The reason we personify things like cars and computers is that

"The reason we personify things like cars and computers is that just as monkeys live in an arboreal world and moles live in an underground world and water striders live in a surface tension-dominated flatland, we live in a social world." These words by Richard Dawkins illuminate a profound insight into the nature of human cognition and our relationship with the world around us. Personification, the act of attributing human characteristics to non-human entities like cars and computers, is not a mere literary device but a fundamental aspect of how we interpret the world. As Dawkins explains, this tendency arises because, like animals that are shaped by their unique environments, humans are shaped by the social world they inhabit. Our cognitive faculties evolved in a context that was inherently social, leading us to project human-like qualities onto the objects and machines with which we interact.

In the ancient world, thinkers such as Socrates and Aristotle understood that human behavior was shaped not only by individual experience but by the broader societal structures that governed daily life. Plato, in his Republic, envisioned a world where the ideal society would cultivate the virtues necessary for harmonious living, showing that human nature is inextricably linked to the social context in which one is raised. In this framework, the human mind is shaped by interactions with others, and the sense of self is often defined by one’s relationship to the community. Dawkins’ reflection on personification can be seen as a modern extension of these ancient ideas, recognizing that humans view the world through a social lens that colors not only our interactions with other people but with inanimate objects as well.

Consider the story of the early philosophers, who sought to understand the world through logic, observation, and debate. Socrates, for example, would ask probing questions not only to understand the individual’s knowledge but to understand the ways in which their thoughts were influenced by the broader societal context. When Socrates conversed with a citizen of Athens, he wasn’t just exploring their individual ideas, but also trying to understand how those ideas had been shaped by Athenian culture, by the shared values, and by the social norms that surrounded them. This connection between individuality and society is mirrored in the way we personify the world around us today. We cannot help but see human-like qualities in machines because we ourselves are deeply embedded in a world that is ruled by social interaction, and we understand reality through these relationships.

Dawkins’ words also bring to mind the tale of Prometheus, the Greek Titan who stole fire from the gods to give to humanity, enabling progress and transformation. In one sense, fire represented the human ability to shape the world for better or worse, and in the myth, Prometheus is often depicted as a symbol of innovation and creation—but also of the risk that comes with progress. Prometheus, like humans in their social world, brought something of divine power to the human realm, forcing humanity to confront the responsibilities that come with innovation. Similarly, when we personify technology—imbuing it with human-like traits—we bring it into our social realm, making it something that we not only use but relate to, care about, and sometimes even fear.

The personification of technology is not just a mental construct but a reflection of our deep desire for connection. Humans evolved in a social context, relying on relationships with others for survival and meaning. Empathy is at the heart of how we relate to those around us, and this instinct spills over into our interactions with machines and objects. We attribute human qualities to technology not because it is human, but because we are constantly interpreting the world through the lens of social interaction. Machines and computers become more than just tools; they become partners, helpers, and at times, even adversaries, as we project our social needs and expectations onto them.

In modern times, this tendency is evident in the way we form attachments to technology. The rise of artificial intelligence and smart devices has led us to personify our interactions with these tools. People speak to Alexa, Siri, or Google Assistant as though they are conversing with another person. These machines, though far from sentient, become extensions of our social world, as we fill the silence of our interactions with greetings, requests, and even emotions. This is a manifestation of the human need for connection, a fundamental desire that binds us not just to other humans, but to the world we create.

The lesson here is one of awareness and reflection. As we continue to advance in our understanding and development of technology, we must remain conscious of the emotional attachment we form with the tools we create. The ability to personify is both a strength and a weakness: it enables us to relate to the world around us in a deeply human way, but it also risks leading us into illusion. Technology is not human, and computers do not think or feel as we do, despite our projections. However, our need for connection means that we are always inclined to treat the world around us as something that reflects our own social dynamics. By understanding this, we can maintain a healthier relationship with the technology we create, ensuring it remains a tool that serves humanity, rather than one that becomes a replacement for the deep, authentic relationships that we need with one another.

In practical terms, this means that we must strike a balance between embracing technology and preserving our humanity. While machines may serve as convenient and effective tools, we must ensure that we do not lose sight of the real human connections that define our lives. Let us be aware of the ways we personify our technology and ensure that it remains subservient to us, never becoming the dominant force in our social world. As we move forward into an increasingly automated future, the lesson is clear: while technology can enhance our lives, it should never replace the genuine relationships that bind us to each other and to the world around us.