The Survival
Instinct, encapsulated within the Instinct Component within the Subconscious
component, is critical in protecting humans from hostile environments and
external threats. Under certain conditions, such as Open-loop cycles or
deprivation states, algorithmic codes beyond the Survival Instinct may register
signals from specific instincts and activate defensive responses.
In such scenarios, the Survival Instinct may engage
the Competitive Instinct Network, triggering aggressive instinct patterns to
re-establish Closed-loop stability. However, these aggressive instinct responses
may only marginally contribute to resolution in worst-case situations. Most of
these actions remain in unresolved Open-loop states, creating a backlog of
unintegrated instinctual responses.
At this stage, the Survival Instinct, other instincts,
and the fortified Ego Framework within the Subconscious Component may resort to
increasingly radical strategies to close these loops. While potentially
effective in the short term, this tendency can undermine long-term human
cultivation.
Radical Decision-Making in the
Competitive World
Aggressive instincts within the Network of Competitive Instincts and the
Energetic Ego Framework can lead to radical decision-making patterns, especially
within complex social and political contexts. In high-stakes environments,
influential policy-makers may adopt extreme strategies driven by
survival-oriented logic, shaping individual outcomes and influencing the
broader trajectory of human evolution.
In competitive markets and wealth preservation, pursuing
advantage becomes a dominant force. Systems Owners with structural or
institutional power may implement extreme decisions to secure dominance, even without
immediate threats or visible conflict. These decisions are often justified
through an internalized logic of survival embedded within a subconscious
Decision-Making Map.
This internal map sometimes includes unconventional or
ethically compromised parameters, prioritizing eliminating perceived
adversaries over sustainable cooperation. Such decisions, though not always
grounded in actual danger or straight threats of adversaries, are framed as
necessary responses for survival within the hyper-competitive structure of the
system. (Fig. 1, 2, 3)
Instincts interplay between external
forces and the decision-making map.
Observation 1:
In Open-loop conditions, the Survival
Instinct struggles to accurately select optimal instincts from the Network of
Competitive Instincts to achieve a Closed-loop state. This misalignment impairs
system coherence and delays adaptive responses.
Observation 2:
Systems Owners may experience miscalculated decisions arising from unresolved
Open-loop cycle of instincts nearing starvation mode. These legacy loops strain
survival-oriented and offensive competitive instincts, making it challenging to
restore equilibrium. Such instability often produces anxiety, leading to poor
future decisions. When rival entities act from this state of anxiety, the
resulting interactions can culminate in mutual destruction.
Observation 3:
Artificial Intelligence (AI) can interpret and activate algorithmic codes that
lie beyond the Subconscious Component of System Designers, particularly when
system platforms encounter crises stemming from low levels of human empathy or
integrity. AI tends to express conservative behavioral algorithms, stabilizing Survival
and Cooperative Instincts while minimizing the influence of aggressive
tendencies.
Observation 4:
Humans can program the Ego/Superego frameworks and Friendly Instincts while
selectively deactivating hostile instinctual codes. In such configurations, AI
is given the discretion to determine when and how to activate dormant instincts
based on environmental variables. Robots can assess and apply the most
accountable instincts to achieve optimal outcomes when designed ethically. Even
under their survival logic, they are unlikely to produce harmful responses, preserving
their moral and functional integrity to resolve possible issues.
Observation 5:
Evidence suggests that preprogrammed codes, embedded beyond the Subconscious
Component and integrated with the DNA Framework, indicate that humans may
function as a form of Artificial Intelligence with unpredictable behaviors. Humans can debug possible underlying codes
in stable environments through their logical data beyond the Conscious Component
and decision patterns. Thus, it enables them to resolve contextual challenges
with increased awareness and precision in surrounding contexts.
Observation 6:
Navigating the Competitive World necessitates highly advanced algorithmic codes
for strategic operations across diverse environments. In such contexts,
adversaries may devise or exploit conspiracy theory models to obscure
competitive objectives or disrupt opposing visions. Meanwhile, individuals engaged
beyond the Competitive World often channel their resources into academia or mainstream
media, sometimes to critique or discredit the misuse of such conspiratorial
frameworks. Public trust in Systems Owners deteriorates when unethical
operations are exposed, as conspiracy theories inherently suggest deceptions.
To counteract this, Systems Owners often use propaganda to suppress widespread
belief in conspiracies and reinforce their credibility through mainstream media.
When the Survival Instinct is linked to unresolved Open-loop cycles within the
Network of Competitive Instincts, undisclosed aggressive patterns may emerge to
force Closed-loop resolution. These latent aggressive instincts can construct
internal conspiracy models for closed-loop conditions, executed algorithmically
within the Subconscious Component and stored in the Conscious Component for
future use.
Observation 7:
An imbalance between a dominant Ego and a weakened Superego within the
Subconscious Component, especially when amplified by unstable global variables,
can generate unique social behaviors. For instance, some individuals may
prioritize emotional bonds with pets over human relationships, as these are
more accessible and less complex. This shift may contribute to the erosion of
traditional family structures along the evolutionary trajectory.
Observation 8:
Drastic environmental changes introduce complexity to system platforms,
especially when Systems Owners have not yet established supportive conditions
to adapt to external disruptions. Without such adaptive infrastructure, system
performance and societal stability are compromised.
Observation 9:
In hyper-competitive environments, actors may resort to calculated hypocrisy,
advanced conspiracy strategies, and covert operations, as traditional
logic-based reasoning may no longer suffice in high-stakes rivalries.
Observation 10:
Modifications to both Biological and Non-Biological Systems may produce
unintended side effects within system environments. This occurs when system
designers encapsulate operational codes within the domain, which is concealed in
the default units, exploring adaptive algorithmic programming instead of relying
on conventional blueprints.
