Artificial intelligence is a subpart of computer science, concerned with how to give computers the sophistication to perform intelligently, and to do so in increasingly range of wider realms. It participates thoroughly in computer science's passion for abstraction, programming and logical formalisms, and detail -- for algorithms over behavioural data, synthesis over analysis and engineering (how to do) over science (what to know). All the above make Al uncongenial to psychology, which tends to the opposite choice on almost every dimension mentioned -- for behavioural data, analysis and science. But psychology is bound to AI tightly and irrevocably. Their fates do worse than commingle, they co-terminate. Moreover, however annoying it may seem, Al (and computer science) can live and prosper without psychology, but not the other way around. Psychology cannot prosper without Al. The asymmetry arises because psychology docs not stand between Al and its proper goal -- how to make computers do neat things can be discovered without recourse to psychology, simply by experimenting with computers directly. Contrariwise, A I (and computer science) is developing the conceptual tools for understanding how information is processed, and* these tools arc indispensable for psychology to understand how information is processed by humans. However irrelevant particular Al systems realized in particular computer architectures might seem, the concepts, the tools of analysis and synthesis, and the general lessons arc all central to the progress of psychology in its own personal mission -- to understand the mind of man. The only way for psychology to avoid dependence on Al is to get there first, and there appears precious little likelihood of that at the moment (which is a different story for a different time).