Why "Clean Code" Isn't Enough Anymore

For the last two decades, "Clean Code" has been the gold standard. We've all read the books, memorized the SOLID principles, and religiously linted our codebases. But in 2025, clean code is no longer the ceiling—it's the floor.

The AI Commoditization of "Clean"

Here's the uncomfortable truth: AI is actually very good at writing "clean" code. Ask ChatGPT to write a function, and it will give you something that:

• Passes the linter.
• Has proper indentation.
• Uses descriptive (if generic) variable names.
• Is technically "correct".

If your value as a developer is just writing clean, syntactically correct code, you are in trouble. The machine can do that faster, cheaper, and arguably more consistently than you can.

Enter "Soulful Code"

So what's left for humans? The answer lies in what we call Soulful Code (or "Vibe Coding"). Soulful code isn't just about following rules; it's about communicating intent, context, and trade-offs.

Let's look at an example.

The "Clean" AI Version

function processUserData(user) {
  if (!user) {
    return null;
  }
  const formattedDate = new Date().toISOString();
  const result = {
    id: user.id,
    name: user.name,
    timestamp: formattedDate,
    isActive: true
  };
  return result;
}

There is nothing "wrong" with this code. It's clean. It's readable. But it's also completely devoid of context. Why are we processing this user? Why is isActive hardcoded to true? What is the business logic here?

The "Soulful" Human Version

// Hydrate the user session for the analytics dashboard
// We force active=true because inactive users shouldn't even reach this pipeline
function hydrateAnalyticsSession(rawUser) {
  if (!rawUser) return null; // Should be caught by middleware, but safety first

  return {
    analyticsId: rawUser.id,
    displayName: rawUser.name, // PII safe
    sessionStart: new Date().toISOString(),
    forceActive: true // See note above
  };
}

Notice the difference?

• Naming: hydrateAnalyticsSession tells you why this function exists, not just what it does.
• Comments: The comments explain the why ("inactive users shouldn't reach this pipeline"), not the what.
• Nuance: The code acknowledges the system architecture ("Should be caught by middleware").

The 3 Pillars of Soulful Code

1. Contextual Naming

AI names things based on their type (e.g., userList, dataArray). Humans name things based on their role in the story (e.g., eligibleVoters, staleCacheEvictionList).

2. Intentional Inconsistency

Clean code demands perfect consistency. Soulful code knows when to break the rules. Sometimes a "hacky" one-liner is actually better than a "clean" abstraction because it's easier to delete later. Humans understand the lifecycle of code; AI only understands the snapshot.

3. The "Why" Comment

If your comment explains what the code does, delete it. The code explains what it does. Your comment should explain why you chose this approach over the other three obvious ones. That is the value you add.

Conclusion

Don't aim for clean code. Aim for code that tells a story. Aim for code that feels like it was written by a human being who understood the problem, the constraints, and the future maintainers.

That is the vibe we are chasing. And that is the only thing AI can't replace.