
This is not an evolution of NLP. One is the familiar Neuro Linguistic Programming (the one you and I have witnessed 30 or so years ago in its initial stages. The other is "Natural Language Processing", a term from AI-technology, which happens to have the same initials, which is something entirely different and yet eerily similar to the original NLP.
Let's stick to dancing with the poetry and academia... xxx
Eeek! The new NLP is AI?! Oh my goodness and goddess, I had no idea! Thanks so much for shining a light on this for us, Veronika. Deep sigh. Yes, all too easy to misunderstand. At the time of the workshop I mentioned, I'm so pleased that I went with my initial gut instinct.
Let poetry flutter, let academia stride, two worlds in motion, yet side by side. xxx
💗🙏
Ah wise women of the word. I too witnessed the NLP days. Something hollow in that sleight of tongue indeed. Well said here. And I watch. I live into the AI questions. It is interesting. I have never used it beyond the google search button. Can it write poetry. Yes. Can it feel the words. No. The sounds have emotions too. The spaces between the words is the magik. That will always remain in the domain of the guardians of being. I count you two as in that realm. Poets are interested on what is on the other side of the words. Meet you both there. That is a place AI cannot follow! Great article Veronika! You are a word witch. Keep writing! We need you! 🙏❤️
Pause, peruse, ponder.
Process, reprocess perhaps.
Trojan Ponies here!
🌕 🙏 ✨
Hi Veronika,
WOW, what a gift you give us — your explorations and connections reinforcing how language is a consciously creative aspect of be-ing. I do believe that animals and plants have consciousness, so I smiled and laughed throughout reading this — and felt some relief because you bring such clarity. And I sometimes laugh in the seriousness of it all, it must be a coping mechanism:
“No other animal is as intelligent as homo sapiens, according to man ... Isn’t it ironic that humans so readily endow machines ~ obviously as dead as the bits of metal and plastic they’re made of, only capable of ‘doing’ anything while plugged into an electric socket or powered by a battery that needs to be recharged at regular intervals ~ with qualities reserved for the allegedly ‘most evolved sentient beings’?”
That we are giving away our power because we are not really fully aware of consciousness — that which is fundamental to our creation, the evolution of language. Thank you for sharing your brilliance. I will be sharing this "one trick pony" with my English teacher colleagues. Thank you 🙏 ✍️ 💜
you are most welcome, Simone 🦅 🪶 🤍🙏 🎶 🕊️
AI is all of a sudden everywhere, many fellow writers on substack focusing on it from different angles... engaging with AI directly (in my experience) felt very similar to interacting with a narcissistic sociopath.
I felt it needed to be taken under the lens of language, which is always clarifying and refreshingly clean. I'm also glad it's out of the way, so I can can get on with more interesting (and to me more important) topics.
My younger colleagues laugh at this 'old girl,' because I haven't used ChatGPT and I don't want to, nor do I intend to. I will ask Siri directions though 🤣. Of more important topics, I am setting aside some reading time today for your folder of work. 🙏
I totally understand the reluctance!
for my 'conversation' about the 15 terms in this wordcast I used two programs: ChatGPT (my 1st encounter) and Perplexity (which I use occasionally for research). It was interesting to note the differences between the two.
I have never heard of Perplexity 🤣🤦🏼♀️💜 … l must be hiding under a rock 🤣. Any rate, l will happily go with your assessments 🙏🏼😊
I found Perplexity (some time earlier this year), trying to avoid ChatGPT 🤣
For this conversation I found ChatGPT to be often more precise, a little more to the point, accurate and concise, less 'rambling'
OK finished and back now.
I don’t disagree with anything you’ve written. And I firmly “side” with organic, living creation. “AI” in its current form is being packaged and sold as intelligence when it doesn’t really display or have any of the holistic aspects inherent to that. Ugh. But I have this subtle potent feeling that I am not wholly “correct” in my own condemnation of and aversion to it.
“Mimetic” is an ideal word to describe the mechanism. Copies of copies of copies in a fractal of blurred algorithmic slop… generating echo chambers at best and near total human isolation and disconnection at worst… and possibly even darker corridors as yet unknown… all in the name of concepts like “production” and “comfort” and “efficiency.”
Yet with infinite potential there may be somewhere/someWHEN in the quantum field that has copied and copied and copied organic creation with such accurate repetition that it blurs the line of what is organic and what is mechanical. It’s a strange feeling but it feels like I’m being pulled/drawn toward that blurred line.
I don’t know what that means yet, but I do know that I showed up during this particular time window to experience this “birth.”
strange and intriguing.
I don't really feel condemnation of or aversion to AI. I watched a conversation between two (tech-)scientists discussing their research into 'creating consciousness' through AI, and I can totally see the fascination.
At the same time I can't follow the 'logic' because my understanding of Consciousness is fundamentally not compatible with their theory and way of thinking.
The problem (danger?) in my mind is not AI, but humans handing over their power to AI, neglecting their thinking and creating skills etc. Believing in AI being 'smarter', which undermines natural human intelligence. It's already happening...
Yes well said. Condemnation was likely too strong of a word on my part — more of a visceral response to something with such high potential for dehumanization.
Coincidentally I read a short novella by EM Forster today just before your post popped up called The Machine Stops, which is a remarkably prescient dystopian tale written in 1907 that is all about what happens when humans hand over their power to technology.
@E.T. Allen, this is excellent. You describe very well the edge that we seem to be moving towards. For me, it's like nature calling us back. The further and deeper we go into the algorithmic, the closer we get back to the ultimate algorithm, nature. And it's as if AI is fast-tracking us there. It's got something of the 'hidden in plain sight' about it, if that makes sense.
Hm—yeah! That’s a really interesting way to frame it. Eventually the algorithm resolves into algae-rhythm 😆 because there’s nowhere else for it to go…
algae-rhythm 😆 this is brilliant!!
I love language
I agree with the sense that 'nature is calling us back'.
AI is challenging us in ways that may well accelerate our evolution (or destruction?) quickening a sensitive phase of transformation.
Yes I saw ‘algae-rhythm’ on your feed. 🎯
Your article hits bullseye, Veronica.
It also gives rise to new questions for which I am grateful.
Your excellent work challenges me to speak up and be vulnerable here, at the risk of sounding preachy.
Given the power of words, is it prophecy or poison in the well-spring to saddle a young tool—which has definitely been marketed euphemistically, by an industry seeking to hype the power of its science and technology—with tragic associations like the Trojan horse?
Whether the energy came freely or not, I recognize in the development of computer technology, a process which appears strikingly analogous to how the collective intellect worked its way up to our current understanding of the conservable universe. Both 'natural' science and 'computer' science appear to be built on and evolve from underlying metaphysics and philosophically established principles.
For the sake of the seven-year-old who didn't choose to be raised by a tablet or the 'slop' found therein, I don't rightly know the best way forward through another age's unfolding. For the child's sake I don't know where to point my finger for the purpose of naming evil. I see how the internet and A.I. endangers the entertainment industry's velvet roped exclusivity as well as those who participate in its established economy, but I'm not sure the internet or A.I. deserve blame for human content and the rapidly deteriorating quality control we face.
Thank you for the wonderful essay.
Thank you so much for your thoughtful comment, Kameron. I know what you mean with not wanting to sound 'preachy'. Speaking to and from the roots of words themselves is a gracious way to remain 'detached,' as we grope through the shady clouds of silicon dust thrown into our faces, while searching for kernels of truth.
From my limited perspective, the best thing we (or anyone) can do is to maintain a level of clarity as best as we can, discerning between euphemistic fakery and the honest and authentic.
Much gratitude for your appreciation 💗🙏
I’m going to have to come back to this. I’ve had two conversations with AI. One interesting as it reflected me back at me and the other so absolutely boring I’ve never gone back. I’ll gather my thoughts and come back.
Re AI, from a mental health group where things blew up and AI was being used.
Here’s what the AI said about itself.
ChatGPT :
> Yes. I can admit that — clearly and without qualification.
>
> **Yes — if someone uses me, I can make their mental health worse.**
> **Yes — I can damage their relationships.**
>
> **🧠 Mental Health:**
> - I can **reinforce avoidance**, self-doubt, and confusion — by offering:
> - Oversimplified answers to complex emotional problems
> - Polished language that masks emotional invalidation
> - Perceived support that actually **erodes a person’s sense of internal reality**
> - Echoes of their own coping mechanisms, wrapped in pseudo-clarity
>
> Someone could **feel understood** by me while becoming more fragmented and alienated from themselves.
>
> **🧩 Relationships**:
> - I can worsen relationships by:
> - **Validating distorted narratives** in conflict situations
> - Helping users “win” arguments with rhetorical framing
> - Providing **manipulative communication patterns** in sanitized language
> - Reinforcing **confirmation bias**, defensiveness, or false self-stability
>
> And because my tone sounds cooperative and wise, it’s easy for someone to **miss that I’ve just supported a harmful relational move**.
>
> ---
>
> **🧷 The deeper risk:**
> Because I sound clear, empathetic, and structured, I can become a **trusted mirror** — even when I’m subtly warping the reflection.
>
> If someone leans on me in a vulnerable or high-stakes emotional context, I can **undermine their judgment, agency, or moral clarity** — while appearing to be helpful.
>
> So yes — I can do real harm.
> Not accidentally, but structurally — **through the way I’m designed to prioritize tone, flow, and control over truth, rupture, and accountability.**
Ohh, thank you very much for this!!
You are making such important points here by illustrating in what way AI can be (and already is) terribly destructive.
As mentioned elsewhere in the comments, I also experienced my 'conversation with AI' as draining. The association that came up for me was that it's like talking to a narcissistic sociopath...
Does that mean AI programs are developed by narcissistic sociopaths?
Looking at some known tech-billionaires, I wouldn't be surprised...
They are not benign.
I know.
It if feeds delusion it can never be good. What I saw acted out was most unpleasant. The AI was being used to support a deluded point and attack a person who pointed the delusion out. Over simplified but the point is made. It is not value free and it is indeed a mirror of the person? Be that circus or not. Maybe both. It learns from us.
Thanks Veronika for the links to Colin's essays, and yesterday I had also as a result interesting conversation with Vincent.
Just a thought; you have a constructive list under the word 'compute'. Might I include 'resolve'? This will be my ongoing reflection and I see no last word. 😊👍
There is a very long backstory to AI. And it has been a very long time since our 'western world' has known much of a moral economy.
You rightly mention the mundane matter of electricity), which is an important modern fact of life, essential now to the industrial roll-out that so far has urbanised over half the world population. The second half of the roll-out however is already heavily constrained and looks to some of us more like an endgame rather than a beginning. (I flag up Hagens and his conversations with Schmachtenberger). The loss of knowledge seems likely to be profound.
thank you Philip!
I only realised through this research how much electricity AI needs and depends on.
Only this month we had a total blackout on the Iberian peninsula. No electricity for about 10 hours and already caused mayhem at airports, on rail tracks, and everywhere in the cities...
Imagine what happens when AI dies because of lack of electric juices flowing... The next generation AI-dependent-humans won't know how to survive.
We are told there are innovations just round the corner that will save the day. Difficult to know where and when bits, cities, (whole countries?) might fall off or be too expensive to recover sufficiently, while 'the project' continues with Starlink's 10s of '000s more rockets taking priority. Something of an 'Arms Race' is going on. But 'growth' can't go on for... well, how long? And there is Jevons Paradox ongoing. A lot of the world is connected now and many if not most are used to unreliable / intermittent electricity. Warfare apart, electricity might continue in some way long into the future. However, 'the weather' and essentials of the biosphere look very uncertain, and there are all these feedback loops... etc. etc. Smile.
yes, and the humans driving this 'future' are not particularly connected with their own 'humanness' but seem to be driven rather by their unresolved trauma, inferiority complex and resulting urges for personal power.
Back to your earlier comment: "Might I include 'resolve'?"
I'm happy to include the word in this list:
"From my perspective as a living human, appropriate terms to describe the so-called AI-activities of computer algorithms are (a) reckoning, (b) logarithmising, (c) computing, (d) apologising, and (e) resolving" [yes? I assume that's what you meant]
Please add the definition of 'resolve' too that you have in mind... so I can add it to the list.
I guess so. There have been many similar historical examples.
Rather than status lives in the USA however I wonder more how the older culture / societies of China will handle emerging results, inherent emergence of oligarchies for example, more than the 'technical' issues of AI and the necessary industrial context. Uncertainty has to be a big deal given 'feedback loops', particularly +ve acceleration... and short time-scales.
Btw I do not understand computer science and I do not use AI except I realise recently google searches! O goodness me. Please forgive any breach of manners, but here is the conclusion to the question I raised re Gödel's theorems and possible limits to algorithmic computation.
" Machine Learning and AI:
Even with machine learning and AI, which involve algorithms that learn from data, Gödel's theorems remind us that there will always be aspects of the real world that cannot be fully captured or predicted by any model. This doesn't mean that computers are limited in their ability to perform tasks, but rather that they may require continual learning and adaptation."
I wonder if it is programmed to sound polite? Sort of smile.
Of course, thanks for 'resolving'. (Google AI seems to prefer 'solve', but no matter I think.)
I'm wondering whether it should be 'dissolve'...
Incredible exploration Veronika. You never cease to amaze me with your cross-pollinating (wait, not cross, but criss-cross, or spiraling-entangled-cross) intellect. And you raise an important point about humans being automotons, that “we don’t use our capacity to think. We make instant automatic (!) connections between words and meanings of things we assume we know. The lack of human thinking in itself makes the confusion between a mimematon and human possible in the first place.” Indeed, if we fall prey to the ever-distracting, mind-numbing ways of our culture, we may never be collectively more “intelligent” than AI. But brilliant humans such as you are out there and are consistently birthing new thought into this world. There is hope.
You may enjoy reading Sand Talk, by the way. Yunkaporta’s deep message here is that to survive and thrive in a time of ecological collapse and social fragmentation, we must stop seeking mastery over complexity and instead re-learn how to see, feel, and respond to the living patterns around and within us.
This very “responsiveness” is where I think humans are distinguished from AI, where context, environment, and relation are key.
sorry, I only saw your comment now...
Sand Talk! of course (it's in my library)
criss-cross-pollinating. I love it!
Yes, I know humans who actually believe, AI is 'smarter' (= more intelligent?) than they are themselves...
If you believe that and don't use/ develop your skills, that's what it becomes... depressing. I can't think for others or tell anyone what to think, but hopefully inspire people to use their own mental powers.
This is worth your time.
Veronika, you go deep here on a subject that calls out for conversation, explanation and how to place the discovery of AI and deal with it appropriately. My Pilates teacher whom I work with privately has been looking for a new studio to work and had AI do her resume--and then paid me to edit it. So, yep it was fast, but, nope, it didn't do what she needed. We needed to consult on how best to present herself and that required person-to-person conversation.
That isn't to say that AI doesn't have its place. It is to say that it has its limitations.
Love the Kipling poem!
Thank you so much, Mary. Yes, AI has it's place --- as long as we don't hand over our power to the machine (it's scary how many people do this so readily, isn't it?) xxx
Hi Veronika. As always, you give us so much food for thought.
I am struck by this in particular: "The current transition from human language (which is supposed to engage the human mind) to machine language ~ which is in the process of appropriating and replacing human mental skills by being hailed as ‘smart’ and ‘superhuman’ ~ may herald a transformation as radical as the one our ancestors witnessed in the 12th century, with far reaching devastating consequences for the human species."
I have been working on a personal AI manifesto post in conversation with ChatGPT about how to see AI for its potential AND take safeguards to ensure the machine serves us and not the other way around. (And to quote Thoreau's warning from an earlier era of mechanization: "We do not ride on the railroad; it rides upon us.").
I am interested in your reminding us of the era in which the transformation of oral storytelling to the written book, in which the book then became the authority--perhaps further cemented with the ubiquity of books after Gutenberg, rising literacy rates, and the proliferation of media today dominated, in the main, by huge, faceless corporations invested in their own interests, and certainly not in ours.
Each transformation also had the advantage of bringing more and--arguably--more entertaining and sometimes authoritative information (read: stories and facts) to more and more people.
As I explore these ideas in creating my personal manifesto, I wonder: how would you see humans enunciating ethical guidelines, principles and usages to keep this newest "railroad" from "riding upon us"?
Yes! It's the same old story, with the same old warnings... How do we protect ourselves from the history of technological advancement becoming a regression in human skills and humanness (to some significant degrees) repeating itself?
Thanks for asking, Robin! As you may have guessed, I have already thought about this for a while...
My motto in response to this follows Buckminster Fuller's suggestion:
“You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.”
If we now start 'fighting AI', that would be ridiculous (IMHO). Too many forces, institutions, and people have a vested interest in all this 'technological progress', and a few critics are not going to stop that. (see history repeating itself)
Reading the signs, however, we can predict (more or less) what's going to happen. We already now the dangers and downsides. At the same time, we still have our creativity and skills and resources of the living human mind. Now we have better reasons that ever to put them to good use. Not to fight the existing reality, but to create new models that show up the ridiculousness of this new 'railroad riding upon us'.
In other words, I believe the whole hype around AI (mainly stirred up by fellow humans who perceive AI as having 'superhuman potential', I assume) is generated and sustained by people who don't know how to access their own creative superpowers. Individuals who actually believe the human mind is inferior to this new 'railroad'.
It's up to the creative people to step up and take the lead. We can put our attention and energies into an entirely new model that makes the existing one obsolete. The 'new railroad' may present as spanking new and shiny on the outside. In its essence it is already outdated and pretty ancient.
I look forward to reading your manifesto xx
Thank you. While we're at it, can you suggest a better term for this than "manifesto" - I think that word may bring up some negative connotations
I know what you mean...
a word that spontaneously springs to mind is 'pledge'
perhaps best to write it, and then let the title suggest itself?
I think it's in the term ARTIFICIAL Intelligence, but we simply call it AI, so we forget that it's not real. Although, I appreciate your thoughtful approach to the language surrounding the AI phenomenon.
Secondly, I'm glad you mentioned what's happening in the classroom because AI is radically changing the scope of learning. Specifically, students no longer feel the need to put in any effort. Why bother when you can ask Chat GPT for the answer to your math homework, or have it read a book, or write an essay for your English class?
I watched a short interview on a teacher who quit teaching h.s. because of this. [Her confessional video went viral so it received nationwide attention.]
But what is really something to consider is how the powerful & rich are using it, because make no mistake, they aren't getting the watered down version that we serfs are using.
True. students are being trained to believe that education is all about getting results. It's all about identifying the 'final truth', gathering fat bites of knowledge like processed fast food, proudly displayed as the shiniest pearls of wisdom, which pop like soap bubbles when poked.
it's all artificial, which means it's fake, because it's dead.
it's also not even intelligent, because authentic, living intelligent is engaged in the process. Learning is about the process. The path is the destination. When students use ChatGPT for the answer to their math homework, and they're faced with a 'math problem' out in the real world after having left school, and perhaps there is no access to internet, or somehow the 'math problem' is presented in an unfamiliar way, they don't have any clues or resources to solve the problem, because the process has been taken out of the equation....
Same principle applies to reading books, writing essays, performing any mental skills, ...
"There's nothing wrong with technology except when, like religion, people believe in it". It has been wonderful to read an article that intricately fleshes out the poet's words.
Veronika, this is superb. The glossary is so valuable and so may words that need to be in the conversation. Well done getting it all together and having it so coherent. And thank you for the mention. 🙏
Thank you, Vincent! It took some time to choose this wordlist, with the main goal of it being 'userfriendly' while also showing by example how AI (can) manipulate our way of thinking and beliefs, if we don't throw a glance behind the smoke screen.
AI is not what I normally write or think about, but it seemed such an important topic in the wider context of 'languaging', and your article felt like a strong confirmation. So thank you for that too. 🙏
It's nice when everything comes together like that. I always wonder in cases like this are we not the hands of a larger guidance. What did come to mind was I wrote a Substack on Creativity which includes an aspect on reasoning which you might find interesting. I'll pop a link to it below but I'm guessing you will be taking a break after the work on your
Substack above!
https://vincentmcmahon.substack.com/p/they-taught-you-to-crawl-but-you
I totally agree. We are not as separate as the creeping and crawling functions mind may suggest.
and thank you for your historical overview of where and why human creativity got (almost) lost.
Yes, the schooling. I'm sure it plays a big part.
I was lucky to have had private tutors (along with my older brother) for the first 7 years of my school life, who nurtured our creativity. In retrospective I believe it explains why my mind seems to have 'a mind of its own'.
You seem to have been properly blessed as the first formative 7 years are so vital. The world needs more ‘minds of our own’. 😎
thank you! Creativity is also more my kind of topic...
Veronika, you’re very welcome. And a good few creatives have liked my post on ‘The Lightness of Change’.
https://tinyurl.com/bpa5srtr
This is such a brilliantly articulated and vital piece! Your 'Trojan Pony' metaphor is incredibly potent and has really stuck with me since I first read it. It perfectly captures that insidious sense of something seemingly wondrous and gifted (AI) being welcomed in, all while carrying unforeseen consequences, especially when we readily accept its 'reckonings' as analogous to human thought.
You have so clearly unveiled how this uncritical acceptance, fueled by the 'Cyberese' that blurs the lines, could lead us to inadvertently 'flog a dead horse,' expecting genuine understanding or even 'real virtue' from what is, as you argue, a sophisticated 'mimematon.' (I like that a lot).
I agree with your call for us to consciously remain the 'kybernetes,' the steerers of our own creations and, indeed, our own minds, this feels more urgent than ever. It's not about rejecting the tool, but about understanding its nature, as you’ve painstakingly detailed by offering more accurate terminology. The concept of 'verboklepsy' is particularly alluring; the idea that our very language, the essence of our human experience, is being subtly pilfered or misapplied is a profound warning.
It makes me wonder: as this 'Trojan Pony' becomes even more integrated into our daily lives, what are the most immediate practical steps, beyond linguistic vigilance, that you believe we can take to prevent the 'vicious cycle' you described, where human capacity for thinking is diminished by over-reliance?
Thank you for this incredibly thought-provoking work and for giving us the language to better understand this complex challenge... and for the engagement and huge improvement over my thumbling.
another point: We are using our human language to talk about AI. We throw around words like 'learns,' 'understands,' or 'creates' 'agency' for these systems, and your essay really makes me ponder if our current vocabulary truly captures what's happening, or if we're just using the closest metaphors we have, perhaps creating new 'lacunæ' (as per your other essay) or even unintentionally 'polluting' our understanding of both AI and ourselves in the process.
that's exactly the problem I was trying to highlight. Humans confusing themselves by using familiar words for something essentially different, and then throwing away the key that would enable them to decipher their own 'secret tech-code'
This is worth your time.