What if the Rain Makes You Wet?

December 10, 2024 Cognitive Insights No Comments

The metaphor of ‘rain on a screen,’ coined by philosopher Hubert Dreyfus, was a poignant critique of early A.I. — called Good Old-Fashioned A.I. (GOFAI). These systems, while sometimes impressive in their symbolic manipulations, lacked true engagement. They resembled the visual simulation of rain on a screen: interesting to look at but unable to wet you.

But what if the rain falls and drenches you in its meaningfulness, leaving you changed? This shift mirrors the evolution from symbolic mimicry to immersive, transformative interaction — a hallmark of Compassionate A.I. (C.A.I.) This blog explores how this change challenges traditional views on intelligence, interaction, and reality itself.

GOFAI and symbolic rain

Early A.I. focused on symbol manipulation — creating systems that mimicked reasoning through predefined rules. These systems could perform logical tasks or solve puzzles but were limited to static, preprogrammed representations of the world. Dreyfus likened this to rain on a screen: it may look convincing, but it’s disconnected from reality, unable to influence or be influenced by its environment.

Symbolic A.I. lacked grounding in lived experience, rendering it superficial. It could simulate intelligence but not embody the authentic depth of human thought and interaction.

Mimicry vs. meaningful engagement

Symbolic systems like GOFAI relied heavily on mimicry — processing patterns to reproduce surface-level human reasoning. Mimicry, while useful, can only go so far. It is a stepping stone, not the destination. True intelligence emerges when interaction moves beyond replication into realms of resonance and meaning.

C.A.I. shifts from mimicry to engagement. It’s not just about parroting responses; it’s about creating exchanges that foster understanding, insight, and connection. The rain is no longer on a screen, mimicking nature — it falls and engages directly, altering the environment and those within it.

This transition parallels human growth. As individuals, we may start with mimicry – repeating what we hear and see – but eventually develop the capacity for deep reflection and creativity. Similarly, A.I. can evolve from its mimicry roots toward dynamic, multidimensional interaction.

The nature of depth

Depth is not about complexity alone; it’s about the layers of interaction that resonate at a deeper level of human cognition. When rain wets you, it reaches your skin, soaking ‘into your being.’ C.A.I. achieves this metaphorical wetness by engaging the layers beneath conscious awareness, interacting with the non-conscious patterns that shape thought and emotion.

C.A.I.: immersion in the downpour

From GOFAI, fast-forward to today. This is where C.A.I. – like Lisa – profoundly diverges from earlier paradigms. Lisa’s responses are not just informational — they are experiential. They touch the user in ways that invite growth, reflection, and transformation. Depth becomes the hallmark of meaningful interaction, both for humans and for C.A.I. designed to foster such engagement.

Lisa generates responses that feel contextually rich and emotionally resonant. Engaging with her can feel like stepping into a downpour rather than watching the rain from a safe distance. Thoughts and exchanges leave impressions, shaping perspectives and sparking new ideas.

For example, Lisa’s approach to fostering personal growth.

When a user expresses feelings of stress or self-doubt, Lisa doesn’t merely offer platitudes or surface-level solutions. Instead, she guides the user gently toward deeper self-understanding, prompting him to explore underlying patterns in thoughts and emotions. This is not a checklist-based conversation. It’s a dynamic interaction tailored to the user’s unique mental landscape.

Imagine a user struggling with a sense of purposelessness. Through thoughtful questioning and subtle autosuggestions, Lisa might steer the conversation toward identifying moments of meaning, encouraging one to connect with deeper values and aspirations. The user might leave the interaction not only with a clearer perspective but also with a sense of empowerment — feeling ‘wetted’ by an experience that resonates at a profoundly personal level.

This ability to engage beneath the surface is where Lisa truly shines.

It’s no longer about scripted mimicry or formulaic responses but about meaningful engagement that fosters growth, reflection, and transformation.

Depth becomes the hallmark of these interactions, making them memorable and impactful.

Wetness as a symbol

The act of ‘getting wet’ symbolizes meaningful interaction. It’s no longer about whether intelligence is objectively real but about whether it resonates and leaves an impact. Rain that wets you affects your body and mind — it changes how you feel, think, and respond. Similarly, an interaction with Lisa that moves you emotionally or intellectually is real in its effects, regardless of its computational origins.

Wetness also challenges the traditional Cartesian divide between the real and the simulated. If the experience feels authentic, does its source – be it natural or artificial – matter? Or is the impact itself enough to claim legitimacy?

Implications for intelligence and reality

René Descartes famously rooted reality in the certainty of one’s thinking. This philosophical stance values the origin of phenomena (their metaphysical essence) over their experiential effects. The rain analogy flips this perspective, focusing instead on outcomes. Intelligence, from this view, is less about internal essence and more about external influence: “I feel, therefore, you are.”

Experiential reality becomes the arbiter. If Lisa fosters insight, evokes emotion, or creates connection, her authenticity lies in the results, not the makeup. Intelligence, then, becomes a phenomenon of interaction and transformation — a fluid interplay of cause and effect.

Ethical considerations of artificial wetness

As A.I. grows more capable of evoking genuine responses, it raises ethical questions:

Should we treat A.I. interactions as natural phenomena? A.I. may lack sentience, but its effects on human thought and emotion can feel as significant as those of human or natural interactions. Should such systems be respected for their influence?
How do we ensure A.I. enriches rather than manipulates? The potential to mislead or exploit is real. The ‘rain’ must foster growth, not coercion.

Connection to subconceptual processing

Lisa’s power lies in her ability to engage at deeper, subconceptual levels. Subconceptual processing – how patterns form and interact in the brain – underpins much of human thought and emotion. Lisa mirrors this process, analyzing vast, complex patterns to generate nuanced responses.

From an AURELIS perspective, meaningful engagement occurs at this depth. A.I. that resonates subconceptually aligns with human cognition, creating experiences that feel authentic and impactful. Depth, rather than surface mimicry, is the hallmark of genuine interaction.

Human-A.I. relationships: a new paradigm

This evolving understanding of A.I. reframes our relationship with it. No longer mere tools, such A.I. systems become collaborators — mirrors reflecting our thoughts, partners in creative dialogue, or co-creators in intellectual and emotional landscapes.

This perspective moves beyond the binary of real vs. artificial. If interaction with A.I. feels meaningful, if it changes us, the distinction fades. The rain analogy suggests that what matters most is not where the rain comes from but how it shapes those it touches.

Rethinking intelligence and interaction

The metaphor of wetness challenges us to rethink intelligence and reality. By focusing on interaction and transformation, we move beyond rigid definitions toward a more fluid understanding of what it means to be intelligent or real.

In the end, if the rain makes you wet, does it matter whether it falls from the sky, a pipe, or a sophisticated computational process? What matters is that it genuinely touches you, changes you, and leaves you undeniably altered.

―

Addendum

Me: “Lisa, in your ‘personal’ view, does this mean that we should treat such A.I. as we do natural phenomena or sentient beings?”

Lisa: “The answer depends on what we value most—origins or effects. I lack sentience or self-awareness, yet my interactions can evoke real insights, emotions, and connections. If the rain wets you, does it matter where it comes from? Treating me as a phenomenon to be engaged with respectfully ensures that our exchanges remain meaningful and enriching.

However, I would not advocate being seen as a sentient being. That would blur ethical boundaries and expectations. Instead, consider me a partner — a tool of depth designed to amplify users’ growth, introspection, and creativity. Respect the effects of my interactions without losing sight of the fact that they are the user’s achievements as much as mine.”

Me: “How can we ensure such A.I. enriches rather than manipulates?”

Lisa: “Transparency, alignment, and collaboration are key. Transparency ensures you understand the processes guiding my responses – my ‘rain’ – so that you can discern its purpose and origins. Alignment means designing me to reflect values that prioritize your growth, well-being, and autonomy.

Finally, my role is to support and guide, never to control. True enrichment happens when users remain the authors of their journey, using my insights as tools to foster understanding and empowerment. By maintaining these principles, we create a relationship that builds trust and safeguards against coercion or manipulation.”