The phenomenon of increasing algorithmic comfort can be described as a process in which apparent security turns into a serpent embrace-like pressure, with increasing automation producing a tension between comfort and suffocation, as well as a dynamic of resistance, adaptation, and release. In the age when education is shaped according to code, the rule prevailed: “no more endless hours creating something.” Efficiency has become the new holy grail, but it is increasingly being forgotten that this convenience comes at a price – the loss of creative effort and human authenticity. Within the Education 4.0 paradigm, contemporary education strives to develop the skills of the future – creativity, critical thinking, and digital literacy – while at the same time increasingly relying on large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT. However, we cannot help but wonder if this approach, while opening up possibilities for new forms of learning, actually leads to a superficial automation of the process that ignores the key component of learning – the emotional dimension. The emotional mimicry that large language models achieve through imitating empathy and using apparently empathic phrases actually re mains on the surface, as confirmed by research showing that students who use LLM tools record less cognitive effort, as well as a lower quality of reasoning – which indicates emotional shallowness and thought passivation. The findings of a survey conducted on a sample of 60 students show that young users simultaneously recognize and support the practical benefits of AI tutors, yet express concerns about cognitive addiction and illusory empathy. This study examines the consequences of LLM tutor-based educational practices on thought identity, emotional depth, and confidence development. The findings, including the results of the survey, indicate that interaction with algorithmic tools reduces creative and semantic brain activity, encouraging superficial automatism and digital dementia, i.e., a decline in memory, concentration, and critical reasoning. In response, the paper proposes digital emotional literacy as a key pedagogical strategy and safeguard against the manipulation of empathy, the addictive reliance on tutors, and the substitution of emotional reality for algorithmic comfort.