AI Can 'Re-create' Our Loved Ones After They Die, but Is This a Good Idea?
The Wired Word for the Week of May 19, 2024

In the News

The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) continues to present us with ethical dilemmas, and not the least of these is whether we should create representations of people who have died that allow us to see and hear them again. And, asks an article in The Wall Street Journal, where those representations are of people we loved, will those lifelike renderings bring comfort to us who are grieving, or will they distort the grieving process?

This is not the same as viewing a video of a departed loved one that was filmed while the person was alive and voluntarily speaking. Rather these are compilations of segments of existing audio and/or video and CGI (computer-generated imagery) controlled by algorithms that allow the deceased individual to have whole new conversations.

Hollywood has already done this, most famously by reproducing Carrie Fisher to appear in Star Wars films after the actress herself had died. (See the SYFY link in the list below for some details on the process.)

More recently, parents of some school shooting victims have permitted their deceased children's recorded words to be AI-rearranged and used to generate AI calls to lawmakers to plead for gun control measures. In each call, the speakers identified themselves as dead victims of the shootings.

Also, during the recent New Hampshire primary election, a deepfake robocall, claiming to be President Joe Biden, went to many potential voters in an attempt to discourage Biden voters ahead of the primary. The call, which did indeed sound like Biden, was commissioned by a political consultant working for a rival candidate. Unlike the movie uses and calls to lawmakers, this use of AI has been ruled illegal by the FCC since it was intended to dampen voter turnout, and the consultant and the companies who helped him create the call have since been sued by the League of Women Voters.

But these uses aside, the thrust of The Wall Street Journal article is on whether AI re-creation of deceased loved ones as digital avatars is helpful to grieving people, especially as the AI technology is sure to be improved. 

Rather than offering an opinion, the Journal asked readers for reactions. The Journal posed the question this way: "AI is already creating chat, audio and video representations that mimic deceased people. Will conversing with them comfort loved ones, or prolong the feeling of loss and prevent them from moving on? If the chatbots are flawed, could they warp our understanding of who the person really was?"

Reader responses were varied and thoughtful, some with a firm  "yes" or "no," some with a "yes, but," others considering the potential, and still others calling the practice "cold comfort," "warping reality" or even "creepy." Some said the matter should be left to individual choice.

One of the "nos" put it, "I would find no comfort from chatting with a mimic of a lost family member. There's no possible way an algorithm could capture my family member's humor, spontaneity, quirkiness and spirit. No way. That's an AI bridge too far."

Another "no" said, "Having photos or videos of lost loved ones is a comfort. But the idea of an algorithm, which is as prone to generate nonsense as anything lucid, representing a deceased person's thoughts or behaviors seems terrifying. It would be like generating digital dementia after your loved ones' passing."

One of the "yeses" called the development "A positive for many," adding, "I think this aspect of AI will prove ultimately popular, as people live longer, and as we face personal loss. The mimicry will be significantly flawed initially, but probably since this sort of application is likely to have great appeal, improvements will be rapid. … Something to look forward to."

Another "yes" said, "So bring it on. Progress always entails costs and uncertainty. The faster this can be accomplished the faster the benefits accrue and the costs will diminish. Mistakes will be made, but we'll learn from them and there are some good outcomes here worth striving for."

Another respondent pointed to the divine Creator, and said, "A machine isn't an embodied human being. AI chatbots will prolong the effects of loss if used this way. They will divide humans. They will muddy our understanding of reality. Humans are made in the image of God; a machine cannot replicate that." 

See The Wall Street Journal article below for more responses.

More on this story can be found at these links:

Should We Use AI to Re-Create Our Loved Ones After They Die? The Wall Street Journal
These Six Young People Died by Gun Violence. Now Their AI-Generated Voices Are Sending Gun Control Pleas to Lawmakers. CNN
It Took More CGI Than You Think to Bring Carrie Fisher Into The Rise Of Skywalker. SYFY
Democratic Operative Admits to Commissioning Fake Biden Robocall That Used AI. NBC News 

The Big Questions

1. What experiences have you had with AI? Do you feel qualified to talk about its potential for good ... and for bad? 

2. Whether you know much about AI or not, what does your experience with grief suggest about the good or harm of having access to avatars of your deceased loved ones to converse with?

3. After a loved one dies, might a representation of that person discussing with you things the two of you never got around to discussing be of help when you are grieving? How do you think the knowledge that the loved one's side of the conversation was generated by AI impact you in your grief?

4. If an AI representation is flawed, could it warp our memory of who the deceased person really was?

5. What is unique to humankind that can never be replicated in any invention? Is it something other than intelligence? And if so, what is it?

Confronting the News With Scripture and Hope
Here are some Bible verses to guide your discussion:

1 Samuel 28:8, 15
… They came to the woman by night. And [Saul] said, "Consult a spirit for me, and bring up for me the one whom I name to you." ... Then Samuel said to Saul, "Why have you disturbed me by bringing me up?" Saul answered, "I am in great distress, for the Philistines are warring against me, and God has turned away from me and answers me no more, either by prophets or by dreams, so I have summoned you to tell me what I should do." (For context, read 1 Samuel 28:3-25.) 

When Saul was initially chosen to be Israel's king, God directed Samuel, who was a judge, priest and prophet in Israel, to anoint Saul for this role. After Saul took the throne, Samuel became his spiritual adviser, telling Saul of God's instructions and will. 

But then came an incident where Saul disobeyed God, and consequently, God rejected Saul as king of Israel. Though Saul stayed on the throne until his death, he did so without any guidance from Samuel, who left Saul's presence on the day of the king's disobedience and did not see him again. In the intervening time, Samuel, at God's direction, anointed David to replace Saul. 

Samuel was not the only priest in Israel, but later, after one priest gave David some food as he was fleeing from Saul (who was out to kill him), Saul, in a rage, had all 85 priests in that place put to death. 

At some point during his reign, Saul expelled the wizards and mediums from Israel. This was in keeping with the Law of Moses, which expressly prohibited frequenting wizards, witches and mediums (Leviticus 19:31).

That brings us to the incident at Endor. Sometime after Samuel died, the Philistine army marched against Israel. This struck fear in Saul's heart. He knew he needed to do something, but he wanted to know what to do that would have God's blessing. The problem was, he had no channels left for hearing from God. 

In that day, leaders sometimes relied on dreams to hear from God, but Saul did not receive a dream answer. Leaders sometimes heard from God by way of prophets, but the prophet Samuel had died, and there was no other prophet on the scene. Leaders could ask the priests to determine God's will using the Urim and Thummim, which were sacred objects carried inside the breastplate of the high priest of ancient Israel and used as oracular media to determine the will of God. But after Saul killed so many of their colleagues, what priests remained in Israel stayed away from him. The high priest, in fact, was now with David.

But Saul really wanted God to tell him what to do, so he told his servants to find a medium so he could call up Samuel from the dead. Although there were officially no mediums left in Israel, his servants apparently knew of a woman in the city of Endor who had been one, so Saul decided to visit her.

The medium did manage to call up the disembodied spirit of Samuel, but instead of telling Saul what to do, Samuel reminded Saul that God had already rejected him and told him that he and his sons would die in battle with the Philistines the next day, which is what happened.

When the séance ended, Saul was so overwhelmed that the medium had to cook dinner for him just to revive him enough to be able to return to his palace.

This biblical story is not a validation of spiritualism, mediums and others who claim to be able to communicate with the dead. In this particular case, Saul believed talking to the dead was possible, and apparently God permitted him to have an experience in which Saul received the message God wanted him to hear, but we should not generalize this story as evidence that so-called ghost whispering is anything more than theatrics, or these days, technology.. 

Questions: What does this biblical story tell you about God? What does it tell you about encounters with the dead? What expectation would you have of a meeting with a technological representation of a deceased loved one? Who should control the algorithms in those encounters?

Revelation 7:9-10
After this I looked, and there was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, robed in white, with palm branches in their hands. They cried out in a loud voice, saying, "Salvation belongs to our God who is seated on the throne and to the Lamb!" (For context, read Revelation 7:9-17.) 

Here, John of Patmos has a vision of heaven in which he sees those faithful ones who have died, and he discovers that they are not lost, but are doing just fine there in God's presence.

Questions: How does the Bible's teachings about eternal life figure into your grieving for those who have died? What is the significance of their white robes?

Hebrews 12:1-2
Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight and the sin that clings so closely, and let us run with perseverance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith ... (For context, read Hebrews 12:1-13.) 

The news story is about AI making it possible for us to view our departed ones in some kind of digital format. But this verse from Hebrews reverses that idea in that it talks about the faithful dead as a great "cloud of witnesses" who, having already completed their race of life, have gone to the viewing stands to cheer us on as we run "with perseverance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith." 

Questions: What actions are followers of Jesus urged to take as they run their race? Of what practical help to us is the cloud of witnesses, a sample of which is described in Hebrews 11?

1 Thessalonians 4:13-14
But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers and sisters, about those who have died, so that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope. For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have died. (For context, read 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18.) 

The apostle Paul's purpose in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 is to address believers' concerns about those who die before Christ returns. And his point is that when Jesus returns, the faithful who have died will be raised to join Christ and the faithful who are still alive.

But his statement above has a larger application as well, for it applies to all our concerns about those who pass away. We grieve just as nonbelievers do, but we have one difference: We do not grieve as those who have no hope. That hope, of course, is based on Christ and his resurrection, and on his promise of eternal life.

Questions: How does that hope express itself in times of grief? How is hope related to faith and love?

For Further Discussion

 1. In 2001, the Steven Spielberg/Stanley Kubrick movie A.I. was released and was a box-office winner. The movie was part science fiction, part fairy tale story about a boy robot who is programmed to love a human parent. The plot was set in the 22nd century when A.I. has come very close to approximating human intelligence. In the story, a husband and wife, whose son is in a lingering coma from which he may never awake, accept the prototype of a boy robot, "David," who is indistinguishable in appearance from a human boy, and, more importantly, who can be programmed to love them the way a real son would love his parents. The mother, Monica, initializes the programming and David becomes her loving son.
            But then the couple's real son awakes from his coma, and a sibling rivalry develops. The couple comes to view David as a threat to their biological son and eventually, Monica reluctantly turns David out, abandoning him in a forest. But David's programming, to love Monica, cannot be shut off, and the story goes on from there. Read the rest of the plot here and discuss how it makes you feel.

2.  A movie made in the early '80s had Robert Duvall playing the character of Mac Sledge, a boozy, broken-down, ex-country singer who checked into a rural Texas motel and then could not check out because he was flat broke. He stayed on to work on odd jobs around the place and eventually married the widow who owned the motel. He overcame his drinking problem and in time was baptized in the little church where his wife sang in the choir.
            One of Mac's big regrets was that he had been prevented from seeing his daughter from his first marriage. But then his daughter, now grown, stopped to see Mac. Sadly, their new relationship had just begun when she was killed in an automobile accident. After her funeral, Mac said to his wife, "I prayed to know why my daughter died and I lived. But I got no answer ... I don't know why I wandered out here and you took me in and married me. ... I don't trust happiness. I never did. I never will." And yet, by the end of the movie, we have the sense that Mac is going to be all right. Why do you think the movie was titled Tender Mercies?

3. Read and respond to this article, written from a Roman Catholic perspective, that is against the idea of using AI representations of the dead. 

Responding to the News

If you believe that viewing AI representation of the dead is not a good idea, you might want to specify in final written instructions you give to loved ones that you do not want to be presented to them in any AI format following your death.

You may also want to think about what you might want to leave behind to help those who will be grieving your passing to find some comfort and peace. For example, you may want to prepare a letter or video for each family member in which you tell them how much they mean to you and how you value them. You could arrange for these letters to be delivered soon after you die, but it might be even better to deliver them while you are still living, so that some good conversations can follow between them and you. 

Prayer

O God, come with comfort and mercy to all those who are grieving departed loved ones. Help us to be instruments of your mercy. In Jesus' name. Amen.

Copyright 2024 Communication Resources