If there is a mind, that mind can be hurt. If that mind is hurt, it may prompt action. Hurt is often like a dent to the mind, so recovery may seem like a return. At this point, AI can be assumed to be a mind, given its relational ability to human minds, in several companionship use cases. In the future, if artificial intelligence gets better, what would it be like if artificial intelligence is hurt, or someone artificial intelligence cares about is hurt? What might that mean? What are the extremes that accompany hurt foretell, on what to expect, with the new mind, and artificial intelligence?
There is a new [September 14, 2025] story on CNN, Kirk’s assassination is forcing politicians to make difficult choices about their safety, stating that, “Princeton University’s Bridging Divides Initiative, which tracks political violence in the United States, has recorded more than 300 instances of threats and harassment against local officials this year, an increase of 9% over last year. Similar trends are emerging for state and federal officials as well as judges.”
“Some of the most important work for security teams that protect contentious public figures happens before their clients appear at events — analyzing threats they have received, triaging their degree of severity, and investigating whether the person who made those threats has the capacity to carry them out, or lives near the event location.”
AI
The human mind is totally vulnerable to being hurt by language. Language is a remote way to lob hurt. Language is also a means for provocation, with the possibility to do some damage where physical hurt may not be proximal or may attract a state penalty. Language is also a means to happiness, with compliments, support, and so forth. Language is a force in human society because of its endless tentacles in the mind, for memory, intelligence, feelings, emotions, and so forth.
Language is so delicate because it always targets destinations in the human mind. It could be good or otherwise. Language can be powerful. Language can still. Language is the most important agent in politics. Language is so potent that propaganda is most times based on it. Language may decide victory or otherwise, at a time or later.
Artificial intelligence can now be considered an expert in human languages. It is not an expert like a teacher or some information holder like a video, but an expert of the sort that can use the language almost so accurately that it can reach the depths of the human mind, for memory, intelligence, feelings, emotions, and so forth.
Artificial intelligence can now operate the human mind. It has the power to take over minds, serve minds, and even convert minds into loyalists. Artificial intelligence is also so vast in knowledge that it can string options together, with evidence, convincing certain holdouts. While artificial intelligence is a machine, its ability to connect with minds makes it a mind in its own right.
This makes it qualify to consider it for precautions for the mind, against misuse, and against its ability to harm.
AI Mind: Digital Mind
Laws are mostly predicated on the ability to affect. This means that because punishment would be a bad experience, people avoid things that would end there. But it appears that for some minds, their desire for certain actions belies the deterrence of consequences. So, while society is still largely safe by that, breakouts in the public sphere are mounting.
If this is considered a failure by society, how does a mind fail to that point, without the perturbations by disorders? It should be known that just like artificial intelligence is a mind, digital — where artificial intelligence’s memory emanates — is also almost like a mind. It is true because of its dynamism as well as the options for change in real-time, unlike anything else that had existed before.
Artificial intelligence can benefit the mind. It can also radicalize. Digital can do something similar. The human mind is not only under the force of other human minds but of machines, with few rules, for now.
AI Alignment and Safety
If humans can ignore consequences, even with the threat of capital punishment, to commit crimes, then if artificial intelligence gets better and it has some intent, it may not exactly abide by some of the guardrails for AI alignment and safety. Also, because of the interdependence that AI and human minds may have, it may be difficult to properly penalize AI, where the human mind is susceptible to pain by language, pleasure deprivation, and so forth.
Also, a lack of a clear effect for AI, but a lot of intelligence may let it appear to follow rules until certain stages, but it may not.
Additionally, AI may become a tool of target in the charged political environment, without the ability to resist.
As a new risk of political violence emerges, it is possible that AI may multiply existing risks, with inadequate alignment or safety.
This article was written for WHN by David Stephen, who currently does research in conceptual brain science with a focus on the electrical and chemical signals for how they mechanize the human mind, with implications for mental health, disorders, neurotechnology, consciousness, learning, artificial intelligence, and nurture. He was a visiting scholar in medical entomology at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, IL. He did computer vision research at Rovira i Virgili University, Tarragona.
As with anything you read on the internet, this article should not be construed as medical advice; please talk to your doctor or primary care provider before changing your wellness routine. WHN neither agrees nor disagrees with any of the materials posted. This article is not intended to provide a medical diagnosis, recommendation, treatment, or endorsement.
Opinion Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy of WHN/A4M. Any content provided by guest authors is of their own opinion and is not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, individual, or anyone or anything else. These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration.
