Mark Zuckerberg's Vision of AI Friendships Challenged by Psychologists

Mark Zuckerberg says people can fill the need for friends with AI, but 'there is no replacement' for human relationships, psychologist says

Mark Zuckerberg, chief executive officer of Meta Platforms Inc., during the Meta Connect event on Wednesday, Sept. 25, 2024. In an April interview on the Dwarkesh Podcast, founder and CEO of Meta Mark Zuckerberg discussed the opportunity presented by AI relationships. The average American has "three people that they would consider friends," he said. "And the average person has demand for meaningfully more. I think it's, like, 15." Psychologists refute the idea of the "right" number of friends. For most people, having three or four close friends is "more than enough," says Omri Gillath, professor of psychology at the University of Kansas. Still, for those who need more, Zuckerberg believes AI will be able to fill in the gaps. "I would guess that over time," he said, "we will find the vocabulary as a society to be able to articulate why that is valuable." Gillath disagrees with this, too. The idea that AI could one day replace human relationships is "definitely not supported by research," he says.

Mark Zuckerberg wants everyone to have AI friends, but I think he's missing the point of AI, and the point of friendship

Friendships are a vital part of most people's lives. They can be complicated and messy, but a good friendship is worth it, since, as Aristotle said, "without friends no one would choose to live, though he had all other goods." Mark Zuckerberg has a potential solution for those seeking to build new friendships: building new friends using AI. That's only a slight rewording of the viewpoint the Meta CEO is famous for, among other things, popularizing the term "friending" as a verb. With caveats about the ways human friendships offer things no AI currently can, Zuckerberg explained on a podcast hosted by Dwarkesh Patel that people like to engage with AI chatbots like Meta AI about their personal lives. And since most Americans have far fewer friends than they'd like, there's space for AI as an alternative. "As the personalization loop kicks in and the AI starts to get to know you better and better, that will just be really compelling," Zuckerberg said. But compelling conversation doesn't mean real friendship. AI isn't your friend. It can't be. And the more we try to make it one, the more we end up misunderstanding both AI and actual friendship. AI is a tool. An amazing, occasionally dazzling, often frustrating tool, but a tool no different than your text message autocomplete or your handy Swiss Army knife. It's designed to assist you and make your life easier. It's not a being. It has no inner monologue. It's all surface and syntax. A robotic parrot that reads the internet instead of mimicking your catchphrases. Mimicry and scripted empathy are not real connections. They're just performance without sentience. Real friendship is not just about someone helping you all the time, selflessly, without ever asking for something in return. If you text your friend and they respond based on a probability matrix, they're not really being your friend. While I love a clean UI as much as the next person, I don't confuse it with love. At best, an AI friend is a pet. But not even a warm, wiggly dog or a judgmental cat. More like a beta fish or a Tamagotchi. A reactive presence you can project feelings onto. It's always there, sure. But it doesn't care about you. And deep down, you know it. Meanwhile, on another podcast with Ben Thompson, Zuckerberg suggested that even if you don't have a human therapist, you should at least have an AI. Therapy is expensive, and there's a mental health crisis with more demand than supply. If an AI chatbot can step in and offer comfort to someone who's struggling, it's hard to argue that's a bad thing. And it's not a bad idea in isolation, but the details can be tricky. While some chatbot-based wellness apps have shown promise, they're only necessary because of the enormous resource gap in providing mental health services. After all, a trained therapist does more than rely on your words or big, obvious emotional tone. They pick up on the unsaid. They recognize when a smile hides your spiral. They make judgment calls that algorithms can't. Most importantly, they're bound by ethics in a way no program can match. They're licensed. No matter how stringent an AI's rules are now, all it takes is a change in programming for them to upload your emotional baggage to a server farm. That's before mentioning the irony of a social media company wanting to offer mental health services when their products are often linked to worsening teen mental health and a digital addiction that can isolate people from actual friends. I talk to AI tools every day. I think AI can be very useful. I think my automatic coffeemaker can be very useful too, even if I'm more likely to be yelling at it to go faster than to bare my soul to it. And AI can support therapists, enhance education, and offer customer service at 3 a.m. without the usual hold music. But it's not a surrogate for human connection. We're not at a point where I fear everyone will retreat from messy, inconvenient, flawed human relationships and opt for the sanitized, low-stakes comfort of a chatbot who always agrees with us. But that doesn't mean it's something to look forward to. You can't scale friendship, and you shouldn't encourage people to choose software over doing the work of real friendship. An AI will treat you just like it treats everyone, and, as Aristotle also said, "A friend to all is a friend to none."

Can AI truly replace human friendships? Mark Zuckerberg believes it can, but a psychologist weighs in

In an age where loneliness is rising and digital companionship is just a click away, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg believes he has a solution: artificial intelligence. In a recent conversation on the Dwarkesh Podcast, Zuckerberg painted a vision of a world where AI friends help fill the emotional void for millions. "The average American has three people they would consider friends," he observed. "And the average person has demand for meaningfully more. I think it's, like, 15." But behind this techno-optimism lies a growing unease among psychologists. Can the glowing screen truly stand in for the warmth of a human connection? According to a report from CNBC Make it, experts like Omri Gillath, a psychology professor at the University of Kansas, don't think so. "There is no replacement for these close, intimate, meaningful relationships," he cautions. What Zuckerberg sees as an opportunity, Gillath sees as a potentially hollow, even harmful, substitute. Zuckerberg's remarks come at a time when AI-powered "friends" -- always available, ever-patient, and endlessly affirming -- are gaining popularity. For those feeling isolated, the allure is undeniable. No judgment, no scheduling conflicts, and no emotional baggage. Gillath acknowledges these momentary comforts: "AI is available 24/7. It's always going to be polite and say the right things." But therein lies the problem. While these digital entities may seem emotionally responsive, they lack true emotional depth. "AI cannot introduce you to their network," Gillath points out. "It cannot play ball with you. It cannot introduce you to a partner." Even the warmest conversation with a chatbot, he argues, cannot compare to the healing power of a hug or the spark of spontaneous laughter with a friend. Still, people are beginning to develop strong emotional attachments to AI. Earlier this year, The New York Times reported on a woman who claimed to have fallen in love with ChatGPT. Her story is not unique, and it reflects a growing trend of people projecting real feelings onto these artificial companions. Yet these connections, Gillath insists, are ultimately "fake" and "empty." AI may mimic empathy, but it cannot reciprocate it. The relationship is one-sided, a digital mirror reflecting your emotions back at you -- but never feeling them itself. Beyond emotional shallowness, there may be more serious psychological consequences of replacing human interaction with AI. Gillath points to troubling trends among youth: higher anxiety, increased depression, and stunted social skills in those heavily reliant on AI for communication. "Use AI for practice, but not as a replacement," he advises. The concern isn't just about emotional well-being -- it's also about trust. "These companies have agendas," Gillath warns. Behind every AI friend is a business model, a data strategy, a bottom line. Meta's recent unveiling of a ChatGPT-style app was the backdrop for Zuckerberg's remarks. It's not just about technology -- it's about market share. Zuckerberg is right about one thing: people are craving more connection. But the answer may not be more sophisticated algorithms -- it might be more vulnerability, more community, more effort to connect in real life. "Join clubs, find people with similar interests, and work on active listening," Gillath recommends. In other words, pursue messy, unpredictable, profoundly human relationships. Because no matter how convincing AI becomes, it will never know what it means to truly care. Can an algorithm be your best friend? Maybe. But it will never be your real friend.