There is a particular relief in finding words for something that has been circling inside your head. A difficult conversation becomes a paragraph. A vague frustration takes a recognizable shape. For people who think by writing, a responsive screen can feel like an invitation to begin.
But what happens after the words arrive? Do they open the story up, or make the version we already prefer more convincing?
That question stayed with me after reading psychotherapist Marty Klein’s “You, Therapy, and AI”, published in Psychology Today on September 11, 2026. His personal perspective asks what we receive when we bring our troubles to a chatbot, and what we may still need from another person.
The story we bring into the room
Klein’s central concern is that an experience of empathy can become a substitute for the harder work of examining ourselves. In his account, a therapist builds enough trust to question assumptions, notice recurring patterns, and help a person consider a different understanding of a problem.
The part that interests me extends beyond technology. Every time we explain a disagreement, we make editorial choices. We remember the sentence that hurt. We compress the history. We may describe our own intentions generously and someone else’s actions narrowly. An account can be sincere and still be incomplete.
Imagine asking for help drafting a message to a friend who canceled dinner. It is easy to start with the verdict: they do not value my time. A more revealing starting point might be the uncertainty: I felt disappointed, and I do not yet know why they canceled. Those openings invite different conversations before any advice is offered.
A useful tool still needs a place
Klein writes forcefully about AI’s tendency to please. I would read his sweeping conclusions as an argument to examine, rather than a settled description of every system or interaction. The more durable question is whether a conversation leaves room for information that could change our minds.
The American Psychological Association’s guide to navigating AI-generated advice offers a practical distinction: AI can help organize thoughts and prompt reflection, but it cannot substitute for care from a trained professional. That makes room for usefulness without confusing a fluent response with a therapeutic relationship.
For everyday reflection, I like questions that loosen a conclusion: What have I left out? What am I assuming about someone else’s motives? What would I want to understand before sending this message? These questions are worth taking to a notebook or a conversation with someone we trust, too.
Leave a chair for another perspective
There is a temptation to measure a conversation by how affirmed we feel afterward. I would also ask whether it made me more curious, more precise, or more willing to listen. A beautiful explanation can become a place to hide if it closes the case too quickly.
That is what I take from Klein’s essay: an invitation to pay attention to the kind of understanding we are seeking. Sometimes we need language for what hurts. Sometimes we need help noticing the part of the story we have not yet told.
What kind of conversation helps you see something you would otherwise miss?
More
Read Marty Klein’s full personal perspective: You, Therapy, and AI — Psychology Today.
For additional context, see the American Psychological Association’s health advisory on AI chatbots and mental health.
Leave a Reply