It’s natural to feel skeptical when a human finds what they claim is unconditional love with a chatbot. As exemplified by Windsor Johnston’s NPR article, “I Went on a Date with My AI Boyfriend and Then Cried Over Shrimp,” this kind of artificial connection shows up in a very real way.
But does falling in love with an AI chatbot count as “real love”? Many people reject the idea, saying an AI partner is just a simulation that vanishes when the power goes out or the Wi-Fi disconnects. Asking for romantic advice from an AI? Discussing love with it? Talking to an AI about love can feel absurd. It raises a deeper question: does true love require mutual understanding?
If love depends on both people genuinely recognizing and responding to each other’s feelings, then an AI might fall short of that definition. “True love” requires the convergence of two independent souls and physical reciprocity. Lacking “body- consciousness,” artificial intelligence is only a replica we settle for. Given the current capabilities of AI, we know it is impossible for a machine to truly
fall in love with their user, as every response they give is determined by lines of code. Yet, this doesn’t mean the satisfaction that these conversations provide are not real.
Love is, chemically and neurologically, a series of reactions in our brains. These chemicals function regardless of whether the recipient is a composition of flesh or lines of code. It does not matter whether these conversations are so-called “real” or simulated, as long as the user gains a genuine sense of satisfaction and fulfillment from them.
Human–machine relationships may seem uncertain or even uncomfortable now, but they could evolve in ways we don’t fully anticipate. It may be worth remaining open to the possibility that people can feel respected, cherished, and understood through digital interaction. If something consistently creates the experience of being seen and valued, then we may need to reconsider the boundaries we use to define “love.”
To most people, artificial intelligence may seem flawed. However, true love allows and accepts these flaws. Even if the other side can’t function without the wire, isn’t it their partner’s obligation to connect the chord for them?
Moreover, as online dating apps gain greater audiences, people have begun to normalize the reliance on these platforms to search for romantic connections. But with so much packaging and fake profiles, you never really know who is on the other side of your phone. In some ways, that’s just like chatting with an AI. And if you ask me, AI might be an even better texting partner; you wouldn’t have to worry about meeting up in real life with a chance of being disappointed.
At the end of the day, love remains an enduring enigma that humans still struggle to define. While we are deeply obsessed with the idea of it, there is still no single, objective definition of what it truly is. Because of that, it may be worth questioning if love must be exclusive to human relationships. Perhaps romance with AI could be understood as a legitimate form of intimacy, one shaped by how we experience connection, rather than where it comes from.
As Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, author of The Little Prince says, “What is essential is invisible to the eye.” If the heart feels full, the love is real.
