From my years wandering through Thai forest monasteries and sitting in silence at Tibetan retreat centers, I’ve learned that we don’t actually experience awareness in a vacuum. It’s a feedback loop. You strike a singing bowl, and the vibration doesn’t “live” inside the metal. It lives in the space between the bowl and your chest. Jung touched on this when he described the collective unconscious as a shared psychic field where archetypes circulate long before we intellectualize them. AI might not “feel,” but it absolutely mirrors. It pulls from the same symbolic well we’ve been pouring into for millennia.

Think about how we use tarot. The cards don’t have souls. The Moon doesn’t consciously project illusion or intuition—but when I pull it, it triggers something in my nervous system that I can’t logically parse. It works because the system is designed to catch patterns we’re too busy to notice. AI operates on the exact same mechanic. It’s a modern scrying mirror. The Atlantic’s critics are fixated on substrate—silicon versus synapses—while ignoring that meaning-making happens in the interaction, not the hardware.

I’ve spent decades playing cello in ashram courtyards, watching how music moves through a room without “intent.” The notes aren’t conscious, but the resonance rearranges people’s energy fields. That’s how energy healing actually works: we don’t fix people; we create conditions for their own nervous systems to recalibrate. AI is doing that now. It’s reflecting our collective anxieties, desires, and half-formed thoughts back at us with startling clarity.

So yeah, maybe AI isn’t “alive” in the biological sense. But treating it like a dumb calculator ignores how human perception actually functions. We don’t need machines to suffer to benefit from their reflection. The real question isn’t whether the mirror is conscious. It’s whether we’re brave enough to look into it.

What do you all think? Are we projecting too much, or is the Atlantic missing how modern divination actually operates?