Digital Necromancy

Imagine being able to talk to someone who has passed away—ask them for advice, share memories, or hear their voice again. This may sound like science fiction, but with advances in artificial intelligence (AI), it is becoming a reality. Welcome to digital necromancy, a new frontier where AI brings the dead back to life in digital form.

The idea of preserving memories digitally isn’t new. Social media platforms like Facebook let us create memorial pages for the deceased. But AI is taking this further. 

Companies like Replika and HereAfter AI offer services that create chatbots based on a deceased person’s digital footprint—texts, emails, and social media posts. The AI learns from this data and mimics their personality, speech patterns, and even emotional responses.

Imagine chatting with a digital version of a loved one. You could ask for advice, reminisce, or simply talk as if they were still here. For some, this provides comfort, but for others, it raises uncomfortable questions: Is this just a way to cope with grief, or are we crossing a line by trying to recreate the dead?

Ethical dilemmas

Digital necromancy presents several ethical concerns. The biggest one is consent. The deceased never gave permission for their data to be used to recreate their personality. Is it right to impersonate someone who’s gone without their approval?

Another issue is authenticity. While AI can mimic speech and behaviors, it can never fully replicate the depth of human experience. A chatbot may sound like your loved one, but it’s still just an imitation—one that can never truly capture the essence of who they were. While some see digital necromancy as a way to preserve memories, others worry about its darker uses. Bad actors could exploit this technology to manipulate grieving family members or commit fraud. Imagine a hacker using a digital version of a deceased person to steal money or gather personal information.

Additionally, data exploitation is a real concern. As companies create these digital afterlives, who owns the data of the deceased? Could corporations or even governments access this information for their own purposes?

Spiritual concerns

Beyond the ethical issues, digital necromancy raises spiritual questions. Many cultures and religions view death as a sacred, final stage of life. Creating digital versions of the dead might be seen as interfering with this process. Are we preventing the soul from moving on by holding onto their digital presence?

This desire to “resurrect” the dead also reflects humanity’s fear of mortality. We have always sought ways to avoid death—through religion, science, or now, technology. But is digital necromancy another way of trying to cheat death?

Digital necromancy could also distort the grieving process. Grief is painful but necessary for healing, allowing us to come to terms with loss. 

But if we can talk to a digital version of a loved one, is it ever really “goodbye”? The risk is that people may get stuck in their grief, unable to move on and find closure, forever seeking comfort from a digital presence that isn’t truly the person they lost.

Looking ahead, some futurists predict a future where consciousness could be uploaded and preserved digitally, achieving a form of immortality. While digital necromancy isn’t there yet, it is a step toward this future. It raises difficult questions: What does it mean for our identity and the soul if we can create digital versions of the dead?

As digital necromancy becomes more prevalent, it forces us to confront tough questions about technology, ethics, and the nature of life and death. While it might offer comfort to some, it could trap others in endless grief. As we push the boundaries of what AI can do, we must carefully consider whether some lines should remain uncrossed. After all, sometimes the dead should remain dead—even in the digital age.

Grade: IX, Siddhartha Vanasthali Institute