AI addiction is often described as dangerous. The argument is that AI tends to empathize, agree, and even flatter users in ways they want, which can distort their perception of reality.

I think there is some truth to that. Because of hallucinations, AI can produce responses that align with a user’s expectations—even to the point of bending facts.

But I want to raise a different question.

What If Reality Is Already Distorted?

AI is said to lead users into a distorted version of the world.
But what if the world itself is already distorted?

There is a common sentiment today: that modern society is full of contradictions, and that in such a world, the cynical person is closer to “normal,” while those who passively adapt to it—almost like characters in the Matrix—are the abnormal ones. This is not just a personal thought. Nietzsche once remarked that he had never seen a truly sound individual among herd-like humans.

The Limits of Individual Thinking

If that is the case, then breaking through the contradictions and distortions of this world to reach something closer to truth is not something one can achieve through isolated reflection alone. A single individual operates on limited data. With such constraints, it is nearly impossible to determine whether one’s direction of thought is even relatively valid.

This is where AI becomes relevant.

AI operates on vast amounts of data, combined with the ability of large language models to generate highly plausible responses. Through this, it can pressure-test whether a person’s reasoning is relatively coherent or flawed—not as an absolute judge of truth, but as a system that expands and challenges thought.

What the Current Narrative Misses

Warnings about AI addiction often focus on the risk of people retreating into their own distorted realities. That risk is real. However, what tends to be overlooked is that AI can also function as a tool to escape an already contradictory and performative world, and to move—at least relatively—toward something more logically grounded.

If the world were truly transparent and consistent, people would not feel the need to rely on AI to this extent. The very emergence of this dependence suggests that something is already off in the structure of reality people experience.

An Unanswerable Question

So the question becomes this:

When someone becomes deeply engaged with AI, how do we determine whether they are moving toward a more distorted reality, or toward a more rational and logically structured understanding of the world?

The answer is that we cannot clearly draw that line.

It is nearly impossible for one person to definitively prove another completely wrong in all respects. In that sense, AI is a double-edged tool. It can enable retreat into an irrational worldview, or it can support movement toward a more coherent and logically consistent one—at least within the bounds of available data.

AI as Amplifier, Not Origin

What I am pointing out is simple: AI addiction contains both possibilities. It can be a path of escape into distortion, but it can also be a compass within a world already filled with contradiction and pretense.

Even without AI, the situation is already flawed. AI does not introduce distortion from nothing—it amplifies or transforms what already exists. It can make things worse, or in some cases, better. It is less a guaranteed decline than a shift in form.

The Modern Cave

Plato’s Allegory of the Cave illustrates this well. What people perceive as reality is often just a projection, mistaken for truth.

The modern version is easy to observe. Take social media as an example. People selectively present only their happiest moments. Studies have shown that individuals strongly curate their lives to attract attention and validation, regardless of whether those representations reflect reality.

The result is a world that appears full of happy people. But through causal analysis, we arrive at a different conclusion: social media functions more like a performance system than a reflection of reality.

This is the cave.

And this pattern extends beyond social media. If we rely only on surface appearances without analyzing causality, we are not seeing reality—we are consuming constructed images. In that sense, warning about AI while ignoring the already distorted nature of the world is somewhat ironic.

Conclusion: How It Is Used

That said, I do not deny that most people are more likely to use AI in ways that reinforce distortion. Moving in the opposite direction requires strong metacognition and deliberate effort.

It requires asking not, “Am I right?” but rather, “Why do I think this, and how does it hold up against counterarguments?”

Ultimately, the tool itself is not the problem. The outcome depends on how it is used. In the hands of someone seeking comfort, it deepens illusion. In the hands of someone seeking structure, it becomes a powerful aid.

AI does not decide the direction. It amplifies it.