Memory and Mimesis in Our Relationships with Posthumous Avatars

In Henry Shevlin, AI in Society: Relationships (Oxford Intersections). Oxford University Press (forthcoming)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Critics have raised many moral and legal concerns about posthumous digital avatars. Here my focus instead falls on whether they are likely to enable the bonds with the dead that users apparently yearn for. I conclude that though posthumous avatars can have short-term therapeutic benefits in replicating “habits of intimacy” with the dead, users’ expectations for sustaining long-term bonds with the deceased via posthumous avatars are unlikely to be fulfilled. Posthumous avatars are unlikely to foster the construction of valued memories of the deceased and could in fact impede this process. Furthermore, bonds that develop with posthumous avatars are likely to disappoint users’ expectations for relationships that echo relationships among the living in being temporally dynamic, open-ended, authentic, and mutually shaping. Simply put, users will struggle to sustain living relationships with dead people. Posthumous avatars are therefore likely to prove ill-suited to continue the bonds that the living have with the dead in either of these two forms, especially if a ‘digital afterlife industry’ emerges to commercialize these.

Author's Profile

Michael Cholbi
University of Edinburgh

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-10-07

Downloads
41 (#104,816)

6 months
41 (#100,823)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?