Fröding and Peterson (2025) offer four objections challenging my argument that using ChatGPT to fulfill authenticity-based obligations is generally problematic, as it fails to respect what I call “second-person authenticity”. In this paper, I respond to each of these criticisms and conclude that they do not undermine the core of my argument. Second-person authenticity remains a morally relevant and independent dimension of human-to-human relationships, one that must be urgently considered in an era where AI mediation is becoming increasingly pervasive.
