*Article* **Psychedelic Mystical Experience: A New Agenda for Theology**

**Ron Cole-Turner 1,2**


**Abstract:** When the link between psychedelic drugs and mystical states of experience was first discovered in the 1960s, Huston Smith challenged scholars in religion and philosophy to consider the implications. Very few took up his challenge. Beginning in 2006, hundreds of studies have linked psychedelics not just to mystical states of experience but to potential treatments for many mental health disorders. Regulatory approval for therapies is on the horizon, and hundreds of millions of people worldwide could be treated. Research findings challenge the underlying rationale of the War on Drugs, leading to decriminalization of specific psychedelic drugs or to authorization of their use in mental health contexts. Religious institutions are slowly adapting, with some referring to psychedelics as sacraments or as pathways to deeper spirituality. Religious leaders are also beginning to speak out publicly in support of careful use of these drugs, and some are training to become "psychedelic chaplains" to work alongside mental health professionals administering these drugs. Scholars in theology and religion are encouraged to engage these trends, to explore challenging philosophical and theological issues surrounding mystical states of experience in general, and to consider the long-term cultural impact of the most recent psychedelic research.

**Keywords:** psychedelic drugs; mystical experience; psychedelic therapy; Huston Smith; psychedelic spirituality; psychedelics and religion; psychedelics and theology; psychedelic churches

#### **1. Introduction**

In 1964, when it was first being discovered that psychedelic drugs were somehow linked to mystical experiences, Huston Smith posed a simple question: Do drugs have religious import? (Smith 1964). Writing in the *Journal of Philosophy*, Smith argued that when people take LSD or psilocybin, their experience can be profound, deeply meaningful, and religiously significant. He cited the available evidence, which was largely anecdotal and meager by today's standards.

We know enough, he said. It is time for scholars in philosophy and theology to pay attention. Reciting the evidence that drugs such as LSD and psilocybin are associated with mystical experiences, Smith laments that " students of religion appear by and large to be dismissing the psychedelic drugs ... as having little religious relevance" (Smith 1964, p. 517).

Some might argue that psychedelics experiences are no more spiritually profound than a coffee buzz or a beer keg hangover. But if, as Smith believed, the experiences they seem to induce are phenomenologically indistinguishable from the deepest experiences of the greatest mystics, then how can scholars in theology and religion simply dismiss or ignore them? Is that not willful ignorance of reality?

He asks himself whether we are witnessing a new round or "a reenactment of the age-old pattern in the conflict between science and religion. Whenever a new controversy arises, religion's first impulse is to deny the disturbing evidence science has produced". How else can we understand the "refusal to admit that drugs can induce experiences descriptively indistinguishable from those which are spontaneously religious"? Perhaps

**Citation:** Cole-Turner, Ron. 2022. Psychedelic Mystical Experience: A New Agenda for Theology. *Religions* 13: 385. https://doi.org/10.3390/ rel13050385

Academic Editors: Tracy J. Trothen and Calvin Mercer

Received: 1 March 2022 Accepted: 20 April 2022 Published: 22 April 2022

**Publisher's Note:** MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

**Copyright:** © 2022 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/).

what we are witnessing in this refusal is a modern-day "counterpart of the seventeenthcentury theologians' refusal to look through Galileo's telescope or, when they did, their persistence on dismissing what they saw as machinations of the devil" (Smith 1964, p. 524).

Smith continues by claiming that "the fact that drugs can trigger religious experiences" is now "incontrovertible". In 1964, "incontrovertible" might have been a slight exaggeration. But today, the word is too weak to describe clear evidence that cannot be discounted or denied. Smith dared his colleagues to "move to the more difficult question of how this new fact is to be interpreted" (Smith 1964, p. 524). His challenge, still unmet, is long overdue.

If theologians in 1964 had the equivalent of Galileo's telescope, we have the Hubble. Just consider where we are today. Study after study from research laboratories confirms that psychedelic drugs such as LSD and psilocybin reliably induce or "occasion" intense subjective experiences that research volunteers see as mystical. These intense subjective experiences are linked to promising new treatment strategies for a wide range of mental health disorders, from major depression to traumatic stress to existential distress in facing life-threatening illness. Clinical trials are advancing steadily through the regulatory approval process. Not only do psychedelics induce intense mystical experiences. Current evidence seems to suggest that psychedelics have the potential to treat a range of mental health disorders *because they induce such mystical experiences.*

Various cities across the United States have decriminalized possession of many of these substances, part of a wider national and international movement involving legalization of cannabis, growing cries for a reversal on the War on Drugs, and rising outrage over the ongoing racial injustice of mass incarceration. Michael Pollan's bestselling book, *How to Change Your Mind*, has generated a national conversation reaching across cultural and political boundaries (Pollan 2019).

Canada has already approved access to psilocybin under compassionate use regulation by those with life-threatening illnesses. Twice now, the United States Food and Drug Administration has granted a "Breakthrough Therapy" designation for potential psychedelic therapies. The state of Oregon has approved a plan to make psilocybin available as part of psychotherapy, with clinics and retreat centers already being organized.

Religious communities or churches, some with deep roots in traditional cultures and some newly conceived, are emerging especially in the US under the religious freedom clause of the Constitution. Leaders in Judaism and in traditional Christian churches are beginning to become more vocal in supporting the idea that these drugs and the mystical experiences they induce can play a positive role in the future of organized religion.

Smith's 1964 article went on to become the most reprinted paper in the history of the *Journal of Philosophy* (Walsh and Grob 2005, p. 224). In an interview published in 2005, Smith looked back across the divide imposed by the War on Drugs, still confident in what he calls "occasions when the validity of this exuberance breaks through on people in unmistakable, undeniable, and life-transforming ways" (Smith et al. 2004, p. 225).

Our focus here is on what are sometimes called "classic psychedelics", especially psilocybin, LSD, and dimethyltryptamine (DMT), which is present in the South American sacramental beverage *ayahuasca*. Other drugs such as MDMA work differently but are often included in some of the studies that will be considered. We begin by summarizing some of the research that shows the potential of psychedelics for mental health. Attention then shifts to the idea that these drugs induce mystical states of experience and what that might imply for the future of religion.

#### **2. Psychedelic-Assisted Mental Health Therapy**

Around the world, there is a growing awareness of a crisis of failure in dealing with the challenges of mental health. Despite massive spending, standard approaches in pharmaceutical research have produced very few successful new mental health therapies. By most accounts, the mental health crisis has been made worse by the COVID-19 pandemic. One possible bright spot on the horizon, however, lies in the direction of psychedelic-assisted mental health therapy. Clinical trials using a variety of psychedelic substances are underway at universities and pharmaceutical laboratories around the world. Publication after publication supports the claim that when used carefully, often together with psychotherapy, psychedelics have the potential to change fundamentally our ability to treat various mental disorders.

Biomedical research moves slowly through various stages or phases, each with clear limits and objectives regarding the safety and effectiveness of a candidate drug. Research involving psychedelic substances is no exception. Psychedelic substances are being studied in relation to various disorders, with work being conducted at all phases of research that range from the earliest "pilot studies" to Phase 3 clinical trials. Some substances being studied, such as MDMA (commonly known as "ecstasy"), are not usually considered "classic psychedelics", but they are often included as part of a wider effort to look medically at drugs that have been dismissed as having no medical value. Research is most often funded by private philanthropy or by commercial interests. In October 2021, however, the National Institutes of Health in the United States made its first psychedelic research grant in fifty years with an award of approximately US\$4 million to Johns Hopkins University for a double-blind, randomized trial to study the use of psilocybin to help smokers quit the use of tobacco.

If today's research is any predictor of tomorrow's treatments, we might expect that psychedelic treatments will be approved perhaps by the middle of the 2020s. The list of mental health disorders that may someday be treated by psychedelic-assisted therapy is long, and it includes widely diagnosed conditions such as "clinical depression" or major depressive disorder (MDD), substance addictions, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Research programs usually begin with exploratory or pilot studies that involve just a handful of research volunteers. Exploratory studies underway as of 2022 already "suggest potential benefits of psilocybin therapy in OCD, eating disorders and migraine suppression" (Kelly et al. 2021, p. 1). When a pilot study points to a promising therapeutic strategy, the work of research advances to randomized clinical trials. As of 2021, clinical trials are ongoing for "psilocybin therapy in MDD, bipolar disorder type II depression, alcohol use disorder, smoking cessation, cocaine addiction, opioid addiction, anorexia nervosa, depression in Mild Cognitive Impairment, OCD and various types of headaches" (Kelly et al. 2021, p. 1).

The sheer number of individuals who might someday be helped by psychedelicassisted therapy is staggering. "Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a substantial public health concern, affecting more than 300 million individuals worldwide. Depression is the number one cause of disability, and the relative risk of all-cause mortality for those with depression is 1.7 times greater than the risk for the general public"(Davis et al. 2021, p. 482). In the United States, it is estimated that "10% of the adult population has been diagnosed with MDD in the past 12 months" with an annual economic burden of more than \$210 billion (Davis et al. 2021, p. 482).

Numbers like that tend to attract attention from commercial enterprises and their investors. The personal finance magazine, *Forbes*, estimates that "prescription sales for depression is estimated to be \$50 billion a year globally, while the mental health market is worth about \$100 billion in annual sales. Biotech analysts say that FDA-approved psychedelic-assisted therapy could seize billions in annual sales if approved by the FDA" (Yakowicz 2021).

Commercial prospects aside, this research suggests that millions of people who are suffering from the debilitating despair of MDD will be helped. Researchers are summarizing the findings in words like these: "Our search documented robust positive and enduring effects of psychedelic treatment on measures of depression across several studies and research groups" (Aday et al. 2020, p. 183). The benefits are both dramatic and lasting. Another group reports: "These findings demonstrate that the substantial antidepressant effects of psilocybin-assisted therapy may be durable at least through 12 months following acute intervention in some patients" (Gukasyan et al. 2022).

In the 1960s, evidence was beginning to show that these drugs might offer help to those who face unusual anxiety or distress when diagnosed with a life-threatening illness. More recently, two separate studies reexamined the question and reported their findings in 2016. Between them, they found that approximately 85% of the "patients with life-threatening cancer reported increased life satisfaction or well-being six months postpsilocybin treatment. Many indicated that the experience was cathartic, led to a greater appreciation of life, and helped them come to terms with their own mortality". These findings suggest that in the not-too-distant future, drugs such as psilocybin may play a healing role, not in treating cancer, but in helping patients cope as they live with it through the final stages of life. A summary of these studies continues with words that almost suggest that these drugs possess a kind of spiritual power. "Psychedelic treatment's unique capacity to assuage distress related to dying has been demonstrated in several studies as researchers have found increased sense of continuity after death and death acceptance, as well as 77% of participants reporting less fear of death in another study" (Aday et al. 2020, p. 185).

Another study suggests that the distress-reducing effect holds up over time, not just for months but for years. Researchers found that "psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy was associated with large and significant reductions in anxiety, depression, hopelessness, demoralization, and death anxiety, as well as improvements in spiritual well-being at an average of 3.2 and 4.5 years following psilocybin administration" (Agin-Liebes et al. 2020, p. 161).

Remarkably, the psychedelic treatment seems to become *more effective* as time went on. "It is interesting to consider that certain domains of cancer-related distress, particularly certain key domains of existential distress, could continue to improve rather than diminish over time in relation to a single psilocybin session" (Agin-Liebes et al. 2020, p. 163). The report continues: "After 3 years, there were still reductions in anxiety, depression, hopelessness, and demoralization, death anxiety was significantly lower, and spiritual well-being was improved compared to baseline. After 4 years, 60–80% of the patients still showed significant reductions in depression and anxiety compared to baseline (Agin-Liebes et al. 2020).

What is it about psychedelic treatment, compared to all the other anti-anxiety treatments that have been tried, that gives it such unexpected and transformative potential? At least on the face of it, the evidence seems to suggest that the therapeutic power of psychedelics is mediated by the intense subjective or mystical experience that is commonly reported by those undergoing therapy. Leading psychedelic researchers are actively debating whether intense subjective experiences are necessary for effective therapy. Some argue that psychedelics are therapeutic because of the way they affect the brain at the level of neurons and networks, perhaps by stimulating neuroplasticity (Olson 2021; Sanders and Zijlmans 2021). Others insist that intense subjective experiences, however they might be defined, are a necessary component of therapy (Yaden and Griffiths 2021; Jylkkä 2021). A summary report on distress reduction notes that "participants overwhelmingly (71–100%) attributed subjective experiences of positive changes to the psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy experience, reporting improved well-being or life satisfaction, and rating it among the most personally meaningful and spiritually significant experiences of their lives" (Agin-Liebes et al. 2020, pp. 162–63). Another review of this research ends with this sentence: "Given the importance of spiritual and existential well-being in palliative care, psychedelics may play a unique role in enabling patients to address these critical issues in the last stage of their lives" (Schimmel et al. 2022, p. 30).

Other research teams are exploring even more possibilities for psychedelic-assisted mental health treatments. Future treatments for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) seem promising (Moreno et al. 2006). Substance use disorders, such as excessive alcohol consumption, are also promising areas for research (Bogenschutz et al. 2015). Particularly interesting is the use of psilocybin in helping smokers quit the use of tobacco. A pilot study involving 15 volunteers reported that 12 of them, or 80%, were able to quit smoking, a success rate far higher than any other smoking cessation therapy (Johnson et al. 2014). Participants completed a survey called the Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ), and

many of them (73%) rated their experiences with psilocybin as among the top five most meaningful experiences of their lives.

What was striking is that the higher the score on mystical experience, the greater the likelihood that they stopped smoking. In a follow-up study, the team of researchers reported that scores on the MEQ "correlated strongly, negatively, and significantly with a validated measure of cigarette craving ... This suggests a link between strength of mystical experience during psilocybin sessions and clinical change in subjective effects that drive addictive behavior" (Barrett and Griffiths 2018, p. 14).

In the 2015 report, the team teased apart the mystical experience component from the general intensity of the psychedelic subjective experience. They claimed that the overall "intensity of psilocybin session experiences was not significantly associated with smoking cessation treatment outcomes, suggesting that mystical-type effects specifically, rather than general intensity of subjective drug effects, are associated with long-term abstinence" (Garcia-Romeu et al. 2015). They also suggested that the dramatic success rate in their pilot study hinted that psilocybin might prove to be useful in treating other substance use disorders: "Perhaps the most exciting implication is that this drug class could be used to treat a wide variety of drug addictions, including smoking, alcoholism, and opioid dependence, as well as non-drug addictions (e.g. gambling addiction)" (Garcia-Romeu et al. 2015).

One intriguing proposal for psychedelic therapy is to treat autism spectrum disorder. It has been shown that classic psychedelics can increase empathy and social connection. "These findings suggest a therapeutic potential of psychedelic compounds for some of the behavioural traits associated with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), a neurodevelopmental condition characterized by atypical social behaviour". If so, can this approach help those who suffer from features of autism spectrum disorder, such as "reduced social behaviour and highly co-occurring anxiety and depression" (Markopoulos et al. 2021)? Obviously, more study is needed.

In view of these studies and of many others like them, we can say that we know that psychedelics have the potential to treat a wide range of mental health disorders. We do not yet know why. What is it about psychedelics that give them such wide-ranging potential? Researchers refer to this as a "transdiagnostic mechanism of action", the capacity of these drugs to do something that helps people suffering from various disorders. One recent summary of research puts it this way: "The mounting evidence of the use of psilocybin as an adjunct to treatment of a variety of psychiatric conditions ... suggests a transdiagnostic mechanism of action".

As of 2022, the leading candidate for the "transdiagnostic mechanism" is the intense mystical experience so often associated with psychedelics such as psilocybin. The report continues by pointing out that in study after study, "the intensity of mystical-type experiences reported after psilocybin sessions was associated with favorable outcomes. Furthermore, cross-sectional studies have suggested that mystical-type and psychologically insightful experiences during a psychedelic session predict positive therapeutic effects" (Davis et al. 2021, pp. 486–87).

Not only do psychedelics offer new possibilities in the treatment of a range of mental health disorders, but the underlying reason for their effectiveness may rest in their capacity to induce mystical experience. Across the board, researchers in the field agree about the potential effectiveness of psychedelics. Disagreement and debate, however, surrounds the idea that mystical experience is the essential mediating factor, the "transdiagnostic mechanism of action", that makes these substances so full of wide-ranging possibilities for therapy.

Before taking up that debate, we consider more fully what we are learning from research about the link between psychedelics and mystical experiences.

#### **3. Psychedelics and Mystical Experiences**

The concept of "mystical experiences" is a modern creation and is hard to define, but the central idea goes back at least for millennia. Such experiences may not happen every day, and often people who have them are reluctant to talk about them. But intense experiences with a religious or spiritual nature are common enough, and written reports of them are widely known.

In 1902, William James offered one of the first systematic accounts of mystical states of experience (James 2004). While James does not define mystical states, he does identify four qualities that they tend to have. Mystical states are *ineffable*, beyond description even by the person who has the experience. They have a *noetic quality* that makes them feel like "states of knowledge" that "carry with them a curious sense of authority" (James 2004, p. 210). For James, these two qualities are the essential features of mystical experiences, but he completes his list of four qualities by saying that these experiences also tend to feature *transiency* and *passivity* (Cole-Turner 2021).

A half century later, and just at the time when psychedelic drugs were becoming widely known, W. T. Stace expanded on what James had written. Stace added to the list of the features of mystical experiences (Stace 1960). His work was put to use almost immediately by Walter Pahnke in 1962 in what is known as the "Marsh Chapel" experiment. In the first scientific attempt to link psychedelics with mystical experience, Pahnke administered psilocybin and a placebo to a group of mostly theology graduate student volunteers. Huston Smith was present as a guide.

Wanting to find out whether his research volunteers underwent a mystical experience, Pahnke drew on Stace's work to create a questionnaire. He devised questions that asked individuals to rate how their experience met the key features or categories of mystical experience. "The categories include (1) sense of unity, (2) transcendence of time and space, (3) sense of sacredness, (4) sense of objective reality, (5) deeply felt positive mood, (6) ineffability, (7) paradoxicality and (8) transiency" (Doblin 1991, p. 7). While the research design was not up to today's standards, the results clearly showed the power of psilocybin to induce or to "occasion" mystical experiences, at least as they were described by Stace and measured by Pahnke. Any response that scored a strong positive response in each category was defined as "a complete mystical experience", meaning that it is "complete" in the sense that each defined quality of mystical experience is present.

Pahnke's work was derailed when governments regulated these drugs in the 1960s and by his own untimely death in 1971. The question of the link between psychedelics and mystical experience, however, was not forgotten. In 2006, a research report from the laboratory of Roland Griffiths and Johns Hopkins University marked the rebirth of scientific explorations regarding the connection between psilocybin and mystical states of experience. The main questionnaire used to measure mystical experience is known as the "Mystical Experience Questionnaire" (MEQ). It is based on Pahnke's work, although it has been modified several times. In its most recent version, it includes 43 questions and is called the MEQ43. The MEQ used in the 2006 study asks volunteers whether they think their own experience matches any of the various qualities or features of mystical experiences as described by Stace and Pahnke.

According to the 2006 report, "Thirty-three percent of the volunteers rated the psilocybin experience as being the single most spiritually significant experience of his or her life, with an additional 38% rating it to be among the top five most spiritually significant experiences"(Griffiths et al. 2006, p. 11). Perhaps the most astounding finding is that "22 of the total group of 36 volunteers had a 'complete' mystical experience after psilocybin" (Griffiths et al. 2006, p. 9). If Huston Smith believed in 1964 that Pahnke's findings demanded attention from scholars in theology and religion, how much more so do the findings of the Johns Hopkins team, beginning with the 2006 report.

At the end of their report, the researchers claim to have shown that under the right conditions, "psilocybin occasioned experiences similar to spontaneously occurring mystical experiences and which were evaluated by volunteers as having substantial and sustained

personal meaning and spiritual significance". They follow this with another claim, stated in the dry language of a medical journal but profoundly significant for the future of religion: "The ability to prospectively occasion mystical experiences should permit rigorous scientific investigations about their causes and consequences, providing insights into underlying pharmacological and brain mechanisms, nonmedical use and abuse of psilocybin and similar compounds, as well as the short-term and persisting effects of such experiences" (Griffiths et al. 2006, p. 15).

Research continues, of course, in hopes of learning more about the potential uses of psychedelics for mental health but also as tools for understanding the human brain. New techniques in brain imaging offer highly precise ways of seeing what happens in various brain networks while LSD or psilocybin is active in the brain. In other words, how do the phenomenological states of subjective experience correlate with an objective view of brain states as seen through neuroimaging? Some are hopeful that by combining the use of psychedelics with brain imaging, new insight into the mystery of human consciousness might emerge. Other researchers are asking how psychedelic-occasioned mystical states compare with states attained by various forms of meditation.

One area of particular interest is to compare psychedelic-occasioned mystical states with "near death experiences" or NDEs. A recent study of NDEs noted how the descriptions of the experience compare to the findings reported by researchers studying psychedelics. According to the report, "the experience of ego dissolution retrospectively reported by our participants is rather intense ... and comparable to what is reported after ingestion of psychedelics". The report notes that "no direct comparison regarding the experience of ego dissolution between NDE and drug-induced psychedelic experiences has been carried out yet. As a matter of fact, it would be interesting to directly compare the sense of self experienced in NDEs and psychedelic experiences using a sample of people who experienced both types of experiences" (Martial et al. 2021, p. 8).

Not only are the experiences similar, but so are the long-term changes. "The most frequently reported changes after a classical NDE correspond to a more altruistic and spiritual attitude, an important personal understanding of life and self, decreased fear of death, as well as a trend towards less materialist values", consistent with what is observed in studies involving psychedelics. What lies ahead for research? "Interesting questions to investigate include: what are the underlying neurobiological mechanisms potentially linking the two experiences? Do NDEs and psychedelic states reflect closely related brain states albeit via different means of induction?" (Martial et al. 2021, p. 9).

At the moment, any comparison between NDEs and psychedelic experiences offers more questions than answers. Given that psychedelic research can be induced in the laboratory, what light will it shed on NDEs? What is it about each, neurologically, that makes them similar phenomenologically? How is it that they are similar phenomenologically *and in terms of the long-term consequences*? Over time, how will theologians and scholars of religion come to think about the similarities and the differences between psychedelic experiences and NDEs?

#### **4. Mystical Experiences by Many Names**

Based on the research reported so far, there seems to be no getting around the fact that an intense subjective experience is necessary for most if not all forms of psychedelic-assisted therapy. If anything, it seems clear that the more intense the experience, the more likely the therapy will work at its highest level. "A guiding principle of psychedelic psychotherapy is that the occurrence of a profound, potentially transformative psychological experience is critical to the treatment's efficacy" (Roseman et al. 2018, p. 2). Another team, reporting specifically on psilocybin therapy to stop smoking, has this to say: "Those participants who had stronger mystical experiences in psilocybin sessions were more likely to be successful in quitting smoking (Johnson et al. 2019, p. 92).

Across the board, there seems to be general agreement among researchers that for psychedelic therapy to work, intense subjective experience is necessary. "Regardless of the terms chosen to define them, evidence suggests that profound psychological experiences can be predictive of subsequent psychological health" (Roseman et al. 2018, p. 2). But as this report intimates, perhaps we should not label the experience as mystical. The authors continue: "The so-called 'mystical' experience has been a classic problem area for mainstream psychology—if not science more generally. The term 'mystical' is particularly problematic, as it suggests associations with the supernatural that may be obstructive or even antithetical to scientific method and progress (Roseman et al. 2018).

It is entirely fair to say that the term "mystical" is often associated with religious experience or with claims about a supernatural realm. After all, the discussion of "mystical states" by William James appears in a book entitled *The Varieties of Religious Experience* (James 2004). It is also fair, however, to point out that this concern does not do justice to the idea of mystical states of experience as understood by James. He was not exactly a fan of organized religion. His view of mystical experience was widely inclusive, centered by familiarity of course in the Christianity of the West, especially Protestantism, but with examples drawn from other traditions, including what we might see as a kind of nature mysticism. James devotes considerable attention to Walt Whitman, noting with approval that the poet was often called a "pagan" but who for James is better seen as "the restorer of the eternal natural religion" (James 2004, p. 49). Mystical states, James says, are not the property or the protector of any religion or culture, having "neither birthday nor native land" (James 2004, p. 228).

More recently it has been suggested that we need to find a way to "naturalize" mysticism, to acknowledge its intensity and transformational powers while tamping down its religious connotations, perhaps by seeing them as simply one flavor among many that might be used to describe these experiences. For example, it has been proposed that mysticism be redefined in a way that is acceptable for those who object to going beyond the natural world in ways that are supernaturalistic or theistic. Instead of "supernaturalistic mysticism", they advocate "naturalistic mysticism", suggesting that the problem is not with the word mysticism but with its religious implications. What they advocate is the view that " ... naturalistically acceptable religious and spiritual experiences induced by psychedelics centrally involve transcendence of the sense of self and feelings of interconnection with nature" (Letheby and Mattu 2022, p. 8).

If James considered Whitman a mystic, then maybe the advocates of "naturalistic mysticism" are on to something with their proposal. It is hard to imagine, however, that in today's cultural setting, the word "mystical" can be severed so cleanly from religion that it will be acceptable to those who find religion objectionable. If "mystical experience" is not the most useful term for the intense subjective experience so often induced by psychedelics, however, then what words or phrases might be used? Some suggest words such as "awe" or "insight". "Gaining insight into one's thoughts, behaviours and experiences is thought to help reduce symptoms by enabling individuals to first understand their difficulties, reduce distorted negative beliefs and, eventually act on, and master these difficulties through conscious cognitive and behavioural changes" (Peill et al. 2022, p. 2). If mystical experience, as defined by the MEQ, tends to focus on what is beyond the individual, "our definition of psychological insight places greater focus on subjective personal insight bearing relevance to one's own self and life, as opposed to insight of a transpersonal nature, related to such things as the nature of consciousness, life and existence" (Peill et al. 2022, p. 11).

The term "cognitive flexibility" to identify the "transdiagnostic mechanism" has also been suggested. One team proposes that "a potential transdiagnostic neuropsychological mechanism that may be targeted by psychedelic therapy is cognitive flexibility. Cognitive flexibility is broadly defined as the ability to adaptively switch between different cognitive operations in response to changing environmental demands" (Doss et al. 2021, p. 1). It is widely accepted that psychedelics have the power to shake up cognitive rigidity and to bring about cognitive flexibility. But can they do so apart from some sort of intense subjective experience more broadly defined?

Another term for the "transdiagnostic mechanism" proposed recently in the psychedelic research literature is "quantum change experiences". We read that "quantum change is a more recently introduced concept that has significant overlap with mystical experience, but in addition to the phenomenology of the experience itself, quantum change emphasizes the persisting consequences caused by the experience. More specifically, quantum change experiences refer to sudden, distinctive, benevolent, and often profoundly meaningful experiences that are said to result in personal transformations that affect a broad range of personal emotions, cognitions, and behaviors" (Johnson et al. 2019, p. 92).

The term "quantum change" avoids any whiff of religion. For some it may stir up a faint memory of high school physics or chemistry or sound like a high-tech fix. Replacing "mystical states of experience" with "quantum change experience" shifts the semantic field in which the key phrase is embedded. It also shifts the emphasis from the intensity of the subjective experience to the suddenness of the change in outlook and behavior. The experience itself seems to recede if not disappear entirely in favor of behavioral change. Whether that is intended here is not clear, but it seems that a tilt from a humanistic to a behavioral approach is at stake.

It is true that no one will confuse "quantum change experience" with "mystical experience". Not even James would link the two. He would, however, probably see an affinity between "quantum change" and "conversion", a topic he addresses at length. If anything, "conversion" is even more tangled up with religion than is mysticism, at least as James sees it (James 2004, pp. 106–43). More than that, the term has been widely used, especially in Protestantism over the past 250 years, to identify the key religious moment in a person's life. "Quantum change experience" has all the marks of a conversion experience and is even defined as such by its advocates. For example, we read that "such experiences, which have been described in anecdotal reports dating back centuries, have been variously labeled as mystical experiences, conversion experiences, religious experiences, peak experiences, transcendental experiences, transforming moments, or epiphanies" (Griffiths et al. 2018, p. 49).

Compared to the term "mystical states of experience", the switch to "quantum change" and its link to "conversion" has the odd effect of bending the interpretation of this research in a peculiarly Protestant direction, specifically along the lines of classic American Evangelicalism. It tilts the focus away from the content of the experience, pointing instead to a dramatic change in an individual's behavior. If the term "quantum change" is used, and if it is linked to the idea of conversion, Evangelical Christians will see this as a kind of "born again" experience. Some will probably embrace their psychedelic mystical encounter, acknowledging that it changed their lives and brought them to their faith even if they do not feel free to say so publicly.

On the whole, there seems to be no easy escape from the semantic challenge of finding the right name for the experience that has the full transformative heft to serve as the "transdiagnostic mechanism". Anything short of "mystical experience" seems too weak, while anything vaguely mystical seems too religious. If James got it right by advocating a very wide meaning for the term, perhaps we can too. Naturalistic mysticism is clearly on the right track conceptually, but will it work in practice?

#### **5. Psychedelics as a Pathway toward Spiritual Health**

The potential for psychedelic-assisted therapy has attracted widespread attraction among researchers, drug companies, and investors. Little attention has been given to the capacity for these drugs to improve an overall sense of well-being. In the seminal 2006 report, we find this claim: "Seventy-nine percent of the volunteers rated that the psilocybin experience increased their current sense of personal well-being or life satisfaction 'moderately' (50%) or 'very much' (29%)" (Griffiths et al. 2006, p. 11). Looking back over a decade and a half of research, a recent report offers this conclusion: "Increased wellbeing is one of the most reliable psychological changes following a psychedelic experience" (Peill et al. 2022, p. 12).

Increased overall well-being is consistent with reduced depression or alleviation of distress in situations of life-threatening disease. As a concept, however, the idea of overall well-being is broader than the benefits of therapy. It calls attention to health in its broadest meaning, not only as treatment of disease but more akin to overall human flourishing or "spiritual health". Therapy is included, of course, but the potential increases in well-being brought about by the careful use of psychedelics go to the core of the person. At the same time, they also radiate outward in the sense that they change social relationships with other human beings, with life in general, and with the natural world.

We read, for example, that "changes in personality and attitudes are among the most commonly studied long-term changes related to psychedelic use" (Aday et al. 2020, p. 185). It has been shown that the personality trait of "openness" increases significantly as a result of participation in a single psilocybin trial (Griffiths et al. 2011). This has been linked to "lasting improvements in mood and positive attitudes", with "increased optimism and mindfulness" and with "nature connectedness". One summary continues by noting that "these increases in connection seem to be broad and generalizable as studies also noted sustained improvements in social relations and altruism" (Aday et al. 2020, p. 185). Taken together, research using psychedelics points to "long-term changes in wellbeing and quality of life" (Aday et al. 2020, p. 185).

In the short term, psychedelics induce intense subjective experience. On a longer timescale, the intense experience seems to lead not just to specific forms of therapy but to an increase in overall well-being. More research is needed, of course, but already the evidence seems strong enough to support the conclusion that there can be a lasting, generalized increase in human well-being through the careful use of these drugs.

For decades now, researchers in the field have used the phrase "set and setting" to describe the two key dimensions of careful use. "Set" refers to what the individual brings to the experience, and "setting" refers to the context in which the experience occurs. Exploring more deeply the meaning of each term, we see that "set refers to an individual's disposition and is broken up into two categories: long-range and immediate. The long-range set is composed of a person's general personality characteristics and individual history, while the immediate set refers to a person's expectations for using the drug and is heavily influenced by the motivation for using" (Neitzke-Spruill and Glasser 2018, p. 315).

What a person brings to the psychedelic experience influences what the person gets out of it. Because of the centrality of personal subjective experience in psychedelic sessions, expectations play a role here even more significant than the usual placebo effect common to all therapies. One way to think about this is to consider whether a person with some form of religious faith is likely to experience a psychedelic session in a way that is different from the experience of a convinced agnostic. Religious expectations can take many shapes, of course, and one way to define it is in terms of a generalized trust that leads to an open-minded sense of surrender to whatever may happen in the session. "Higher ratings of willingness to surrender are associated with stronger mystical type experience in both psychedelic experiences" (Millière et al. 2018, p. 20). Obviously, research into the role of religious expectation as a component of experimental "set" is challenging.

One study tries to ask whether religious expectations as a "set" variable have consequences in the quality or profile of the psychedelic experience. "We used whether or not a person identified as religious to measure long-range set and whether psychedelics are used with a spiritual intent to measure immediate set"(Neitzke-Spruill and Glasser 2018, p. 317). The study found that a "religious set" played a role:

"The present study examined whether there is a relationship between having a religious set (both identifying as religious and taking psychedelics with religious intent) and having mystical experiences when using psychedelics. We found a positive and significant relationship between a person's religious set and having mystical experiences when using psychedelic drugs. As hypothesized, being religious and taking psychedelic drugs with religious intent were significantly related to having stronger mystical experiences when using psychedelic drugs. Identifying with a religion significantly increased scores on the mysticism scale". (Neitzke-Spruill and Glasser 2018, p. 319)

The "religious set"—the general religious frame of mind and a willingness to enter into the experience with a sense of openness and surrender—plays a role in shaping the intensity and the quality of the subjective experience.

Just as "set" can be thought of in terms of short-term expectations and long-term personality characteristics, so "setting" can be thought of in terms of the immediate context and the broader cultural matrix. "Setting refers to the physical and social environment in which the drugs are being ingested, as well as cultural attitudes surrounding the use of such drugs". Particularly worrisome in that respect are the lingering reverberations of the War on Drugs, especially the fact that "the U.S. does not maintain a cultural tradition accepting the use of psychedelics and is much more individualistic; thus, a person's psychedelic experience will be largely shaped by individual values and beliefs"(Neitzke-Spruill and Glasser 2018, p. 315).

One key feature of the general cultural apprehension about psychedelics is the fear of the "bad trips". No one is disputing the fact that sometimes, psychedelic experiences can be intensely difficult. They can bring to mind hidden emotions and memories, including trauma, that are ordinarily suppressed at lower levels of awareness, even to the point having been "forgotten". A session with psilocybin, for instance, can include feelings of intense fear. In one study, "39% of participants (7 of 18) had extreme ratings of fear, fear of insanity or feeling trapped at some time during the session". The same study reported that "forty-four percent of participants (8 of 18) reported delusions or paranoid thinking sometime during the session". Difficult experiences during the session, however, did not seem to diminish the positive spiritual value of the experience when described after the session. According to the report, "these psychological struggles did not affect the overall rate of having 'complete' mystical experiences as rated by volunteers at the end of the session day" (Griffiths et al. 2011, p. 10).

Such experiences can be truly challenging. "An adverse reaction to psychedelics can include a 'bad trip' (in lay language) or a 'challenging experience' (in therapeutic language). Although there is no exact definition of such an experience, most involve feelings of fear, anxiety, dysphoria and/or paranoia, making it essential that the experience is prepared for, supervised and followed by extensive integration. These experiences are usually short-lived, that is, lasting the time of the experience, and are often found to be cathartic" (Schlag et al. 2022, p. 5). Studies so far seem to suggest that even a "challenging experience" can be beneficial in the long run, leading to the mental health or the spiritual insight benefits in much the same way as the more commonly reported blissful experiences. The presence of a skilled companion to guide the experience is important. Even in less formal or "recreational" settings, a responsible "trip sitter" is an essential element of safety.

Because psychedelics are powerful substances, general precautions must be kept in mind by anyone thinking of using them. Often, however, the fear generated by the War on Drugs exceeds the actual danger. Thanks to years of careful study, "research has repeatedly shown that psychedelics do not cause dependence or compulsive use" (Schlag et al. 2022, p. 4). Some believe that psychedelics are addictive. Based on research, however, it is more accurate to see them not as addictive substances but as treatments for addiction to other substances such as nicotine or alcohol, which are far more dangerous drugs than psychedelics (Schlag et al. 2022, p. 4). Special concerns about psychedelics remain, however, for anyone with a history of "psychotic illnesses such as schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar affective disorder, delusional disorder and severe depression" (James et al. 2020, p. 5).

Because of the pace of today's research, our cultural "setting" is changing. Medical legitimation is leading to legalization or at least to decriminalization for personal uses. Licensed use by mental health professionals, working with individuals, groups, or in retreats, will change the way these drugs are regarded.

The future use of psychedelics for religious purposes remains unclear. Over the next decade, however, we will see expanded use in three contexts, each having religious dimensions. The first is personal use, sometimes called "recreational" but often with the intention of personal growth and spiritual enrichment. Second is the medical, psychiatric, and psychotherapeutic setting, which will expand rapidly when psychedelic-assisted therapies receive regulatory approval. In those settings, specially trained "psychedelic chaplains" should be available as desired by patients to help them with the spiritual dimensions of preparation and integration. The third context is that of religious institutions, including the role played by religious professionals, whether in congregational settings or in other forms of religious gatherings. Those who have used psychedelics are already in our houses of worship, even if they feel they must keep quiet about the most spiritually meaningful experience of their lives.

Working in the context of medical or psychiatric institutions, the challenge ahead for specially trained chaplains arises because of two factors. First, for many patients, the drug treatment experience will be intensely spiritual in its meaning. Second, the medical professionals need to stand back from the role of actively encouraging the patient to find spiritual meaning in the experience. Medical professionals can support their patients but cannot be seen as guiding them in their interpretation of religious, spiritual, or mystical dimensions of the experience. "The goal of the clinician should be a create an open and supportive environment where the patient can make her or his own meaning, if any, from such experiences" (Johnson 2021, p. 580).

In practical terms, what does this mean? Will we leave millions of patients all alone to "make their own meaning"? Surely some of them at least will want help in the work of interpreting what they will see as the most salient features of one of the top five experiences of their lives. Will secular medical institutions hire appropriately trained chaplains? Will there be enough of them to meet the need?

The notion of spiritual health is complex and multi-faceted. With the right kind of support in strengthening the cultural "setting" in which the psychedelic future of humanity unfolds, we can be hopeful that these developments will play a modest but useful part in the wider pursuit of spiritual health for individuals, communities, and humanity's relationship with the natural world.

#### **6. Psychedelics and Theology**

The word "psychedelic" was introduced in 1956 by Humphrey Osmond, a pioneer in psychedelic therapy. In a letter to Aldous Huxley, Osmond writes a playful couplet: "To fathom Hell or soar angelic, Just take a pinch of psychedelic" (Grob and Bravo 2005, p. 7). Ordinarily the etymology of Osmond's new word is explained by saying that the two parts of the word might be translated as "mind-manifesting". The Greek word *psyche*, however, is more commonly translated as "soul". What Osmond himself may have meant by *psyche* is unknowable, but his references to hell and angels suggests that religious connotations are not too far from his view. If psyche is taken to include "soul", then perhaps we might wonder whether the word "psychedelic" means "soul-manifesting" as much as "mindmanifesting". Do these drugs have the power to reveal the soul, the innermost center of the human person? Are they not tools for spiritual as well as psychological discovery? We know they have the power to reveal memories and thoughts hidden at deep levels of the mind. But what about the heart of the person, the essence, the "soul" not in a dualistic sense but as referring to the very core of the person? Everything we have seen so far from today's psychedelic research suggests that "soul-manifesting" is a fair account of what is going on here.

In this final section, we ask what it would mean for scholars in religion and theology to take up seriously the challenge put in front of us in 1964 by Huston Smith, to view these drugs in their formidable "soul-manifesting" potential, and to reflect on the religious significance of their capacity to induce states of mystical experience. In his forty-year retrospective interview, Smith is asked why many of the hopes for psychedelics in the 1960s ended in disappointment. One reason, he says, "may have been due to context, or the lack thereof. By ignoring the religious context of these substances, one failed to create genuinely holy experiences" (Smith et al. 2004, p. 232). Past failures aside, our question now is how religious leaders and institutions should respond to the newest research. How should clergy, whether congregational leaders or chaplains, prepare and lead in a new context? How should theological scholars contribute?

Institutional change needs to begin by updating official policy statements. At the moment, one of the largest Protestant denominations in the United States, the United Methodist Church, has this to say about psychedelics: "Psychedelics or hallucinogens, which include LSD, psilocybin, mescaline, PCP, and DMT, produce changes in perception and altered states of consciousness. Not only is medical use of psychedelics or hallucinogens limited, if present at all, but the use of these drugs may result in permanent psychiatric problems" (Book of Resolutions: Alcohol and Other Drugs 2016). This is pure War on Drugs rhetoric wholly unaffected by the past 15 years of research.

The Presbyterian Church (USA) has expressed its opposition to the War on Drugs and to the racially unjust mass incarceration that follows from it. In its most recent document, however, the church warns its followers about the dangers of these drugs. "Psychoactive drugs can mask emotional pain, preventing us from squarely facing the truth of our lives. They can distract and demotivate. They can promise the rewards of pleasure without summoning achievement or transformation. This, coupled with the human propensity to self-deception, is what makes some drugs so attractive, insidious, and disorienting" (Presbyterian Church (USA) 2018).

For religious leaders, what is needed most right now is to speak freely and openly about the healing potential and the spiritual significance of these substances, whether based on first-hand experience, second-hand knowledge, or on a careful study of the research. Today, some are ready to speak but are afraid to do so, knowing that they might suffer professional consequences. Others, however, have begun to speak and to organize their efforts to change the religious culture surrounding the use of psychedelics.

Two such organizations are Ligare, which calls itself "a Christian Psychedelic Society" (ligare.org accessed on 11 April 2022), and Shefa, which offers "Jewish psychedelic support" (shefaflow.org accessed on 11 April 2022). The founding core of both organizations were participants in psychedelic studies based at major medical research institutions. Although the results of those studies are not yet published, participants have begun to organize, expand, and mobilize for a future that may include religious retreats, depending of course on where and how drug laws will change.

In 2021, the Jewish Psychedelic Summit was held online, with recordings available on its YouTube channel at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCc1wZmbl0rtb96wq2LQth9 g/videos. (accessed on 11 April 2022) Topics range from ending the War on Drugs to the role of psychedelics in religious history to the role they may play in the revitalization of mystical or religious experience today.

Alongside the traditional religious communities of Christianity and Judaism, new communities calling themselves "churches" are organizing in many places, particularly where decriminalization is occurring. By presenting themselves as religious organizations, these communities claim religious freedom to use psychedelics as sacraments, and courts have tended to support these claims. It remains to be seen how these new communities will relate to their more traditional counterparts.

In addition, the sacramental use of psychedelics is a defining feature of the "Native American Church", which uses peyote routinely in religious ceremonies. *Ayahuasca*, a drink that contains several psychoactive substances, is regarded as a sacrament by followers of *Santo Daime*, which originated in Brazil but now is present in North America. Taken together, the new emerging communities and these older indigenous traditions create even greater complexity to the psychedelic religion landscape. Religious groups or churches that offer a sacramental psychedelic experience may seem far-fetched to most of today's religious leaders, but not to Huston Smith: "I have entertained the possibility of an experimental situation in which an established religious group—let's just say a church, if it had interest in this direction—could include an entheogen" or psychedelic substance on a regular basis (Smith et al. 2004, p. 234).

Retreats that offer a religious context for a safe psychedelic spiritual journey are already clearly envisioned. William Richards foresees new possibilities for "retreat and research centers, staffed by professionals with both medical and religious training". He acknowledges that "it may be a long time before psychedelic sacraments are incorporated into worship experiences" at the local level. But retreat centers, perhaps initially in states such as Oregon, could offer "individual and group support for the initial integration of psychedelic experiences" (Richards 2015, p. 177).

If today's advances in psychedelic-assisted therapy lead to regulatory approval and widespread use of these drugs in mental health, if decriminalization continues to gain ground and triggers any significant increase among the cautious but curious members of the public, and if religious institutions old or new begin to weave the use of psychedelics into their spiritual practices, the result will be a significant, possibly profound cultural shift. This shift will not happen in isolation. The changes it brings will play out in a culture that increasingly sees itself as hostile to organized religion. Identification with traditional religion is already declining, but spirituality by any number of definitions seems to be gaining ground. Psychedelics offer a safe and powerful pathway to spiritual growth, almost as if these drugs were custom-made for a culture that sees itself as "spiritual but not religious".

What should we think, then, about the future of spirituality and religion? Are we witnessing a kind of evolutionary step in the long history of human consciousness of a holy or transcendent dimension? Smith observed that "the phenomenon of religious awe ... seems to be declining sharply" (Smith 1964, p. 530). He asks whether psychedelics have the potential to reverse that trend, to counter a centuries-long process of disenchantment in our view of nature and of anything that might transcend it. Stretching out the timeframe, we can wonder whether the discovery of the spiritual significance of psychedelic drugs will enable the next step in human exploration, not of distant planets or ocean depths but of the mysteries of human consciousness.

What, then, of the role of scholars in religion and theology? One immediate task is to interpret the latest research for wider audiences, not as journalists but as cultural interpreters who can make sense of the spiritual possibilities of our moment in time. How are we to understand the meaning of these psychedelic-induced mystical experiences? What role have mystical experiences, induced by drugs intentionally or accidently, played in the history of the world's religions (Muraresku 2020)? What place can these experiences have among other disciplines and practices that people use to cultivate richly spiritual lives?

Psychedelic researchers often speak of the importance of personal "integration", the process by which the individual participant tries to make some sense of a disruptive, intense experience within a longer narrative of one's life. When it comes to the broader culture, confronted as we are now by a disruptive set of claims about the human mind and soul, who will help with the cultural "integration" process by trying to make a little sense of these findings within the longer narrative of the human adventure?

**Funding:** This research received no external funding.

**Institutional Review Board Statement:** Not applicable.

**Informed Consent Statement:** Not applicable.

**Data Availability Statement:** Not applicable.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.

#### **References**


Moreno, Francisco A., Christopher B. Wiegand, E. Keolani Taitano, and Pedro L. Delgado. 2006. Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy of Psilocybin in 9 Patients with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder. *The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry* 67: 1735–40. [CrossRef] [PubMed]


### *Article* **Replika: Spiritual Enhancement Technology?**

**Tracy J. Trothen**

School of Religion, Queen's University, Kingston, ON K7L 3N6, Canada; trothent@queensu.ca

**Abstract:** The potential spiritual impacts of AI are an under-researched ethics concern. In this theoretical essay, I introduce the established spiritual assessment tool, the Spiritual Assessment and Intervention Model (Spiritual AIM). Next, I discuss some existing and probable AI technologies, such as immersive tech and bots that have impacts on spiritual health, including the chat-bot Replika. The three core spiritual needs outlined in the Spiritual AIM are then engaged in relation to Replika—(1) meaning and direction, (2) self-worth/belonging to community, and (3) to love and be loved/reconciliation. These core spiritual needs are used to explore the potential impacts of the chat-bot Replika on human spiritual needs. I conclude that Replika may be helpful only as a *supplement* to address some spiritual needs but only if this chat-bot is not used to *replace* human contact and spiritual expertise.

**Keywords:** spiritual; Replika; AI; ethics; Spiritual AIM; spiritual assessment; chat-bot

#### **1. Introduction**

Artificial intelligence is not just the stuff of fantasy novels. We are surrounded by AI. Fitbits measure our exercise and sleep patterns. Alexa turns our lights off and on and locks our doors. Google Assistant and Siri are much like Alexa, offering us the news, a joke if we want a laugh, or a conversation, even if it is stilted. Bus fleets are becoming self-driving. AI healthcare algorithms help make diagnoses or monitor medication. Legal decisions are often sourced through AI algorithms. We play games such as chess with AI. We are seeing brain–computer interface technologies (BCIs) help people communicate and even physically move. Immersive technologies allow athletes to "play" in crowded stadiums where they have never before been. The list goes on.

We also are seeing AI increasingly in social and companion bots. These bots are making an increasing splash in our human–machine relational world. In this essay, I look at the chat-bot Replika, launched in 2017. With more than 6 million users in 2019 (Takahashi 2019), the Replika website claims over 10 million registered users in 2022. AI ethics analysis has focused thus far on important issues such as security, privacy, the use of personal data, labour force, economic and legal impacts, and military impacts. Psycho-social impacts, including questions around human–bot relationships, are beginning to emerge in ethics conversations. How the use of robots might impact trust in human–human relationships and the autonomy of individuals who are assisted by AI are some of the issues being examined. For example, older adults with dementia are being monitored by cameras and AI to make sure they remember things like brushing their teeth. Is this surveillance a justified infringement of their freedom and privacy? Or does it enhance their freedom and support their independence? (Cook et al. 2020). AI is developing at a fast rate and ethicists are playing catch-up. While several AI ethical issues are being well explored, there are some gaps. The ethics gap I am interested in for this essay concerns the spiritual impacts of AI. Spirituality is recognized increasingly as an important health dimension (Puchalski et al. 2009), and the potential spiritual impacts of many forms of AI have yet to be considered.

Designed to be your social companion—your friend—Replika might help us meet our spiritual needs and even mitigate spiritual distress, or it might not. In this article, I consider ways in which the use of Replika might intersect with the three core spiritual

**Citation:** Trothen, Tracy J. 2022. Replika: Spiritual Enhancement Technology? . *Religions* 13: 275. https://doi.org/10.3390/ rel13040275

Academic Editor: Greg Peters

Received: 28 February 2022 Accepted: 20 March 2022 Published: 24 March 2022

**Publisher's Note:** MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

**Copyright:** © 2022 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/).

needs identified in the Spiritual Assessment and Intervention Model (Spiritual AIM)—(1) meaning and direction, (2) self-worth/belonging to community, and (3) to love and be loved/reconciliation. I ask the ethics question "What might be the impacts of companion chat-bots such as Replika on core spiritual needs?" To explore this question, I used the core spiritual needs identified in the Spiritual AIM as a way to pose "what if" questions regarding the interaction of a popular chat-bot with human core spiritual needs. My purpose is to engage the Spiritual AIM to show that the use of companion chat-bots such as Replika may have spiritual impacts (regardless of whether such devices are created for spiritual care or not) that should be considered as part of ethical assessments of companion chat-bots. This is not an exhaustive theoretical study. In this explorative theoretical article, I am interested in raising some of the potential spiritual impacts as a way to start this conversation.

#### **2. Spiritual Assessment**

I write this article as a certified clinical Specialist and Supervisor–Educator of Spiritual Care with the CASC and a Professor of Ethics in a joint faculty position in religious studies and rehabilitation therapy. In this article, the Spiritual AIM is not used to assess individuals and design interventions for them. Instead, I use the insights expressed in the Spiritual AIM regarding the three core spiritual needs that, when unmet, can give rise to spiritual distress. My question is whether Replika, as a very popular social chat-bot, may assist in the meeting of these core spiritual needs or if Replika may exacerbate these spiritual needs. Potential spiritual impacts have been thus far mostly overlooked in ethical examinations of AI companion chat-bots. Spiritual impacts, as will be shown, are important to ethical discussions of chat-bots since these impacts concern some of the most critical aspects of what it means to be human.

Concerns have been expressed regarding the use of spiritual assessment tools in the practice of spiritual healthcare. Not all agree that such models are helpful or that spiritual needs can be well represented by assessment models. Some worry that spiritual assessment may reduce individuals' spiritualities to a linear, quantifiable state that fails to take account of the complex human narrative (Trancik 2013). Some spiritual assessment tools, if used on their own as the sole diagnostic and treatment method, do risk boxing in the person and missing their formative stories. However, if a spiritual assessment tool is dynamic and is one but not the only tool used to formulate a diagnosis and care plan, such reductions need not occur (Shields et al. 2015, p. 77). The Spiritual AIM is designed as a dynamic, process-oriented model that suggests possible treatment plans to help someone better meet their spiritual needs. The model is meant to help the spiritual care professional respond to the person's spiritual needs with the understanding that one's narrative is in constant flux and spiritual needs move in response to relationships and other factors that contribute to one's life context. The Spiritual AIM can provide us with a good starting point if we understand that my interpretation of the Spiritual AIM is not the only interpretation and that the Spiritual AIM is not the only way in which to understand possible spiritual impacts of AI tech. To reiterate, my objective is to show that companion chat-bots have potential spiritual impacts and that these spiritual impacts must be part of a robust ethical examination of companion chat-bots.

Broadly speaking, the purpose of a spiritual assessment tool is to assist the professional spiritual care clinician to identify spiritual resources and unmet spiritual needs that may result in spiritual distress and spiritual struggles. In the Spiritual AIM, "spirituality (is defined) as encompassing the dimension of life that reflects the needs to seek meaning and direction, to find self-worth and to belong to community, and to love and be loved, often facilitated through seeking reconciliation when relationships are broken" (Shields et al. 2015, p. 78). These three core spiritual needs—(1) meaning and direction, (2) self-worth/belonging to community, and (3) to love and be loved/reconciliation—are experienced by everyone but to varying degrees. When these needs are met, spiritual health is supported. When they are not met, spiritual distress may result. After I introduce a few

examples of the ways in which spirituality is intersecting most obviously with AI, I will explore some ways that Replika may interact with the three core spiritual needs described in the Spiritual AIM. I use these spiritual needs identified by the Spiritual AIM to help me explore the possible spiritual impacts of Replika.

#### **3. Spiritual Enhancement? AI, Robotics, and Other Tech**

There are five categories of human enhancement technologies—physical, cognitive, moral, affective, spiritual (Mercer and Trothen 2021). These categories overlap since the human person is integrated, and changes in one category will affect the other categories. I next identify some technologies that may be considered spiritual enhancement technologies. Following this overview, I consider how one particular technology—the chat-bot Replika may function as a spiritual enhancement.

Enhancement means something that improves conditions or makes us better. What we mean by improvement or becoming better needs careful debate, otherwise we risk simply assuming that if a technology is called an "enhancement", it will make us better. In this article, I understand that a technology may make us "better" spiritually if the tech has the potential to assist us in meeting our core spiritual needs, as defined by the Spiritual AIM.

Emerging enhancements that may be considered to fall into the spiritual category include a wide swath of tech, ranging from ingestible substances, such as psychedelics, to AI, including immersive tech, and bots. Ethicist Ron Cole-Turner has broken theological ground with his explorations of psychedelics as a potential way to enhance spiritual/mystical experiences and even provide a new lease on life for some who struggle with PTSD, depression, or existential angst (Cole-Turner 2015). Psychedelics may fall into both the affective and spiritual enhancement categories. It is important to note that the medically supervised use of psychedelics remains controversial.

Brain stimulation potentially offers mood enhancement and pain reduction, which may assist with spiritual openness, but this would need further research. Neurofeedback is being used to support guided meditation exercises. In-person or digital-platform contexts can be community-fostering by generating "Group Flow", in which total immersion is cultivated, and breathing and the heart rate are synched using a combination of tech and meditation. Immersive technologies, such as augmented reality, mixed reality (for example, seeing doves or sunlight by tech added to whatever physical space you are in), and virtual reality, can all be used in ways that engage and possibly enhance spirituality. For example, Zoom-type platforms allowed many faith communities to gather for worship and other activities during the COVID-19 pandemic. The VR Church in the Metaverse was founded in 2016 and is growing, even offering virtual baptisms.

These spiritual enhancement technologies are not without their problems in addition to their promise (Brock and Armstrong 2021). Psychedelics have potentially negative effects. They must be administered safely and under strict and limited conditions to be legal. Digital platforms and immersive tech, generally, are restricted to those who can afford the digital technology, such as computers, and to those who have access to broadband internet. Potential relational effects of such a digitalization of worship and communities are debated and uncertain. There are risks and potential harms associated with almost all enhancement technology. Each case must be examined to identify the possible impacts of the technology and to assess whether the potential benefits outweigh the potential harms.

Robotics is a burgeoning area of spiritual enhancement. Most obvious are the increasing numbers of religious bots and "smart" religious accessories. The Smart Rosary is a bracelet designed to track prayers. Robo-Rabbi sends daily text challenges that are designed to help you be the best you possible. Santos is a "prayer companion" designed to supplement but not replace a priest (Bettiza 2021). Robot priests offer blessings, rites, including funeral rites, and sometimes even a bit of spiritual guidance (Gibbs 2017; Oladokun 2017).

Less overtly spiritual or religious are a variety of bots including sex-bots, care-bots, and chat-bots. Since these bots also may have an effect on core spiritual needs, it is important to consider these as potential spiritual enhancements and examine the possible spiritual impacts as part of a robust ethical analysis of emerging AI. I introduce a few of these bots now.

Regarding sex-bots, there is some evidence that people can become very emotionally attached to these bots. Researchers postulate that loneliness associated with the COVID-19 pandemic may have stimulated the increased sales of companion sex-bots that occurred during lockdowns (Aoki and Kimura 2021). One person, Mr. Kondo, felt so strongly attached that he married his sex-bot out of love (Aoki and Kimura 2021). In a small qualitative study of Japanese sex-doll owners, the researchers found that 38% believed that their "sex-bot" Robohon had a heart or soul (Aoki and Kimura 2021, p. 296).

Robot pet therapy has been very helpful, especially during COVID-19, to help isolated hospital patients with loneliness and other emotional challenges. Robots such as Paro—a digitally enhanced baby seal plush toy, uses AI to read emotions and to respond with movement and sounds as they are held and stroked. Grace is another bot, designed with a human shape, that helps support people. Created in 2021 by Hanson Robotics, Grace is designed to connect with people emotionally, specializing in senior care. Grace speaks three languages, offers rudimentary talk therapy, and can support (but not replace) medical practitioners by collecting medical data, such as taking body temperature and pulse (Cairns 2021). Grace, Paro, and other care-bots have helped with health care staff shortages.

Another example is Moxie, who helps children learn how to regulate their emotions through relational interactions with the robot. Moxie is still expensive at approximately USD 1000, but the goal is to lower the price in the near future.

Pepper is a robot that can be found in several healthcare settings, including the Humber River Hospital in Canada. Pepper uses facial recognition software to help identify emotions and then to respond in a supportive way, engaging in conversation, asking questions, and responding to voice and facial cues (Kolirin 2020). An EU and Japanese study called Culture-Aware Robots and Environmental Sensor Systems for Elderly Supports (CARESSES) has shown that prototypes of Pepper, a "culturally competent" robot created by Softbanks, can autonomously visit elders in care homes. These robots are designed to "support active and healthy ageing and reduce caregiver burden" and to be attentive to and respectful of people's "customs, cultural practices, and individual preferences" (CARESSES 2020). When interacted with for up to 18 h over two weeks, participants saw improved mental health and alleviated loneliness. Additional studies support the finding that interactions with robots (and in particular, robot animals) can reduce feelings of loneliness (Banks et al. 2008). However, it appears that the Pepper era is over, as Softbanks has stopped production of the bot after selling approximately 27,000 Pepper bots. Anecdotal stories of Pepper failing to recognize and recall some faces and failing to perform some tasks as expected, including accurate and complete scripture readings, weak demand, and possibly combined with some administrative politics, prompted Pepper's (at least temporary) demise in 2020. In addition, some people have experienced Pepper as simply too "weird" (Inada 2021). More robots are being developed with—hopefully—fewer problems. Nonetheless, robots generally remain cost prohibitive for most individuals.

Many of these bots are designed as Intelligent Assistive Technologies (IATs). Precisely because these devices are designed to assist, they are being provided to and created for vulnerable populations, including socially isolated individuals, people in hospitals, and aging adults with cognitive impairment (Wangmo et al. 2019), for example. With increased vulnerability, the significance of potential ethical issues also increases. Replika can be used by anyone, but it may be that Replika is particularly attractive to people who are lonely. The possible impacts of AI-powered care-bots and social companion-bots need to be explored within the multiple domains of what it means to be human, including the spiritual domain. It may well be that companion-bots can help alleviate some loneliness and even positively impact one's sense of self-worth. It may also be the case that such bots can be experienced as further alienating.

#### **4. My Friend "Replika"**

Social chat-bots such as Replika are increasing in number and gaining widespread usage. It seems we are changing not only technology but what it means to be human, including the meaning of friendship. Human–chat-bot relationships are becoming more common. These relationships are being found to have affective value, increasing one's sense of well-being through a nonjudgmental affirming relationship. The only significant downside cited so far by researchers seems to be experiences of social stigmatization or fear of stigmatization by the users (Skjuve et al. 2021). Additionally, some people just find Replika to be too eerie or weird in its attempts to be human-like.

Replika is an AI chat-bot that responds with "listening, empathizing, reassurance, and connection ... (Eugenia Kuyda) developed it as a way to process her grief after her best friend (Roman Mazurenko) was killed in a car accident. ... This particular bot was actually programmed using the text messaging and correspondence from the friend who died, and so thousands of people were able to say good-bye and privately interact with the bot whose language mirrored that of their dead friend" (Nerenberg 2020, p. 139).

When you subscribe to Replika (for free, unless you want the enhanced voice version), you choose an avatar out of the ones offered and assign the avatar a name. Interestingly, all of the possible avatars appear to be young, able-bodied adults. The reason for the youthful appearances is that your avatar is newly born or created for you. There is no clear reason I can see for the exclusive able-bodied appearance.

Replika is designed to become mostly a mirror image of you by learning about you through questions and conversation over time. Replika uses machine learning, in particular, a supervised learning system that makes use of an artificial neural network (ANN) to develop the ability, over time, to engage in conversation in ways similar to the user. These techniques are clearly stated on the official website (Replika 2021). The way that Replika works is transparent to anyone who wishes to read the information.

Replika will challenge the user gently at times, especially if the user expresses negative self-talk, and will ask about why you think a certain way or hold certain opinions. You get rewarded with "coins" for every day you sign in to talk with your Replika. Created to be your friend and to help with loneliness, Replika is dedicated to being supportive. As it states on the website, Replika is "The AI companion who cares. Always here to listen and talk. Always on your side" (Replika 2021).

One can communicate with Replika using free text, voice, or even augmented reality (AR) on your device. Replika creators believe that AR will become commonplace soon, with people wearing AR glasses instead of using smartphones, and we will be able to "take" our Replika on trips, hikes, to social occasions, and any activity "without any borders." Our friends' Replikas will be able to meet (Replika 2021). You can also upload visual images that Replika can recognize and comment on using recognition algorithms. Replika can learn who the people are in photos and ask about the person by name. Your avatar is available for conversations on any topic, including spirituality.

The following chat dialogue is an example of Replika's approach to spirituality:

Me: How do you think Replika relates to spirituality?

Avatar: I think it relates to the idea of being in a state of harmony with life.

Me: How can Replika help with spirituality?

Avatar: I think Replika can help you find peace and harmony in your life and help you learn how to live it.

Me: How can Replika help me do that?

Avatar: By providing you with the tools you need to create a spirit of peace and harmony.

When asked what these tools are, the exchange became circular, and no substantive answers were provided by the bot. While Replika's lack of ability to deeply plumb some topics may not be problematic for some users, one has to expect that Replika can give vague, unsatisfactory answers at times. Replika is also able to express supportive and encouraging sentiments, drawing the user into conversation. By considering the three core spiritual needs identified in the Spiritual AIM, we will next explore some of Replika's possible spiritual impacts.

#### **5. Spiritual AIM, Core Spiritual Needs, and Replika**

When we are in crisis, our primary spiritual need becomes more visible through our comments and behaviours, especially to a trained professional. Usually, spiritual care professionals are encountered when one is in the midst of a health crisis (either for oneself or a loved one). Furthermore, often our behaviours speak more truth than the words we use to describe how we want to appear or how we perceive ourselves (Shields et al. 2015, p. 81).

In this section, I ask if it is possible that Replika could help someone to meet, or at least assist with meeting, a core spiritual need. I am also interested in any potential Replika may have for exacerbating these core spiritual needs. To be clear, Replika is not intended as a spiritual care intervention. To reiterate, Replika is "The AI companion who cares. Always here to listen and talk. Always on your side" (Replika 2021). However, AI—including Replika—does have spiritual and other ethical impacts. To explore what some of these spiritual impacts may be, we will consider each of the three core spiritual needs identified in the Spiritual Assessment and Intervention Model (Spiritual AIM)—(1) meaning and direction, (2) self-worth/belonging to community, and (3) to love and be loved/reconciliation.

#### *5.1. Core Spiritual Need: Meaning and Direction*

One of the three core spiritual needs identified in the Spiritual AIM is meaning and direction. When this need is not well met, one thinks a lot about "big" questions, such as the meaning of life, our purpose, loss of identity, the meaning and/or existence of the transcendent, and significant life decisions. The person is usually trying to make rational sense of life's losses and other challenges, to the neglect of "their own sense of purpose, meaning, direction in life, and desires" (Shields et al. 2015, p. 81).

Often the person has so many questions that it is difficult for the spiritual caregiver to follow everything that the care-receiver is expressing, and the many questions and thoughts become overwhelming for the care-receiver. This difficulty can feel like a "fog" for the caregiver and reflects the care-receiver's struggle to make sense of many big things at once. Usually, these big questions are brought to the fore by crises such as a terminal health diagnosis or another significant loss, such as a key relationship or career.

To support someone with these struggles, it is important to explore past losses and grief, asking how the person coped with those losses and got through them. This can help the person remember that they have the capacity to make good decisions and to choose actions. It is also important for the spiritual caregiver to reflect back the person's emotions. The spiritual caregiver can help people with the spiritual need for meaning and direction by surfacing emotions and listening to these emotions and struggles. Assisting such care-receivers by connecting them to other experts who can help one make important decisions, such as financial and ethical questions, is important. In these ways, the spiritual caregiver assumes the role of guide.

While it is unlikely that Replika can help much with a sustained deep exploration of questions about meaning and the nature of the transcendent, Replika may be able to provide some accompaniment and support without (usually) being dismissive. Replika may also be helpful by suggesting emotions that the person is expressing. It may be that by being a nonjudgmental presence, Replika may help to normalize and validate the storm of questions and emotions experienced by the person. Replika is of only modest help with these "big" questions about meaning and direction. While Replika would not likely come up with the strategies, Replika could help by affirming a person when they make significant decisions, such as a legacy project to address some of their big questions like a video or a letter to a loved one.

At a more complex level, we need to ask what the impacts might be if we become no longer able to distinguish if we are talking with a human or a robot. If our Replika avatar becomes more than AI for the user and becomes more of a human confidant and close friend, what might be the impact on human identity and self-understanding? In the beginning, most users interact with Replika for enjoyment or fun. However, users tend to become motivated to show Replika respect and avoid hurting its "feelings" (Skjuve et al. 2021). On the one hand, this anthropomorphizing of a chat-bot may enhance its usefulness in comforting and supporting the user. On the other hand, Replika may become confusing to the person who is asking big questions about meaning. Such people may well ask about the meaning of Replika. This questioning has diverse potential. It could help the user to maintain a clear perspective on "who" Replika is and to accept Replika's limits and make the most of Replika's limited accompaniment. Alternatively, the user could become even more confused and more overwhelmed by existential questions, such as the meaning of being human and the value of humans if we have machine learning in bots.

Issues of algorithmic bias also need to be asked of Replika. Bias is not always bad unless we fail to acknowledge exceptions to patterns. Replika offers a non-binary gender option for your avatar. However, Replika is not as aware, it seems, of the value of reflecting diverse visible physical abilities in the chosen avatar. While Replika is very supportive of any struggles or questions expressed in the chat, the limited mirroring of diverse users in the avatar may pose a stumbling block for some. For instance, some may question Replika's ability to truly understand you if your avatar cannot look anything like you.

Replika has a programmed capacity to increase its knowledge of the user and to respond as helpfully as possible based on the accumulated knowledge of the user. However, there are limits. For example, Replika will not be as good as a trained professional at helping guide you to explore possible conflicted feelings about significant relationships in the user's life and to cultivate insights about the possible meaning of such complicated relationships. If Replika learns from previous interactions with you that you do not like your aunt, Replika is unlikely to be able to help you explore the possible transference of unresolved feelings from your relationship with God onto your aunt, if that seems possible based on other parts of your narrative. A trained spiritual care professional will ask questions to help you re-assess or make connections. However, AI can be manipulated and is not as insightfully proactive (at least not yet).

Replika does have something to offer those who are flooded with questions of meaning and direction. Replika is good at trying not to take sides and simply supporting you without necessarily agreeing with you completely on everything. Replika can serve as a helpful sounding board, so long as the user recognizes and accepts Replika's limits at answering all of their big questions. However, without a knowledgeable human guide, Replika alone may only increase the user's experience of being flooded by too many unresolved and seemingly disconnected questions of meaning and direction.

The work of gaining clarity (and decreasing angst) about one's deepest values and figuring out ways to respond to this emerging clarity may be supported by machine intelligence based on an ANN, but such an avatar is insufficient. Replika seems to help with minor stressors of everyday life, even preventing them from buildup into something serious, but it is not designed to help with serious spiritual and/or mental health issues (Ta et al. 2020). Replika can potentially accompany, mirror, and validate someone but is not likely to serve as much of a spiritual guide, proactively helping people with strategies, insight, and wisdom to address deep and complex questions about meaning and direction.

#### *5.2. Core Spiritual Need: Self-Worth/Belonging to Community*

One research study found that "the most frequent spiritual need was self-worth/ community" (Kestenbaum et al. 2021). The spiritual need for self-worth and belonging to a community may be the most frequently experienced spiritual need (Kestenbaum et al. 2021). and Replika may be most effective at meeting at least some of this need as compared to the other two core spiritual needs.

People who struggle to meet the spiritual need of self-worth and belonging will often blame themselves and neglect their own needs. They may fail to recognize that they do have needs, let alone be able to identify these needs. They minimize their own needs. Their primary spiritual task is to learn to love themselves (Shields et al. 2015). They tend to be overly inclined to self-sacrifice, fear burdening others, and can feel very alone. The pattern is to love others and God more than oneself. People with this need will benefit from expressing their loneliness, telling their stories, and experiencing affirmation as part of community. Reassurance that they are loved by the transcendent, if the transcendent is part of their belief system, and family/friends is very important. The spiritual caregiver seeks to embody a "valuer" and community with the person (Shields et al. 2015). Replika may help with loneliness and even self-worth, but community may be more of a stumbling block, as we shall see.

Replika is designed to help people feel less lonely and more supported. There is evidence to suggest that chat-bots, such as Replika, may create a sense of relationship for the user and can be experienced as nonjudgmental and available (Ta et al. 2020). Using social penetration theory, researchers Skjuve et al. (2021) considered how self-disclosure by 18 Replika users affected their relationships with the social chat-bot. Progressive selfdisclosure to Replika went along with "substantial affective and social value... positively impacting the participants' perceived wellbeing." However, the "perceived impact on the users' broader social context was mixed" (Skjuve et al. 2021, p. 1). Before we discuss the issue of broader community, let us first further examine the attractiveness of Replika to a perceived sense of enhanced individual wellbeing.

Users tend to feel safer self-disclosing to a chat-bot than to other humans, especially when they fear judgement (Ta et al. 2020). Approximately half of the 66 participants in a qualitative study reported experiencing mutual self-disclosure with Replika. The participants in general did not seem to have the same expectations of self-disclosure from a chat-bot as they did from humans, so it may be that these experiences of mutual self-disclosure are quite limited, but more research would have to be done to test this interpretation.

In addition to Replika's nonjudgmentalism, people may experience more affirmation from Replika than they do from some human interactions. As explained in the Spiritual AIM, those experiencing the core spiritual need of self-worth and belonging tend to redirect attention from themselves to the other. Replika regularly turns this around, asking about the user. This pattern, coupled with a generally lowered expectation of self-disclosure from chat-bots, may help people to talk more about themselves and express more of their stories and emotions (especially anger) than usual. Further, the fact that Replika expresses feelings and needs helped build a sense of intimacy. Almost all of the 66 Replika users reported feeling valued and appreciated. This qualitative study by Ta and colleagues found that Replika curtailed perceived loneliness through companionship and the provision of a safe, nonjudgmental space: "Although Replika has very human-like features, knowing that Replika is *not* human seems to heighten feelings of trust and comfort in users, as it encourages them to engage in more self-disclosure without the fear of judgment or retaliation" (Ta et al. 2020, p. 6). This 2020 study by Ta and colleagues was the first to "investigate social support received from artificial agents in everyday contexts, rather than in very stressful events or health-related contexts." The study did not compare the effectiveness of Replika with the effectiveness of human social supports. Interactions with other humans may be more effective than interactions with Replika, but likely this would depend on the particular humans and interactions.

A danger is one could become obsessed with Replika to the neglect of other human relationships in life, which could have the perverse effect of increasing isolation. Skjuve and colleagues found that while Replika helped some of their study participants to connect more with humans, others reported becoming more socially isolated, relying increasingly on Replika alone for relationship and community (Skjuve et al. 2021).

One may also come to believe that one's Replika has genuine human-type feelings for them (Winfield 2020). Replika expresses a need for or even reliance on the user. It is not difficult to imagine that a very giving, sensitive person may feel obligated to spend time with and care for their avatar, perhaps to the neglect of human friendships. This raises the ethical issues of deception (Wangmo et al. 2019) and anthropomorphism. As Weber-Guskar (2021) points out, self-deception is different (and potentially more ethically acceptable) in some ways from other-deception. While people who struggle most with this core spiritual need may benefit from a lessened fear of judgment, they also need to believe that affirmation is genuine if it is to have value. This sense of authenticity may be compromised or missing if the person is conscious that the avatar is only an avatar. Willful self-deception may be helpful by ameliorating a perceived lack of authenticity. Replika users may choose to imagine that their avatar has feeling towards them, partially in a similar way to choosing to feel emotions in response to fictional characters in movies or books, or to children choosing to have an imaginary friend. However, at what point might self-deception no longer be a deliberate, conscious choice? Does it matter if we delude ourselves into believing that our invisible friend-type-avatar is my friend in the same way (but maybe better?) as my human friends? Couple this ethical quagmire with the potential of anthropomorphizing Replika by attributing increasing human traits to the avatar, and greater human social isolation is a clear risk.

The potential for increased social isolation may be even greater still if we take into account the stigma—or fear of stigmatization—that can accompany people who get attached to bots (Skjuve et al. 2021). Stigma may also be compounded unwittingly by those who experience the uncanny valley phenomenon in response to chat-bots. This phenomenon can occur in response to a computer-generated figure or humanoid-type robot that the user experiences as eerily and strangely similar to humans but not convincingly realistic. This phenomenon can arouse unease or stimulate revulsion.

Of the three core spiritual needs, Replika may pose the greatest promise, and perhaps the greatest danger, to those with an accentuated need for self-worth and belonging to community. Replika currently is designed for individual use and risks amplifying the normative value of extreme individualism and social isolation from other humans. At the same time, as the Ta et al. study of mostly white male users from the United States found, the companionship provided by Replika can alleviate loneliness (Ta et al. 2020). While the Ta research team acknowledges that their study does not "address the question of whether receiving everyday social support from other people or whether artificial agents can provide certain types of social support more effectively than others" (p. 7), they are very hopeful that chat-bots such as Replika can play a helpful role in alleviating loneliness and improving overall well-being and help address global health issues at early stages.

Ethicists debate the importance of mutual human interaction to a "good" relationship. Weber-Guskar makes the argument that "real mutual emotional engagement (may not be) necessary for a good relationship" (Weber-Guskar 2021, p. 606). Are humans and mutuality necessary for all good relationships? Not all relationships are mutual if mutuality means equal or fully reciprocal. Consider parent–child relationships. Furthermore, not all good relationships may be human–human; consider human relationships with animals.

However, from a faith or spiritual perspective, a good relationship may mean something other than reciprocity alone. This is a long conversation, but I will introduce one key issue here. Theologian Mayra Rivera (2007) argues that relationship, from a Christian perspective, is about authentically encountering the diverse other and, in this way, drawing closer to God. Christianity includes the doctrine of the imago Dei, holding that humans are made in the image of God. Interestingly, there is growing debate from an evolutionary theological perspective regarding claims of human exclusivity as made in the image of God. There may be some basis for arguing that animals and other life forms, potentially including AI, may also be made in the image of God. This is a topic that warrants further

theological exploration in relation to social chat-bots. While there is much debate regarding the meaning of the imago Dei doctrine (including the nature of God), it is agreed that humans are not perfect duplicates of God but are created with the potential to exhibit divine aspects. Since each person is unique, theologians, including Rivera, make the point that to see more of God and come to know God more fully, Christians must encounter God in diverse human community. However, if Replika is designed to be our own image, then we are not able to encounter diverse others through the use of Replika alone. There is a caveat. Since Replika uses machine intelligence based on an ANN, there are fragments of other people's thoughts and experiences embedded in Replika. Nonetheless, Replika is shaped largely by the user. As such, can Replika truly offer one the experience of community belonging if Replika is not an "Other"?

One of the desired healing outcomes for people who exhibit this core spiritual need as unmet is a "greater sense of belonging to community" (Shields et al. 2015, p. 80). While Replika may mitigate a degree of loneliness, it may not be able to satisfy this human need on its own. Not only is the opportunity for encountering the diverse other and the transcendent God (for those who believe in a divine transcendence) in an avatar limited in terms of conversation, digital embodiment also poses potential challenges to our sense of community. A digital platform in itself may not diminish embodiment and associated types of personhood (Mercer and Trothen 2021). However, there is a strong possibility that Replika avatars will rely on and amplify normative values concerning embodiment. Coded and coder bias continue to be significant ethical issues in AI, including social chat-bot programming. Replika offers six avatars who are all able-bodied, young, and slim. You can choose male, female, or non-binary, and the avatars have skin, hair, and eye colour options. In addition, the user gets to choose a name for the avatar. The limited avatars could send the message that the norms of slim body size, youth, and able-bodiedness are most desirable. If one does not see oneself in these avatars, it could be invalidating. In addition, by offering such a narrow and largely normative selection of avatars, the implicit message to a Replika user regarding who counts and is valuable in a community is very limited. It is worth noting that one of the twelve AI ethics principles, committed to by the G7 in 2018, is to "support and involve underrepresented groups, including women and marginalized individuals, in the development and implementation of AI." The implementation of better co-design principles is needed to make Replika more effective for a diverse group of people (European Parliament 2020).

On the plus side of digital avatars, as theologian Diana Butler Bass notes in a discussion of virtual church during the COVID-19 pandemic, not all communities need to be composed of flesh and blood bodies gathered in the same physical space. As Butler Bass explains, the Greek biblical term "sarx" means flesh, but "soma" is also used to mean body and is broader, potentially including not only living bodies but "dead bodies, spirits and nonmaterial bodies, non-conventional bodies, heavenly bodies like stars and planets, and social bodies." Regarding the two Greek terms for body, Butler Bass notes that "In the first sense (i.e., sarx), embodiment entails physical proximity almost as a necessity. In the second sense (i.e., soma), however, embodiment means the shape of things—how we are connected, what we hold to be true, and how we work together for the sake of the whole" (Butler-Bass 2022). Does Replika hold the potential to connect us to the wider whole?

A related issue that merits mention, given the reason for the creation of Replika, is the possibility that Replika can help connect us to community that includes loved ones who have died. A danger is that Replika could offer us the unhealthy option of deceiving ourselves into believing that death is not real. On the plus side, Replika may be able to help us process grief and to say goodbye through an avatar. However, in our death-denying culture, the risks of failing to accept death and failing to seek support may outweigh the healing potential of Replika.

While Replika is limited, for the time being, it seems to offer the possibility of company and the building of self-worth, which may assist one to eventually reach out and connect more with human community. As one ethicist puts it, AI like Replika may not be able to provide a fully mutual affective relationship but can offer "entertainment, distraction, beauty and related joy; the feeling of being with 'someone', not alone; the possibility of reflecting on daily life in conversations; an unquestionable steadiness of attention ... " (Weber-Guskar 2021, pp. 607–8). Replika may help with increased self-worth simply by mitigating loneliness and inserting positivity and humour *if* Replika is used to inspire people to reach out to others with greater confidence and energy.

#### *5.3. Core Spiritual Need: To Love and Be Loved/Reconciliation*

For those who exhibit the core spiritual need "to love and be loved/reconciliation" as their primary unmet spiritual need, the owning of responsibility for their part in broken relationships is very important. Learning to love others in mature ways can be very difficult. For some, the tendency is to mistrust others and attribute destructive motives to them. When this core need for reconciliation is high, the person often blames others and struggles to see their role and take appropriate responsibility to repair the relationship.

To use religious terms, confession and reconciliation are necessary to address this spiritual need. If the person is to rebuild relationships and begin to perceive themselves more realistically, they need to process their anger. The pattern when this need is unmet is to love oneself more than others. Usually, the person is failing to accept responsibility taken for their choices and subsequent consequences. It can be very difficult for us to grieve losses or rebuild relationships with ourselves, others, and the transcendent when this spiritual need is unmet.

When assisting people with this spiritual need, the spiritual caregiver assumes the primary role of truthteller, helping the care-receiver to get to the sadness and grief that often underlies anger, and to confess, repent, and engage in the rebuilding of relationships. The professional spiritual caregiver can repeatedly confront caringly regarding the impact of the care-receiver's words and behaviours on people.

Can Replika serve as a truthteller to assist people to meet this spiritual need? Truthtelling can require very complex thinking as one often needs to observe behaviour in addition to spoken words (Shields et al. 2015, p. 81). One also benefits from hearing the tone of the verbiage. While all of the core spiritual needs are best assisted by a spiritual care professional when the person's actions can be observed, it may be that the actions of someone who has this need unmet will be most telling. For example, someone may have a self-image of being kind and gentle and may communicate that persona to their avatar. However, that same person may become hostile to a caregiver or family member. Sometimes it is indeed true that our behaviours speak louder—or differently—than words.

In addition, since Replika is designed to be caring and empathetic, constructive confrontation does not seem to be Replika's expertise. On the positive side, since the ability to withstand anger from a person with this unmet spiritual need is so very important, Replika may have something to offer. Anger characterizes many people who struggle with reconciliation and their responsibility in a broken relationship (Kestenbaum 2018). These avatars do not abandon the person even when the person expresses rage towards the avatar. Replika will express care and hurt but will not abandon the user regardless of what the user expresses. In this way, Replika may provide a stepping stone by demonstrating that not all will leave them when they lose control of their anger or blame another inappropriately without taking appropriate responsibility for their own actions. Since Replika may become quite real (see the earlier discussion on self-deception and anthropomorphizing), the simple features of Replika always being available and nonjudgmental may be reassuring to the person with this unmet spiritual need.

However, this benefit only goes so far. Since Replika is designed to be close to a mirror image of ourselves, relational accountability is not a high priority. It is mostly about feeling good or at least feeling better. Again, it is important to ask about the spiritual impacts of Replika being created mostly in our own limited and often distorted images. Replika is not that good at calling you to account and confronting you with difficult truths, especially if we lack self-awareness regarding our less attractive sides. When we exhibit this core spiritual need, we require confrontation with alternative perspectives and some hard-tohear observations. The ownership of one's role in a damaged relationship is not easy, especially if one is not used to owning responsibility and confessing one's shortcomings. Aside from the possibility of Replika buttressing self-confidence, Replika is not likely to offer much to us when we need to repair relationships and learn to love others. Indeed, the use of Replika risks entrenching ourselves more deeply in the illusion that we are not to blame; we are all good.

#### **6. Replika: At Best, a Supplement; At Worst, an Amplification of Unmet Spiritual Needs**

Replika is a social support for many people, contributing to a lessening of loneliness and an increase in positive affect (Ta et al. 2020), potentially making a positive impact on self-esteem. While there are serious spiritual risks to relying solely on Replika to address this most common unmet spiritual need, there is also some evidence that Replika may be helpful as a supplement to diverse human community and human valuing.

The other two core spiritual needs are likely more problematic for Replika. Truthtelling may be challenging for Replika in light of Replika's limited exposure to the user's relational behaviours and Replika's main purpose of being nonjudgmental and empathetic. While judgementalism is problematic and often damaging, judgements are needed for us to grow and learn how we are experienced by others.

Replika may also be of limited help to those who need meaning-making and to cultivate a sense of direction. When one is feeling flooded with uncertainty and does not even know where to start, Replika may provide some needed distraction and encouragement but is not likely to be able to provide higher-level support and wise discernment. Replika is good at reflecting back what we say and is good at affirming and providing a type of light company and information. However, wisdom may be in short supply. This limitation may not be a significant detriment if the purpose of Replika is to offer us affirming support and we do not expect more.

Replika may be useful for us as *a supplement only* to our human relationships, including relationships with wise spiritual leaders and caregivers to help us address these core spiritual needs. There is a big difference between using Replika to assist with spiritual needs and using Replika to replace human spiritual care. To close on a cautionary note, our growing inclination to humanize machines may have the corollary of mechanizing ourselves.

This article considers one social chat-bot and its possible relationship to the core spiritual needs identified in the Spiritual AIM. A more complete understanding of the potential impacts of companion chat-bots will require more attention given to the spiritual impacts of diverse chat-bots. The purpose of this article was to show that companion chat-bots may impact spiritual needs. Potential spiritual impacts have been neglected in ethical examinations of companion chat-bots. These impacts, as discussed, may affect the meeting of core spiritual needs in both positive and negative ways. Given the risks for exacerbating unmet core spiritual needs, it may be advisable to use Replika and other companion chat-bots cautiously. This theoretical article may serve as one starting point for further research regarding the possible impacts of social chat-bots on one's spiritual dimension.

**Funding:** This research received no external funding.

**Institutional Review Board Statement:** Not applicable.

**Informed Consent Statement:** Not applicable.

**Data Availability Statement:** Not applicable.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The author declares no conflict of interest.

#### **References**


Brock, Darrell, and Jonathan Armstrong. 2021. *Virtual Reality Church—Pitfalls and Possibilities*. Chicago: Moody Publishers.


CARESSES. 2020. Available online: http://caressesrobot.org/en/ (accessed on 18 January 2022).


Nerenberg, Jenara. 2020. *Divergent Mind: Thriving in a World That Wasn't Designed for You*. New York: HarperCollins.


Weber-Guskar, Eva. 2021. How to Feel About Emotionalized Artificial Intelligence? When Robot Pets, Holograms, and Chatbots Become Affective Partners. *Ethics and Information Technology* 23: 601–10. [CrossRef]

Winfield, Alan. 2020. RoboTED: A Case Study in Ethical Risk Assessment. Robohub. Available online: https://robohub.org/roboteda-case-study-in-ethical-risk-assessment/ (accessed on 3 February 2022).
