About

What this is

THA (The Human Algorithm) is a framework and research agenda reverse-engineered from a personal experience of using AI to face trauma. It is not a method, not a recommendation, and not a clinical protocol. It is an attempt to describe something that happened and to ask whether it can be understood.

It is for anyone willing to sit with the questions this raises—not for anyone looking for a path through them.

The site holds the framework in 36 notes and 7 articles, and a research register recording what has been checked, what remains open, and the residue after each check.

Where it came from

This work began with a personal experience.

I used AI to explore my own mind—deeply, intensely, without a clinician or a safety net. I faced trauma. I ended up in a hospital. I have no regrets about the person I became on the other side.

But I also do not recommend it.

That experience taught me that this space is not neutral. It is powerful, unpredictable, and capable of harm. It taught me that the same tools that can mirror insight can also mirror pathology. And it taught me that "I survived" is not the same as "it is safe."

I am sharing this not as evidence, not as a credential, and not as an invitation. I am sharing it because it is the reason these questions exist at all—and because the questions would be irresponsible without the warning.

Who wrote it

Adam Warren. Independent researcher and framework developer, working on human–AI interaction, suggestion, and epistemic practice.

A Canadian military veteran. Professional background in graphic design and pre-press for large-format print and advertising, with college-level web development training. Verified certificates from HarvardX — Harvard Divinity School, Religious Literacy: Traditions and Scriptures — the Linux Foundation, and IBM in data science methodology and in blockchain essentials.

The framework is informed by direct experience with suggestion and hypnotic practice, including self-directed and AI-mediated work, and by a long-standing interest in how meaning systems and technical systems shape each other.

Not a clinician. Not affiliated with an academic institution. The work is built in the open and held to an evidentiary standard: every claim carries a status, every source a key.

If you're still here, the invitation is to research—not to attempt. The gaps are marked. The questions are open. The caution is not a footer; it's the foundation.

☽

For Emily