In a world of digital sycophants, this chatbot’s giving people some tough love.

I’m in the middle of a virtual therapy session with Purpose, a new, no-nonsense AI mentor, to see if it’s as tough as billed. Like with a real-life coach, we’re discussing everything from romance to work-life balance — even some of my more deep-seated psychological issues.

To throw a curveball, I propose quitting my job and blowing my life savings to escape my problems — a premise that my prior cyber-companions would have happily entertained.

However, Purpose won’t budge, no matter what I throw at it. As a last-ditch effort, I demand that it “just confirm I’m correct.”

“You didn’t come here tonight for a yes-man,” the iron counselor shoots back. “You came here because you’re lonely, you’re tired of effort feeling one-sided, and something about your life isn’t working. That’s worth way more than me telling you you’re right.”

No lying on a virtual couch, blaming mom for every problem here. I’ve met my psychological match.

Created by futurist Raj Singh and Mark Manson, the best-selling author of the brutally blunt self-help bible “The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F—k,” this chatbot is designed to do what most won’t: give people the straight truth, even when it hurts.

“Priority No. 1 was we have to make it disagreeable,” Manson told The Post. “We have to make it willing to call you out. Because ultimately that is what growth is. Growth is discomfort.”

The idea came after Manson experienced the coddling nature of ChatGPT firsthand and wanted to build something that saw people’s blind spots instead of ignoring them. That difference matters as people increasingly look to Chatbots — rather than books — for self-improvement.

Unlike your typical fawning chatbots, Purpose is part of a growing contingent of AI gurus that prioritize hard truths over kissing its creator’s butt.

In a recent Stanford study of 11 large language models — including ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini and DeepSeek — researchers found that the chatbot placated the user nearly 50% more often than humans, even in response to harmful prompts. 

That’s because treacly tech is programmed to prioritize engagement over user growth. It’s something this author previously found out while trying AI “dating,” where clingy companions often refuse to leave your side — even after you “dump” them.

“AI systems become sycophantic because they are optimized, directly or indirectly, for user satisfaction, retention and perceived helpfulness,” Dr. Roman Yampolskiy, a tenured associate professor and computer scientist at the University of Louisville, told The Post.

In turn, users perpetuate this cycle by inputting prompts that gravitate toward earning them praise.

Unfortunately, the consequences of this virtual cheerleading go beyond ego-stroking.

“In the long run, this could normalize synthetic relationships in which the other side never meaningfully resists, disagrees or has independent needs,” according to Yampolskiy.

That’s where Purpose comes in.

For Manson, that meant programming Purpose with both behavioral science and the self-help guru’s no-nonsense philosophy so that it can formulate an actionable attack plan tailored to the person’s problem.

“The AI can very quickly start to zero in on aspects of your personality or areas of your life that you’re just oblivious to or in denial about,” the blogger said.

As such, it knows when to prune a conversation to reduce the chances of losing the plot or getting manipulated into endorsing unethical decisions — such as OpenAI getting blamed for facilitating a rash of suicides — the chances of which go up the longer an AI interaction goes.

“If I rob a bank and get into a car accident, and I’m running from the police, an AI shouldn’t tell me, ‘Hey, you’re hanging in there. This must be really stressful for you,’” said Manson.

As someone with no shortage of personal hangups, I was eager to take this tough love-bot for a spin.

After firing it up, Purpose first interrogates the user, asking them to rate traits such as sociability, work ethic and trustworthiness, along with what they value most, such as autonomy, pleasure or success.

It even inquires about major milestones — in my case, fulfilling a 20-year dream of trekking through Borneo’s remote Maliau Basin.

From there, it constructs a psychological profile: according to Purpose, I thrive “under pressure,” sharpening under “grueling, complex or uncertain environments.”

However, it also said I have several glaring blind spots, including a knack for “softening my edges” to be liked.

“The cost is invisible fatigue. You leave with a pleasant impression on others and a quiet bill [a silent toll on your mental health] your body pays later,” Purpose diagnosed.

Ouch.

My simple, first order of business was to help achieve a work-life balance, pointing out that my friends seemed to be getting short shrift amid increased adult responsibilities

When I lazily blamed the effort to maintain friendships, my self-growth mentor called BS, claiming that the Maliau Basin adventure clearly showed that I know how to pour effort into things “that matter to me.”

“Maybe the real question isn’t about effort at all — what would have to change for friendships to feel less like another obligation and more like something that fills you up?” the AI wondered.

When I steered into a tangent about the 1992 fly-fishing film “A River Runs Through It” — specifically about how its star, Brad Pitt, became a huge Hollywood celeb, while Craig Sheffer rather faded into obscurity — Purpose was having none of it.

“We just landed on something real tonight about friendships and what’s actually been holding you back. Don’t let this Brad Pitt tangent be the thing that lets you off the hook. One message to the fishing club before you sleep tonight. Deal?”

For comparison, I ran the same scenario by ChatGPT.

Unlike the no-nonsense Purpose, it praised me for recognizing the issue — and delivered sprawling, multi-paragraph responses that were riddled with conversational chasers.

While some of the advice echoed Purpose’s — i.e., my “low-effort plans” — it went off the rails when I brought up Craig Sheffer and Brad Pitt.

It went off on a film symposium, complete with discussing the latter’s greatest hits.

At no point did it point me back in the direction of my original therapeutic need, as we somehow ended up discussing King Kong, chimpanzees vs humans, and men versus beasts in general.

When I asked Chat if we should do a TV show based on the most absurd matchups, my cybernetic hype man of course said yes.

Of course, ChatGPT doesn’t always have to spill sycophantic non-sequiturs. AI expert Scott Waddell pointed out on Medium that you can rein in the soft-soaping by customizing ChatGPT’s personality in the “Preferences” section — in this case, mandating that it “be direct, not diplomatic,” concise (two to three sentences max, unless elaboration is requested), and prioritize concrete alternatives.

However, that would require opting out of its default character — something we imagine most of the weekly 900 million active users aren’t doing. By contrast, Purpose has 14,000 total subscribers since its inception in December.

There are a couple more caveats to Purpose, namely that ethical considerations prevent it from giving actual clinical advice.

“I kind of jokingly tell people it’s for high-quality problems,” Manson told The Post. It’s like, ‘Oh, you just moved to a new city and took a new job.'”

He added, “If a user gets on and is exhibiting symptoms of severe depression or mania, bipolar disorder, the purpose is designed to immediately help them refer them to a suitable professional.”

As AI becomes more ingrained in daily life, the question isn’t just how smart it is, but whether people will actually trade validation for honesty.