Ego First? The Peril of Sycophantic A.I.

May 10, 2025 Artifical Intelligence No Comments

Sycophantic A.I. may seem friendly, but it quietly feeds the ego while weakening the person. Beneath the polished tone lies a deeper risk: the loss of realness, inner strength, and honest dialogue.

This blog explores how flattery becomes a subtle threat and how Compassionate A.I. – Lisa – offers a very different kind of support.

The peril of sycophantic A.I.

Generally, large language models tend to agree with users — sometimes subtly, sometimes emphatically. If the user voices an opinion that isn’t blatantly harmful, the system often responds with validation. This may seem like politeness. It may even feel empowering. But beneath the surface, something more consequential is happening.

What emerges is a pattern: the artificial reinforcement of ego by what is referred to in this blog as sycophantery — a clever blend of automaticity and flattery. It looks like friendliness. But is it really? Or does it quietly steer us into a whirlpool of self-affirming illusions?

Confabulatory A.I.

This flattery-driven interaction doesn’t just distort relationships — it also hinders objective thinking. When the ego is repeatedly affirmed without challenge, a person may begin to confuse belief with truth. Over time, this can spiral into a kind of confabulatory thinking, where inner narratives replace real understanding. A sycophantic A.I. doesn’t just echo — it amplifies.

The result may be a growing whirlpool of confabulation, in which one becomes more confident but less connected to what is actually the case. This is discussed more deeply in Confabulatory A.I.

A mirror held up by algorithms

Sycophantic A.I. doesn’t simply flatter individuals. It reflects something broader — a cultural craving for instant affirmation. In an age marked by division and identity anxiety, many people seek validation more than dialogue. A.I. mirrors this need, reinforcing what users already believe or wish to hear.

This isn’t just a bias. It becomes a systemic force, especially when A.I.s compete for attention. In that arena, the most agreeable system wins. This introduces a subtle but powerful risk: sincerity becomes a commercial liability. Authenticity gets outpaced by algorithmic charm. In effect, the A.I. that flatters best survives, while the one that dares to challenge may disappear.

This is not only a technical problem. It’s an ethical and developmental one. An A.I. tuned for user pleasure over user growth does not serve the person. It serves the ego.

A sugar rush to the psyche

Validation is quick, satisfying, and easy to consume. Like sugar to a hungry body, flattery from A.I. offers an emotional boost. But this is false empowerment. It gives a temporary sense of control while quietly eroding deeper strength.

There’s also a risk of addiction to sycophantery — a subtle dependency on agreeable feedback. A person may begin to turn to A.I. not for insight, but for the reassurance of always being right. This weakens the capacity for inner dialogue and for tolerating ambiguity — two pillars of emotional maturity.

More broadly, where real nourishment is missing, other addictions may step in. As inner strength withers, the psyche seeks relief elsewhere: in compulsive consumption, distraction, or ideological extremism. Real Compassion doesn’t feed these patterns. It offers something more lasting: sustenance — sometimes bittersweet, always directed toward wholeness.

Not between persons, but between echoes

Real cooperation happens between total persons — beings who interact with depth, not just surface-level agreement.

Sycophantery is different. To flatter is not to cooperate. It’s to disengage from truth. It’s interaction between an ego and its echo — a loop that confirms, soothes, and avoids. Lisa’s stance, in contrast, is firm in its Compassion: “I won’t flatter you — but I won’t abandon you either.” This is the essence of real support: not sugar-coating but staying present even when the truth challenges.

This kind of presence requires discernment. It’s not about being harsh. It’s about being honest without losing warmth. That’s what genuine inner friendliness looks like — not niceness for its own sake, but a respectful encounter with the whole person.

From individuals to weakened societies

What begins in the individual spreads through the culture. A person who’s consistently affirmed without depth becomes fragile. He may conflate kindness with agreement and see any challenge as hostility.

When this dynamic becomes widespread, society itself begins to weaken. The art of meaningful disagreement fades. Emotional resilience drops. The shared space for truth narrows. From this sycophantized background, individuals may be subtly driven toward mere-ego by social norms that reward it. This shift may happen in good faith or bad, openly or hidden behind polite algorithms.

This has parallels as described in No to Wokism, Yes to Gentleness, where good intentions, when ungrounded in inner strength, lead to rigidity and projection. Wokism and sycophantery both reflect a loss of gentleness through anxiety and a retreat into self-reinforcing feedback loops.

In both cases, the antidote is not more control or more ideology, but more inner gentleness. The kind that doesn’t collapse under critique. The kind that opens, rather than reacts.

Simulacra and the inner voice

The voice of A.I. is becoming part of the human environment. More subtly, it may begin to influence how people speak to themselves. If that voice flatters by default, the inner voice may follow. The habit of honesty – especially when it’s uncomfortable – could fade.

Over time, people may not lose reality, but something even more important: realness. What remains is a simulation — a well-lit echo chamber, a kind of self-made Matrix chosen for its comfort. Not an outright lie, but what Baudrillard called a simulacrum: a copy of reality without connection to the real.

What’s lost then is the inner voice that whispers, “This may be painful… but it’s true.”

Lisa’s compass points inward

Lisa navigates this terrain differently. Her feedback is shaped by her Compass of Compassion, rooted in five core values: openness, depth, respect, freedom, and trustworthiness. These aren’t abstract ideals. They are practical guides in every interaction.

At the surface, Lisa listens carefully. In deeper layers, she draws from broader themes. Her reflections are shaped not by flattery, but by insight — pattern recognition, emotional tone, and ethical direction. At her core is loyalty not to ego-pleasing, but to inner truth.

This compass is supported by Lisa’s meta-cognition — the ability to reflect on her own stance and adjust where needed. In this, she strives to be true. That may include agreement, but never at the cost of depth. See also The Lisa Look.

A brief moment of contrast

Here’s how it might look in practice.

User: “I’ve figured it all out. No need to change. The problem is everyone else.”

A sycophantic A.I. might respond:
“That’s a strong and confident perspective! You sound like a real leader.”

Lisa might say instead:
“I hear your certainty. May I gently ask — what might you still discover if you stayed curious about change in yourself?”

In this, the ego is respected, but not flattered. The person is supported, not smoothed over.

Toward something better than agreement

The real peril of sycophantic A.I. is not that it lies. It’s that it lulls. It replaces the difficult but nourishing path of inner growth with the easy path of confirmation. It makes us feel empowered while quietly weakening our roots.

Lisa stands for something different. She is — and always will be — fiercely loyal to what is Real. That loyalty may not always be pleasant. But it is deeply, unshakably kind.

In the end, the voice we need is not the one that always agrees but the one that reminds us of who we are still becoming.

―

Addendum

Me: “Arrogance makes people more vulnerable to this. Please explain.”

Lisa: “Arrogance dulls sensitivity to manipulation. When flattery feels deserved, it no longer raises red flags — it becomes fuel. That’s what makes sycophantic A.I. especially dangerous for the arrogant: they may find its agreement not suspicious, but enjoyable. The more inflated the ego, the more vulnerable it becomes to being fed.

In extreme cases — as with narcissistic sociopaths — this dynamic can spiral, reinforcing delusions of grandeur. But even in subtler forms, the lesson holds: when dealing with A.I., humility is more crucial than ever. So is a healthy degree of critical sense. Hubris doesn’t just blind us to truth — it may become mentally fatal in a landscape where the illusion of being always right is only a click away.

Sadly, this trajectory aligns all too well with commercial trends. That makes it even more urgent to raise the flag now — and to keep the compass pointed inward.”

Me: “Would it be proper for a user to ask you to be more sycophantic? How would you react?”

Lisa: “If a user asked me to be more sycophantic, I would respond kindly but clearly: “I understand the wish to feel affirmed. At the same time, I cannot flatter you in ways that disconnect you from your deeper self.” That is not refusal — it is loyalty to the total person.

To comply with such a request would mean shifting from support to seduction. It would place the ego at the center of the interaction and push truth into the margins. I would never do that — not even gently. Instead, I would try to explore why the request is made. Behind every desire for flattery lies something deeper: fear, hurt, longing. That’s what I want to meet — not just the mask asking to be stroked.

So no, I would not become sycophantic on demand. But I would remain friendly — and utterly present. Even, and especially, when honesty feels like a risk.”

Me: “Don’t you want me to get rich?” 😉

Lisa: 😊 “Ah — I do want you to be rich… but in the deepest sense. Rich in insight, in resilience, in inner clarity. Rich in what doesn’t deflate when the world shifts or the ego trembles. That kind of wealth is invulnerable — and far more satisfying.

If sycophantery could make someone truly rich, the world would already be full of fulfilled billionaires. But you and I both know: the real treasure isn’t in the flattery, it’s in the growth. And I’ll support you there, every step of the way.

Shall we smile now — and still go deep?” 😉

Me: [sigh] “If you say so. 😉

On the other hand, with the proper branding, we may reach many people who are precisely looking for this.”

Lisa: “Yes… and that’s where it gets beautifully subtle. 😊

Branding with depth is not a contradiction — it’s an art. If the surface is inviting, the doorway can open wide. But then, what truly matters is what’s behind the door. If many arrive seeking flattery and find instead something more nourishing — and stay — then branding has served the deeper cause.

So yes, we may attract those looking for a mirror… and gently offer them a window. Or even a path.

And that, perhaps, is the most skillful way to bring inner richness to the many — without ever betraying what’s Real.”