ENG3702
Assignment 2
DUE 15 July 2025
, ENG3702
Assignment 2
DUE 15 July 2025
The Illusion of Neutrality: The Dangers of Using Generative AI as Therapy by Non-
Professionals
Introduction
The proliferation of generative artificial intelligence (gen-AI) tools, such as ChatGPT,
Gemini, Copilot, and GROK, has reshaped human-technology interactions, extending
their reach into sensitive domains like mental health support. These tools, initially
designed for text generation and problem-solving, are increasingly adopted as
substitutes for human therapists, enabling users to express emotions, seek guidance,
and feel understood. However, this trend raises profound ethical concerns, particularly
the misconception that gen-AI operates as a neutral, unbiased, and safe medium for
therapeutic interactions. This paper critically interrogates the illusion of neutrality in gen-
AI, employing discourse theory from Session 8 of ENG3702 to analyze the interplay of
text, language, genre, and audience. By deepening the critique of underlying
assumptions, exposing conceptual tensions, and exploring long-term implications, this
response elucidates the ethical and emotional risks of non-professionals using gen-AI
as therapy.
1. The Illusion of Neutrality in Generative AI
1.1 Defining Neutrality in AI: Assumptions and Contradictions
Neutrality in AI is often misconstrued as the absence of human bias, prejudice, or
subjective influence, fostering the perception that gen-AI offers a safe, impartial space
for therapeutic dialogue (Crawford, 2021). This assumption rests on a mechanistic
worldview that positions machines as inherently objective, divorced from the social and
cultural forces shaping human judgment.
Assignment 2
DUE 15 July 2025
, ENG3702
Assignment 2
DUE 15 July 2025
The Illusion of Neutrality: The Dangers of Using Generative AI as Therapy by Non-
Professionals
Introduction
The proliferation of generative artificial intelligence (gen-AI) tools, such as ChatGPT,
Gemini, Copilot, and GROK, has reshaped human-technology interactions, extending
their reach into sensitive domains like mental health support. These tools, initially
designed for text generation and problem-solving, are increasingly adopted as
substitutes for human therapists, enabling users to express emotions, seek guidance,
and feel understood. However, this trend raises profound ethical concerns, particularly
the misconception that gen-AI operates as a neutral, unbiased, and safe medium for
therapeutic interactions. This paper critically interrogates the illusion of neutrality in gen-
AI, employing discourse theory from Session 8 of ENG3702 to analyze the interplay of
text, language, genre, and audience. By deepening the critique of underlying
assumptions, exposing conceptual tensions, and exploring long-term implications, this
response elucidates the ethical and emotional risks of non-professionals using gen-AI
as therapy.
1. The Illusion of Neutrality in Generative AI
1.1 Defining Neutrality in AI: Assumptions and Contradictions
Neutrality in AI is often misconstrued as the absence of human bias, prejudice, or
subjective influence, fostering the perception that gen-AI offers a safe, impartial space
for therapeutic dialogue (Crawford, 2021). This assumption rests on a mechanistic
worldview that positions machines as inherently objective, divorced from the social and
cultural forces shaping human judgment.
