Share Resource Lifespan Dependency

This study explores how the optimal sharing of assets can enable sustainable operations and enhance harmonic balance among resources by configuring ideal protocols within the System Platform. Systems Owners often prioritize resource allocation based on hierarchy and control economic perspectives rather than pursuing equitable and ethical distribution. This tendency is influenced by algorithmic forces that operate beyond the basic Survival Instinct within the Subconscious Component, creating an invisible pressure to protect the system from perceived external threats.

The Survival Instinct, functioning as an instance of a competitive network, serves as a defense mechanism to shield the System Platform. However, in the first scenario, characterized by suboptimal asset sharing, this network of instincts attenuates security across all system layers. Such inefficiencies diminish the satisfaction of internal and external system elements and stakeholders. When critical resources suffer from poor allocation, they may enter a state of dysfunction, while others develop symptoms of insecurity, anxiety, and systemic imbalance. As a result, System Owners often resort to financing centralized control mechanisms instead of implementing strategies that would lead to optimal and equitable resource distribution.

 

Observation:

Suboptimal resource allocation within systemic platforms contributes to growing hatred and polarization. Over time, this dynamic allows the wealthy to accumulate wealth while the disadvantaged fall further behind. Observational studies indicate that inequality will continue to rise steadily, reinforcing these divisions. This persistent imbalance has the potential to sustain destructive cycles and trigger profound, potentially catastrophic transformations.

The Superego Obstructs Aggressive Instinct Network

The Superego acts as a regulatory barrier, limiting the operational flow of the aggressive instinct network, which causes System Owners to restrict threaden behaviors in operative layers when such behaviors pose perceived threats to the system platform. These restrictions are enforced through security protocols based on global variables that can target complex resources with a badge of economic burdens. As a result, individuals deemed to exhibit "low social competence" may be excluded from normative social functioning. This imposed withdrawal, akin to enforced austerity or hermitage, disrupts instinctual cycles, leaving nodes within the Competitive Instinct Network in an open-loop state.

When instincts are suspended in this Open-loop mode, the Survival Instinct is triggered to rescue and reengage instincts trapped in the domain of deadlock. Algorithmic codes that operate beyond the traditional Superego framework act to prevent complete closure into a Closed-loop state, maintaining a degree of adaptability within defined time intervals.

Security pressures shaped by global variables along the evolutionary trajectory can initiate new Open-loop cycles and introduce tensions within the Subconscious Component. In response, optimal Superego structures are designed to dismantle obsolete behavioral flags and regulate former Open-loop domains to align with emerging time intervals.

Persistent social oppression, driven by global variables, activates the dynamic Superego framework to authorize the Survival Instinct to summon specific instinctual responses to restore a functional Closed-loop mode. However, excessive pressure within the Subconscious Component can create stronger aggressive instincts that manifest as chaos, tragedy, and widespread social disruption.

 

Decision-Making and the Architecture of Instinctual Networks

 

Decision-making processes emerge through the dominant configurations of instinctual networks and instance modules operating within the Subconscious Component. These networks dynamically shape the foundational structure from which behavioral responses and strategic evaluations arise. Among the key modulators of this system are the Superego and Ego frameworks, whose properties significantly influence the architecture of the decision-making map.

The Superego framework imposes regulatory codes, value constraints, and ethical boundaries, often filtering instinctual impulses to align with internalized societal norms. In contrast, the Ego framework mediates between instinctual drives and external realities, managing adaptation through calculated responses. These frameworks interact with instinctual hierarchies to construct decision pathways, weighing internal pressures against perceived external conditions. This complex interplay ultimately defines decision-making processes' direction, coherence, and stability across varying time intervals and environmental contexts.