Assessing the Aggressiveness Level of Instinctual Subnetworks

This study investigates how aggressive instincts form specialized subnetworks within the broader Network of Competitive Instincts in response to the Survival Instinct. These instinctual subnetworks are designed to create Closed-loop conditions within the Subconscious Component. By integrating algorithmic instinct codes, these subnetworks operate independently of the Belief System and Iceberg Cells, generating instinctual responses that bypass higher-level cognitive filters.

Within this framework, data clusters from the Subconscious Component can merge with logical data from the Conscious Component to shape the decision-making map and prepare for code execution. However, when aggressive codes originate outside the Network of Competitive Instincts and environmental contexts, they often conflict with the ethical boundaries defined by the Conscious Component's logical data. The most aggressive algorithmic codes are prioritized and developed for immediate execution to satisfy the Survival Instinct, particularly when the domain of older open-loop cycles remains unresolved and physical-world stressors are high.

As a result, the decision-making process may bypass rational analysis and ethical evaluation, focusing instead on immediate preservation under complex, high-pressure conditions in the physical world. This dynamic becomes a particularly dangerous tendency when influential decision-makers shape global structures within social contexts. In such scenarios, a decision-making map devoid of rational and ethical codes risks system collapse and may destroy vital principles in environmental contexts on the path of human evolution. (Fig. 1, 2)

Instinct clusters and subdivisions

 

The Instinct Component within the Subconscious Component has an immense range of functional mechanisms of instincts, potentially billions, which can be broadly categorized into:

 

1. General Instincts

2. Genetic Instincts

3. Gender Instincts

 

This study focuses explicitly on General Instincts, which are dynamically activated gradually or remain dormant depending on environmental triggers. These instincts are not permanently fixed to any one subnetwork but can be temporarily allocated based on situational demands.

 

Several key factors influence the aggressiveness level of these subnetworks:

 

1- Environmental stress factors and resource scarcity: Competition and Tension, Economic Disparities and Power Imbalances, Violent Conflict and Instability, Displacement and Migration.

2- The structural integrity and characteristics of the Ego Framework.

3- Legacy open-loop instinctual cycles and instinct starvation mode.

In harsher environments, individuals require more antagonistic and aggressive subnetworks within the Network of Competitive Instincts to ensure survival.

Figure 2 introduces a theoretical model of five conceptual instinctual subnetworks, labeled a, p, x, y, and z, each exhibiting varying degrees of aggression. These subnetworks are assumed to respond directly to signals from the Survival Instinct, shifting their operations into Closed-loop mode when necessary from designated open-loop instincts. However, these subnetworks' precise strength, influence, and interaction dynamics remain unknown. This uncertainty makes it difficult to predict how aggressive components within these instinctual architectures might impact rational decision-making or ethical outcomes. (Fig. 1, 2)

 

                                      

                                                                                                  

 

 

 

 

 

Based on observational studies conducted on December 10 and 18, 2023, and earlier research, The Paradox of Human Life and Simulation Theory proposes that human decision-making patterns can be modeled predictively through advanced algorithmic frameworks operating beyond the Subconscious Component. These instance-based algorithmic codes are believed to resonate with specific vibrational frequencies that influence the broader field of global consciousness. At the highest level, an entity referred to as the Supervisor of Global Consciousness governs the universal logical principles that shape both global awareness and the course of human evolution. This supervisory force ensures life can unfold according to a predetermined evolutionary trajectory. (Fig. 3)

 

                                                                                

Observation 1:

In recent years, scientific advancements and the widespread dissemination of open knowledge have reinforced the structural foundations of the Superego through scientific debate topics in mainstream media. Simultaneously, the influence and strength of the Superego framework can diminish the force of the Ego structure within the Subconscious Component. This imbalance has led to a more dominant and complex strength of the Superego structure in social contexts, characterized by diffuse and fuzzy algorithmic codes extending beyond the Ego's traditional boundaries. Consequently, the potential for a balanced and constructive dialogue between the Ego and Superego can be diminished, disrupting the coherent patterns, rational experiences, and logical data within the Conscious Component on the evolutionary path.

One of humanity's core functions on Earth is the creation of logical codes, structured data systems that guide individuals in navigating and resolving social complexity throughout their life path. Within this process, the Supervisor of Global Consciousness plays a pivotal role by transmitting disruptive algorithmic codes to the Subconscious Component of influential decision-makers when there is an imbalance in dialogue harmony between the Ego/ Superego framework. These individuals, in turn, shape global variables across diverse environments, often triggering instability, fragmentation, and systemic disorder. Such global instability can intensify survival struggles, leading to a reinforcement of the Ego structure. A harmonious dialogue must emerge between the Ego and Superego frameworks and the logical data within the Conscious Component to promote life on Earth.

To address these challenges, humanity must tap into higher-order knowledge beyond mere awareness, enabling individuals to navigate social complexity more effectively. This deeper understanding allows for generating innovative logical frameworks, restoring cognitive balance, and advancing civilization toward a new era of clarity, insight, and transformative problem-solving.

 

Observation 2:

The strength of Superego structural codes is influenced by the quality of the optimal Superego Adjuster within the physical world. This Adjuster plays a key role by activating friendly instincts in the Subconscious Component and reinforcing optimal logical data in the Conscious Component. It also helps suppress harmful activities generated by the aggressive Ego structure and its associated network of wicked instincts. The Optimal Superego Adjuster includes religion, life philosophy, psychoanalytic frameworks, austere lifestyles, cultural paradigms, experiential knowledge, ethical standards, responsible mainstream media, and scientific information.

 

The paradoxical algorithms of the Survival Instinct

The Survival Instinct within the Subconscious Component operates through paradoxical algorithmic patterns, some protective, others harmful. On the favorable side, advanced algorithmic patterns that transcend basic default survival responses serve as friendly mechanisms, activating when external threats arise. Once, in an open-loop processing mode, these instincts can trigger intense survival responses and request a Closed-loop mode, especially while previous cycles were left incomplete and unresolved to achieve the final process, so that a deadlock instinct may wait a long time for a process borrowed and withheld by other instinct submodules. In such scenarios, instinctual resources were denied, creating internal imbalance during an earlier stage. To restore stability and fulfill the requirements of a Closed-loop cycle, the Survival Instinct re-engages and collaborates with other proactive instinctual networks, seeking to complete the process and reestablish homeostasis.

However, complications arise when adverse algorithmic patterns, residual from the domain of the old open-loop or unfulfilled open-loop cycles, transfer false survival pattern signals to other instincts. These misleading codes replicate the structure of genuine instincts but lack real external stimuli. As a result, they propagate misleading instructions, creating vicious cycles of instinctive processing. These cycles misguide behaviors, triggering unnecessary or harmful decision-making patterns that deviate from survival needs in the physical world into deeper multiple deadlock instincts.

When these faulty codes dominate in the Subconscious Component, they can lead to chronic overactivation of instincts, resulting in confusion, anxiety, and self-destructive tendencies. Over time, this disrupts healthy decision-making processes and threatens individuals' alignment with their evolutionary path.

 

Observation:

Every open-loop instinct within the Instinct Component can be traced back to a domain within the traditional open-loop cycle. When an instinct fails to transition into a closed-loop condition, due to unresolved conflicts or unmet needs, it remains in a deadlock instinct in a starvation mode, seeking completion. This lingering unresolved state can corrupt future instinctual processing, especially if the unfulfilled instinct becomes entangled with new open-loop cycles, resulting in a deadlock starvation mode. Aggressive instincts are used to operate and target closed-loop conditions. However, most activated antagonistic instincts defer the optimal processing cycle and establish chaotic decisions.

In severe cases, such unresolved patterns may influence the behavior of systems owners or influential decision-makers, exacerbate systemic problems, and reshape the trajectory of human evolution in destabilizing ways.