We Need Empathy and Trust in the World of AI

Why empathy and trust must guide our journey into the next era of artificial intelligence.

What will it take for artificial intelligence to genuinely benefit society? Ask a dozen people and you’ll get a dozen different answers. Some say we should put the brakes on development, tightly restricting the role of AI in everyday life. Others argue for an open embrace of its potential, pushing ahead with designs that might bring about a more positive future. The real challenge lies not just in the technology itself, but in the values we choose to build into it — and empathy and trust are fast emerging as the cornerstones of that conversation.

Empathy and trust are shaping discussions around AI’s role in society,Reid Hoffman urges optimism, transparency, and dialogue in AI development,Building a human-centred AI future requires cultural as well as technological effort

A moment at Stanford: imagination and intelligence

At Stanford’s recent Imagination in Action event, a session titled “When Imagination Shapes Intelligence” paired entrepreneur Reid Hoffman with Bing Gordon of Kleiner Perkins. The discussion began with an AI avatar of Hoffman casually donning a Stanford sweatshirt before the man himself joined via videoconference. What followed was a wide-ranging conversation on how empathy, trust, and humanism might guide AI’s trajectory.

Hoffman, who describes himself as a “reasoned optimist,” has staked much of his reputation on this belief, not least through his work at Inflection AI, an “empathy-based” AI project. “You don’t get the future you want by just avoiding the futures you don’t want,” he noted. “You want to create things.”

Hoffman, who describes himself as a “reasoned optimist,” has staked much of his reputation on this belief, not least through his work at Inflection AI, an “empathy-based” AI project. “You don’t get the future you want by just avoiding the futures you don’t want,” he noted. “You want to create things.”

Trust as the glue of society

The conversation shifted to investment and risk-taking, with Hoffman recalling early decisions around Airbnb and Facebook. What tied them together, he argued, was trust. “Life is a team sport. It requires trust,” he said. “It’s trust in laws, trust in the society we live in, trust in the financial system. Trust is fundamental.”

The conversation shifted to investment and risk-taking, with Hoffman recalling early decisions around Airbnb and Facebook. What tied them together, he argued, was trust. “Life is a team sport. It requires trust,” he said. “It’s trust in laws, trust in the society we live in, trust in the financial system. Trust is fundamental.”

Transparency and criticism as a force for progress

Large language models have made impressive gains in reducing hallucinations — reportedly by 95% in some cases — but Hoffman warned against complacency. Instead, he encouraged criticism and open dialogue. “Criticise with the goal of improvement,” he said. Constructive scepticism, far from undermining trust, is part of what sustains it.

This balance between optimism and scrutiny is especially pressing in Asia, where governments from Singapore to South Korea are building frameworks for AI governance that aim to safeguard public trust without stifling innovation. For instance, Taiwan’s AI Law Is Quietly Redefining What “Responsible Innovation” Means, showcasing a regional commitment to thoughtful AI integration.

Humanism and empathy in design

The notion of empathy in AI often sounds abstract, yet Hoffman placed it firmly within human relationships. Trust, he argued, comes from feeling heard. “Part of how you trust is that you feel like the other person, the other entity, is listening to you, is responding, and we want to model kindness.”

This isn’t just philosophy. In countries across Asia, mental health services are strained by lack of resources. An empathetic AI agent able to provide support at 11pm on a lonely Friday night, as Hoffman suggested, could act as a stopgap. Not a replacement for therapy, but a lifeline when human help is unavailable. This ties into the broader discussion of AI with Empathy for Humans.

A renaissance mindset

Hoffman also drew inspiration from history, invoking the Renaissance as a model for AI’s cultural role. Speaking previously in Bologna, he called for a “renaissance in AI,” drawing parallels between today’s creative upheaval and the artistic ferment of fifteenth-century Italy. “The humanism of the Renaissance… are some of the things I think we could continue to draw on for inspiration,” he said.

For Asia, this framing is potent. Nations from India to Japan are already wrestling with how to preserve cultural heritage while embracing technological change. The Renaissance lens reminds us that disruption can coexist with flourishing provided empathy and trust remain at the core. This is particularly relevant as AI & Museums: Shaping Our Shared Heritage.

Navigating transition and competition

Gordon posed a provocative question: what if the Luddites had won in England? Would the British now be speaking German? Extending the analogy, what happens if American AI sceptics succeed, will Mandarin dominate global AI development? Hoffman’s answer was pragmatic. Transitions are painful, he said, but essential for future generations. “That’s part of what makes the work meaningful.”

The competitive angle matters in Asia too, where China, India, and ASEAN economies see AI as not just a productivity tool but a lever of geopolitical influence. Yet Hoffman’s insistence on empathy and trust points to a softer kind of power, one that values societal cohesion as much as technical might. A deeper dive into the ethical considerations of AI can be found in publications like the extensive report by the AI Now Institute on "Algorithmic Accountability" in the public sector.^ https://ainowinstitute.org/algorithmic-accountability-report.pdf

Empathy as a design principle

What stands out from Hoffman’s dialogue with Gordon is less the technicalities of AI than the values shaping its trajectory. Empathy and trust may not appear in codebases, but they will determine whether AI becomes an alienating force or a companionable one. In Asia’s fast-urbanising societies, where community trust is both a strength and a vulnerability, this lesson resonates strongly.

So the question for leaders, investors, and technologists is clear: are we designing systems that merely function, or ones that genuinely listen? The answer may define not just the success of AI, but the society it helps to build.