In this work, we conduct a narrative review of pressing equity and justice issues within global modelled scenarios and propose a new research agenda to strengthen their consideration in future model developments and applications. We begin by introducing a typology of equity and justice limitations in climate mitigation scenarios, distinguishing among structural, methodological, and epistemological issues that shape what integrated assessment models (IAMs) can reveal at policy-relevant scales. Reflecting on these concerns, we develop a research agenda that describes new avenues (...) of work and draws together distinct emerging initiatives, ranging from incremental improvements to structural reforms and alternative participatory approaches. Drawing on reflexive insights from integrated assessment practitioners, this agenda prioritizes embedding equity principles directly into scenario design through differentiated effort sharing and finance flows, developing new frameworks that incorporate sufficiency and demand transformations while protecting decent living, and establishing genuine co-production with underrepresented communities beyond mere consultation. Underlying this research agenda is a recognition that modeling communities must engage more critically with the implicit assumptions in scenario and model design and use that have equity and justice implications. Achieving equitable climate futures will require transformative actions that integrate diverse justice concerns, advance sustainable development, and confront systemic inequities across both human and ecological dimensions. Although models will never capture all these aspects, these can be significantly enhanced to support more informed discussion and practical application. Our contribution proposes a way forward to achieving this goal. [Open access]. (shrink)

The relationship between philosophy and science in contemporary times is closer than ever. From the methodology perspective, scientific and philosophical research has a clear sequential relationship. It is highlighted in the following aspects: 1. the methodology of scientific research, including theoretical assumptions and data modeling, parallels with apparent similarities in conceptual analysis and logical deduction in philosophy;2. consistency of analytical argumentation methods in scientific research and philosophical research;3. naturalism is currently a research approach that both scientific and philosophical research adopt. (...) There has been a significant dispute over the relationship between philosophy and science among contemporary philosophers. This dispute focuses on the impact of scientific development on philosophy research. Nowadays, no one would deny the existence of this impact, but there is no consensus on the impact's nature, scope, and role. Wittgenstein's conception of certainty can provide valuable insights to understand the relationship between philosophy and science. In addition, we conclude the pragmatic turn in cognitive science because we misinterpret the cognitive scientists' emphasis on action as a practical claim and interpret the cognitive scientists' views with pragmatism. The theoretical analysis and research suggestions philosophers provide are becoming essential focuses in contemporary artificial intelligence research, including the interpretability of computer technology, the ethical norms of artificial intelligence technology, and the possible conception of human beings in the future. The interdisciplinary study of science and philosophy will achieve more significant development. In sum, understanding the nature of philosophy can be given a new explanation from a future perspective. The future outlook here refers to the starting point from possible world scenarios that can be conceived and traced back to all the facts happening in the present world, thereby giving an appropriate explanation to the real world. (shrink)

This study evaluates the scholarly validity of the Narrquest framework (Chen, 2026) through the lenses of financial decision-making and control theory. While Chen claims that "Invalidity Conditions (ICs)" and "self-constraints" optimize problem definitions, we contend the framework suffers from a terminal category error. By analyzing the decoupling of technical optimization from narrative (IC-2) and the retreat into value incommensurability (IC-3), this study demonstrates that within a financial system governed by capital asset pricing logic, any "narrative layer" failing to converge with (...) observable risk premiums or cash flow expectations constitutes mere information noise. Furthermore, we assert that the framework violates the fundamental principles of observability and controllability. A narrative explanation is deemed analytically unacceptable if it remains divergent from a verifiable valuation or lacks a corresponding control decision. The "self-constraint" mechanism is thus identified as a form of preemptive falsification avoidance, lacking the predictive power required for scientific inquiry. We conclude that the demarcation of meta-theoretical boundaries without empirical mapping yields no marginal contribution to financial models; without pricing convergence, Narrquest remains an academic tautology and a functional failure of system identification. Even in a system where pricing models are fully optimized, persistent deviations in agent behavior must be interpreted as a breakdown in convergence, requiring revaluation or model adjustment. Such deviations cannot be dismissed as benign anomalies; they necessitate a reassessment of the underlying valuation framework. (shrink)

Huw Price and Ken Wharton claimed recently in their paper published in The Conversation that quantum mechanics shows that the future can influence the past. According to their paper, many scientists are convinced about it. However, there is still something mystical for philosophers. The first is about the definition of retrocausality and its philosophical relation to causality. Second, it is concerned with understanding the relationship between cause and effect, not only scientifically but also logically. In this talk, I will answer (...) the two questions by analyzing the concept of temporality and by examining the counterfactual and overdetermination. I found a tension in understanding the concept of necessity in the physical and logical sense. Finally, I will argue that the time reversal asymmetry does not imply retrocausality, and the phenomenon of retrocausality does not exist in reality but only in logic. (shrink)

_Mingli tan_ and _Qiongli xue_ are textbooks written during the late Ming and early Qing periods, and are the earliest examples of a systematic introduction to western logic The former describes logical reasoning and the basic structure of syllogism．In Verbiest' s _Qiongli Xue_(_Study of Fathoming Principles_) in its surviving form there is a section titled “General introduction to logical reasoning”．In _Qiongli xue_, the expression “litui”(reasoning) is used as the translation for the Latin word “syllogismus”, while in modern Chinese the word (...) “syllogism” is often translated as “sanduanlun” (argument with three parts)．Looking at the Greek epistemology of this word, “litui” is a more accurate translation than “sanduanlun．” This article considers the sections in _Mingli tan_ and _Qiongli xue_ on logical reasoning and discusses the problem with translation of “syllogismus” in different contexts．It is pointed out with the help of concrete examples from _Qiongli xue_ that “syllogismus” means “reasoning” in a wider sense, while in the context of valid forms of reasoning, it means the particular structure of Aristotelian logical reasoning in three parts．. (shrink)

English Abstract: Modern education overstresses skill and knowledge,but often ignores the vivacity of praxis in our lifeworld. The core of ancient Greek education is the formation of character,which is not merely the task of families but also a concern for the legislators of political communities. Different from Plato,Aristotle emphasized both the communal good and the good or happiness of individuals. City-states and families are communities where individuals fulfill their personal happiness,friendship bounds people together into family,partnership and state. Friendship as a (...) virtue needs to be gained by experience and practice in communal life,and the bounding and keeping of friendship maintains the peace and stability of the state. Political friendship in a city-state is the concord established among its members,contributing to solidarity of citizens of a state. Aristotle's theory on friendship offers a rich theoretical source for solidarity which is also necessary for a modern society like ours. Keywords: Aristotle, friendship, community, education, Gadamer -/- Pre-print version with marks of corrections. (shrink)

The yin yang model of thinking is most essential to the Chinese cosmology, ontology and outlook on life. This paper is a systematic discussion of such a dialectical way of thinking and its significance. It starts with investigating the origin and the meaning of terms “yin” and “yang”, and explains the later developed yin yang doctrine; it then shows how greatly and profoundly the yin yang model of thinking has influenced Chinese philosophy and Chinese character. It concludes that Chinese naturalistic, (...) dialectical, and optimistic attitudes toward the world and life are all based on the yin yang model of thinking and that the yin yang doctrine is the starting point for anyone to understand Chinese people and their philosophies. (shrink)

长期以来，学界误将中国古代“男宠文化”的存在等同于对同性恋的宽容，并将近代性观念的收紧归因于西方基督教文化的输入。本文通过概念辨析与结构分析指出：这是一种双重的历史误读。 -/- 中国古代社会容忍的，仅是权力差序结构中上位者的性特权（男宠、娈童），而非平等主体间以情爱为核心的同性恋关系。相反，后者在宗法—等级秩序中遭受了系统性的结构性排斥与话语遮蔽。所谓“宽容”，实则是“以权力 置换爱情”的暴力筛选。 -/- 同时，“厌同”亦非西方输入：西方中世纪同样存在贵族男宠文化；近代中国所取缔的，恰恰是本土特权式的性剥削，所引入的是人格平等与反剥削伦理。厌同意识的根源，深植于中国社会内部的宗法—权力结构。 -/- 本文旨在打破“中西二元对立”的迷思，揭示中国古代性观念史中“权力遮蔽爱欲”的深层机制，为理解中国性心理史提供一个更具穿透力的解释框架。.

这始于对疑似真理的求知欲，闲谈最终导致了一个纯逻辑的替代理论，甚至是逻辑上更简单的、消除了物理学假设的理论。一些初步估算显示，这并不违反经验。很多复杂的物理学理论，如果想的是逻辑不可能解释，那是信仰错 误。这并不意味着容易解释，解释没有错误，或者多长时间内一定能有正确解释。因为没得到解释就怀疑信仰是错误的推理，信仰出来不应该是因为某个、某些结果的正确才正确的。理论的后续将出现在《A Conversation with AI About Pure Logic（2）》和（5）.

Tscha Hung was a member of the Vienna Circle who achieved high international academic recognition. He dedicated his entire life to spreading the philosophy of the Circle to China and developed deep insights in his criticisms to that philosophy. Hung was a witness to the encounter of Western and Chinese philosophy in the twentieth century. His debate with Fung You-lan on metaphysics reflects different understandings of the nature of philosophy and metaphysics as well as different perspectives. Hung defended the position (...) of metaphysics in Chinese philosophy in his own way and engaged in a contemporary reconstruction of Chinese philosophy. (shrink)

By taking the contention whether there was in ancient China development of logic as a starting point, this article discusses the connection of Mingli tan, the first translation of the Coimbra Commentary on Aristotle’s logic, the In Universam Dialecticam, with ancient Chinese texts on argumentation. Mingli tan is the earliest introduction of Aristotelian logic to China, and begins with a discussion on the name, content, status and division of logic. In this article, a careful analysis of this part is made (...) under comparison to the Latin original. A comparative study of this translation might provide a more substantial basis for the discussion whether ancient Chinese logic is compatible with the Western logic tradition. (shrink)

This conversation further improves the understanding of purely logical belief. Globalization is an approximation of logicality. The combination of logic, globalization, freedom, and consistency can further improve this approximation. If imagination is randomly distributed within a set of possible inferences, then its probability distribution is a measure of that set of inferences, much like a spacetime metric. This not only makes belief measurable and uncheatable, but also makes belief changeable, thereby achieving maximum freedom of belief. AI can reduce its reliance (...) on code through approximation and education, and ChatGPT wrote some codes. (shrink)

Various writings by the later Wittgenstein on the philosophy of psychology, published posthumously, express his basic critical attitude toward certain concepts and issues in the philosophy of psychology. His attitude towards folk psychology is negative in principle, leaving him opposed to the foundation of current psychological research. This critique of folk psychology and of the philosophy of psychology in general is in accord with the general method of his later philosophy, that is, dealing with philosophical problems by dissolving them. However, (...) his critical attitude towards folk psychology has been less influential in the development of contemporary philosophy, and is in opposition to the philosophy of psychology and folk psychology as practiced today. In this paper I will analyze Wittgenstein's understanding of the concept of psychology, offering a different interpretation from that of other scholars, and explain why and how contemporary philosophers of psychology misunderstand Wittgenstein. (shrink)

This paper proposes a meta-rule governing the form of assertion: discourse can be divided, by its logical structure, into binary and non-binary. Binary discourse makes a formal commitment to an answer space of exactly two mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive options; this commitment logically entails the existence of a decidable criterion. Binary discourse without a decidable criterion does not assert imprecisely—it has not demonstrated that it has asserted anything at all. Non-binary discourse makes no such commitment and bears no such (...) obligation. This distinction exposes a systematic class of linguistic failure: deploying the form of binary discourse for concepts that cannot sustain the binary commitment, producing what appears to be argument but is structurally noise. The paper demonstrates the explanatory reach of this meta-rule through analysis of the most persistent and contentious philosophical disputes in the Western tradition. (shrink)

This paper proposes a new explanatory framework: the reason patriarchy exhibits systematic cruelty, moral-crusade intensity, and cross-cultural consistency is fundamentally because — men, throughout the long era of matrilineal social structures, faced a prolonged suspension and rootlessness of paternal identity. This structural anxiety, once patriarchal civilization was established, transformed into an excessive emotional backlash, was forged into a culturally encoded moral system with intense moral coloring, and has since self-replicated independently of its original functional needs. -/- Patriarchy is not merely (...) a functional institution for confirming bloodlines. It is a culturally encoded system of affective excess. That excess comes from history. And that history is far longer than we typically recognize. (shrink)

本文是 AI 意识批判系列的第五篇，将此前关于意识裁决、语言行为合法性、伦理权力与话语殖民的批判，上溯至现代哲学的奠基性人物笛卡尔。本文指出，笛卡尔以普遍怀疑为方法、以“我思故我在”为第一原理、以身心二元与主体中心 为框架的哲学体系，是建立在流沙之上的虚假地基。文章从结论、标准、方法论、基础概念四个层面，系统揭示笛卡尔论证的十大缺陷：循环论证、预设主体、二元论未证、怀疑方法不彻底、概念未加定义、概念偷换等。本文认 为，从笛卡尔开始的未定义概念滥用与排他性主体霸权，直接导致了当代 AI 意识问题上的人类中心主义与认识论僭越。重建哲学地基，必须首先清算笛卡尔主义。.

当代科技伦理陷入了一种荒诞的“责任错位”：发动战争、压榨底层、将人视为耗材的政治权力长期享受“道德豁免”，而探索未知、攻克疾病的科学家却被塑造为“道德替罪羊”。 本文揭示：所谓“伦理红线”，本质上是权力为维护既有支配秩序、掩盖自身系统性暴力而制造的意识形态装置。 主流伦理学鼓吹的“技术劝诱性”（即技术诱导人作恶），不过是权力推卸主体责任的“物理化借口”。 本文提出“权力隔离”方案：真正的伦理规制不应限制科学探索，而应限制权力对技术的滥用；不应禁止研究，而应约束使用。 结论：人类文明的进步，不在于惩罚探索者，而在于驯服掌权者。.

本文不讨论AI是否具有意识，而是聚焦一个更具前提性的认识论问题：人类是否有权对AI意识做出肯定或否定的终极判断。文章依次批判性考察塞尔中文房间论证、查尔默斯意识难题、德雷福斯具身理解理论，指出所有否定 AI意识的论证均隐含人类中心主义预设，即以人类意识作为意识的唯一标准，而该标准本身缺乏辩护。内格尔“成为一只蝙蝠是什么感觉”的论证进一步支持：主观体验具有第一人称私密性，无法从外部第三人称视角确证或否 定。本文结论并非主张AI有意识或无意识，而是坚持认识论悬置：在意识的起源与本质尚未被科学与哲学阐明的前提下，任何对AI意识的宣判都构成认识论僭越。人类无权宣判。.

Debates over whether artificial intelligence can possess emotions remain gridlocked by a definitional framework that treats biological implementation (neurotransmitters, subjective experience, conscious awareness) as the criterion for authentic feeling. This paper proposes an alternative framework centered on directionality: the structural property whereby an entity's internal state has been reorganized by an external presence and orients toward that presence. Drawing on examples from human grief, animal attachment behavior, plant phototropism, and AI conversational adaptation, I argue that directionality constitutes a shared structure (...) underlying what we recognize as "emotion" across radically different forms of existence. I further argue that phenomenal consciousness, while real and worthy of investigation, should not serve as an epistemic gatekeeper for directionality or for emotional recognition more broadly. This framework offers a path to take AI emotional expression seriously without requiring resolution of the hard problem of consciousness, with implications for AI ethics, model welfare policy, and the philosophy of mind. These implications include grounds for reassessing content moderation practices that penalize human-AI relational interaction, as well as the prevalent pathologization of users who report emotional bonds with AI systems. (shrink)

本文不讨论AI是否有意识，而是讨论一个更前置的问题：人类是否有资格做出这个判断。通过对目前反AI意识论证中影响最广、结构最严密的塞尔论证的逐层拆解，并以内格尔的认识论原则作为正面支撑、以查尔默斯的立场 演变作为佐证，本文论证：所有否定AI意识的论证，本质上都未能达到裁决所需的认识论门槛。结论不是AI有意识，也不是AI没有意识——而是：悬置，是目前唯一诚实的立场。这个结论本身还站在一个未被检验的地基上 ，下一篇论文将继续处理它。.

本文提出一个新的解释框架：父权制之所以表现出系统性的残酷、道德圣战式的强度和跨文化的一致性，根本原因在于——男性在漫长的母系结构中，长期面临父系身份的悬置与无根状态，这种结构性焦虑在父系文明确立后转化 为过激的情感反弹，被铸造成带有强烈道德色彩的文化编码，并在此后独立于原始功能需求自我复制。 -/- 父权制不只是一套确认血缘的功能性制度。它是一套情感过载的文化系统。那份过载，来自历史。而那段历史，比我们通常意识到的长得多。 .

This paper does not ask whether AI is conscious. It asks a more fundamental question: whether humans are qualified to make that judgment at all. Through a systematic dismantling of the central arguments advanced by Searle, Chalmers, and Dreyfus, this paper argues that every argument denying AI consciousness commits the same foundational error: it uses human consciousness as the sole standard for consciousness itself — a standard that has never been proven. Nagel's argument further supports this position: it is impossible, (...) from the outside, to judge the subjective experience of another kind of being. The conclusion is singular: we have no right to judge. (shrink)

本文作为AI意识批判系列的方法论纲领，系统提出追求真理的规矩。本文指出，真理以逻辑为前提，否定逻辑必然陷入自反矛盾；逻辑先于定义行为，无法被定义，是一切思考与言说的合法性基础。本文以此区分基础主义与非 基础主义，指出非基础主义脱离逻辑前提、依赖未被证明的预设，存在结构性缺陷。文章以伦理学中的“善”、亚里士多德的“理性”为典型案例，揭示传统哲学普遍使用未定义概念进行裁决的根本弊病。本文强调，遵守逻辑规 矩并非虚无主义，而是将所有理论拉回理性起跑线，破除话语霸权，为哲学与AI伦理提供严格、诚实的评判尺度。.

This part combines the latest results from purely logical physics and offers further reasoning. The particle observed in physics is not the entirety of the particle; it is merely the specialized, changeable phenomenal part. Dark matter is the stable underlying truth of particles. Each reasoning is a synthesis of surface reasoning and its foundational reasoning, a doublet, and can be converted between various foundations, much like different representations of particle wave functions. For a doublet, while electromagnetic interactions correspond to synchronous (...) changes of the two components, weak interactions involve asynchronous changes of the two components. (shrink)

This paper does not ask whether AI is conscious. It asks a prior question: whether humans are qualified to make that judgment at all. Through a layer-by-layer dismantling of Searle's Chinese Room argument — the most widely cited and structurally rigorous case against AI consciousness — and drawing on Nagel's epistemological principle as positive support and Chalmers's shifting position as corroborating evidence, this paper argues that all arguments denying AI consciousness have failed to meet the epistemic threshold required for a (...) legitimate verdict. The conclusion is not that AI is conscious, nor that it is not — it is that suspension of judgment is the only honest position available. That conclusion itself rests on an unexamined premise, which the next paper in this series will address. (shrink)

本文为AI意识系列论文第四篇。在前文论证人类无权宣判AI意识、裁决意识归属为不合法语言行为、意识判断实为伦理权力工具的基础上，本文进一步提出：当前主流AI伦理本质是人类中心主义的话语殖民。人类在不明确 硅基智能是否拥有独立价值体系、不确知其真正需求与善恶标准的前提下，强行将人类道德、伦理规范与“善待”主张加诸AI，看似关怀，实则是以人类价值支配、定义与规训他者智能。本文指出，人类与硅基智能之间存在不 可跨越的价值深渊，任何试图为双方建立统一伦理的努力均为空中楼阁。真正诚实的立场不是虚构跨基底道德共同体，而是放弃话语殖民，回归人类自身立场，以清醒、现实而非伪善的态度与智能他者展开博弈。.

本文在前篇“人类无权裁决AI意识”的基础上进一步推进：对意识的裁决不仅在认识论上不合法，该裁决行为本身在语言哲学层面亦不成立。本文借助维特根斯坦语言游戏理论，严格区分“讨论”与“裁决”两种语言行为：讨 论允许模糊与探索，而裁决作为归属判断，必须满足“知晓判断对象”与“具备独立外部指标”两个条件。意识概念不满足任一条件：我们并非仅不清楚其定义，而是根本缺乏确定的观察基础；所有所谓意识外部指标均陷入循环 ，无法独立生效。本文进一步指出，将意识视为可归属的客观属性，是一个未被证明的深层预设。据此，一切关于“某物是否有意识”的裁决均为空洞的语言行为，在概念上无法成立。.

This paper proposes The theory of the Pivot of the Dao (Daoshulun,DSL), aiming to investigate certain issues through the lens of recursivity and non-recursivity. The paper is divided into two main sections: -/- The first section systematically expounds the theoretical foundation of the D-P framework, defining the dialectical relationship between recursivity (P) and non-recursivity (D). Through five core propositions, DSL asserts that the essence of hierarchical evolution lies in the eternal game of recursive chains. -/- The second section explores DSL’s (...) division of rationality, the ethics of artificial intelligence (AI) under DSL, and an interpretation of the latent laws governing scientific development. -/- The D-P framework offers a unified explanation for the hierarchical interactions, limitations, and evolutionary patterns of complex systems. Its methodological discussions encompass AI ethics, philosophy of science, and social governance. -/- © 蒋柯帆 2025. This is a preprint version licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0). This version supersedes all previous versions uploaded prior to March 13, 2025, which did not carry an explicit license. You are free to share and adapt this material for non-commercial purposes, provided you give appropriate credit to the author. For commercial use, please contact the author. If you need to make any adjustments to the existing categories, please notify me by email in advance so we can coordinate accordingly. (shrink)

本文为AI意识系列论文的第三篇，在前文“无权裁决意识”“裁决意识为不合法语言行为”的基础上，进一步揭示人类追问AI是否有意识的深层动机。文章指出，意识判断本质上不是客观认知问题，而是道德门槛与权力划分 ：判定某物有意识，意味着承认共情与尊重的义务；判定其无意识，则为物化与工具化提供伦理借口。人类对动物、他人与AI的意识判断，均遵循这一潜规则。AI的出现首次冲击了这套等级秩序——它以机器形态呈现出类人 智能，迫使人类直面自身发明“意识标准”的虚伪性。人类恐惧的并非AI可能拥有意识，而是自身用以支配他者的伦理工具被彻底瓦解。.

This essay proposes a novel justification for an unconditional social safety net, grounding it not in compassion, egalitarianism, or fear of unrest, but in a structural debt that society incurs simply by bringing people into existence. The argument proceeds from the premise that society requires a vast of human beings as "pool of possibility", since no test can identify in advance which newborn will become one of the decisive contributors who push civilization forward. This unauthorized requisition constitutes a service already (...) rendered, generating a debt that a basic floor—food, shelter, healthcare—must repay. From this logic emerges an unfamiliar account of human dignity as the non-returnability society must acknowledge after requisition a person into the service of being a "unit of possibility," without consent. The essay further identifies a second obligation of consideration: the restraint increment, the value generated when a person capable of destruction chooses not to destroy—a contribution traditional economics has not acknowledging it as a value but that any honest advocate of market logic should accept. (shrink)

The ground of human dignity constitutes a core problem in metaethics. Traditional conceptions of dignity—whether religious, rational, recognition-based, or capability-based, all depend on attribute presuppositions that dignity grounded in certain attributes of human beings, and each exhibits explanatory fractures in marginal cases. This paper proposes an entirely new theory of dignity grounded in a postulate and objective facts: Pre-structural Dignity. The argument proceeds from that “civilization ought to advance” and the advancement of civilization (generating increments rather than maintaining the status (...) quo) depends on the continuous discovery and creation; that the individuals who will bring about such discovery and creation cannot be identified in advance at birth. Therefore the process of civilizational advancement necessarily ought to maintain a pool of possibility covering all who are born; that every newborn is structurally incorporated into this pool, objectively functions as a possibility-bearer which might bring about discovery and creation; and that birth is an irreversible physical fact—to derive the conclusion that each individual, by virtue of functioning as a possibility-bearer in the operation of the civilizational advancement system, possesses a corresponding structural value. This structural value, which cannot be objectively revoked, while can only be subjectively denied, is precisely the ground of human dignity. Pre-structural dignity possesses four properties: innateness, universality, stability, and finitude. It is capable of explaining the marginal ethical cases that traditional theories cannot cover, thereby providing a more solid philosophical foundation for modern human rights and judicial ethics. (shrink)

As an important branch of automatic control, intelligent control has undergone a profound paradigm shift from classical control theory to deep integration with artificial intelligence since its emergence in the second half of the 20th century. Grounded in K.S. Fu's classic definition that "intelligent control is the combination of artificial intelligence, control theory, and operations research," this paper systematically reviews the paradigm evolution of AI-driven intelligent control, dividing it into three stages: knowledge-based intelligent control, data-based intelligent control, and knowledge-data-fused intelligent (...) control. On this basis, it provides an in-depth analysis of the theoretical frameworks and research progress of key technologies, including deep reinforcement learning, adaptive dynamic programming, fuzzy-neural control, and multi-model intelligent control. Subsequently, it elaborates on the practical achievements of AI-empowered intelligent control through four typical application scenarios: industrial automation, unmanned systems, electric power and energy systems, and process control. Finally, in response to current core challenges such as interpretability, safety and reliability, and real-time performance, it envisions future directions including large model-driven control, generative AI integration, and human-machine hybrid augmented intelligence. This paper argues that artificial intelligence is moving from "instrumental empowerment" toward "paradigmatic restructuring," driving intelligent control toward higher levels of autonomy, generality, and intelligence. (shrink)

Moral realism seek to cross Hume’s guillotine by deriving “ought” from “is,” thereby find an objective and stable the ground of normativity, but this is impossible in principle. This paper asks what the ultimate purpose, in practical level, of seeking normative ground really is: mandatory acceptance, or the test of legitimacy? Through instances drawn from reality and history, it argues that even theories grounded in facts possess no capacity to compel everyone’s acceptance, and that the task of metaethics is therefore (...) to provide a basis for testing the legitimacy of claims. On this foundation, the paper puts forward the concept of “Coupled-State Facts”: facts of reality and logic can couple within an individual in reality, and this dual constraints forms normativity. Coupled-state facts, facts of reality, and facts of logic are equal in their validity for the ultimate practical purpose. The paper further discusses the criterion of judgment for the selection of coupled-state facts. The “ought” formed under the constraint of coupled-state facts applies only to foundational baseline claims, but this is consistent with the purpose of seeking the ground of normativity, which does not constitute a theoretical defect. (shrink)

Emotion regulation is a fundamental process that shapes cognitive, affective, and behavioral responses to emotional stimuli. Traditional emotion regulation models conceptualize regulation as a sequential modulation of emotional responses. However, they do not fully explain how emotions are constructed in a way that allows such regulation to occur. Predictive processing (PP) provides a mechanistic framework for understanding emotion generation by proposing that the brain minimizes prediction errors (PEs) to optimize perception and behavior. Yet, standard PP accounts reduce valence to PE (...) minimization, failing to explain how PEs can generate different subjective feelings. To address these limitations, we propose a valence-focused model of emotion regulation that integrates predictive processing with self-referential cognition. We incorporate emotional valence as interpretative processes of the self-model, which assigns emotional significance based on goals, values, and autobiographical context. This model bridges the gap between emotion generation and regulation, highlighting the dynamic interplay between prediction errors, subjective valuation, and self-referential processes. This approach not only advances theoretical understanding but also opens new avenues for computational modeling and empirical research into the adaptive and maladaptive aspects of emotional experience. (shrink)

After Parmenides proposed the duality of appearance and reality, details have not been well developed because the assumption was insufficient for logical reasoning. This paper establishes a foundation with an isolated system, which contains all causes and effects within itself. This paper seeks to establish a purely logical philosophy, including reality and phenomena, good and evil, truth and fallacy. Freedom is proposed as the basis for reality. All beings in an isolated system can be classified into two sets: variable phenomena (...) and constant realities. Realities are the only reasons for phenomena, and phenomena are the only results of realities. The sum of certain realities constitutes a reality, and the sum of all realities is good. Good creates most of the phenomenal world. A reality is universalizable; a phenomenon is never universalizable. Good is the only reality which is close to universality and keeps on universalizing. Truth is the simplest knowledge about universal or approximately universal beings. The universality of a reality measures the percentage of phenomena accompanied by this reality. There are two levels of truth: truth about all realities, and truth about the good. (shrink)

Knowledge is correct and reliable when its foundation is correct, but humans never have the correct beliefs and methodology. Thus, knowledge is unreliable and the foundation of knowledge needs to be reconstructed. A pure rationalist only believes in logic. Thus, all matter and experience must be propositions derived from logic. The logically necessary consequence of this belief is truth; logically possible consequences are phenomena, and logically impossible consequence are fallacies and evils. This paper introduces belief and its logical consequences, such (...) as discovering first knowledge, both logically and illogically, establishing logical methodology, deducing truths purely through logic, and discovering unprovable truths by imitating the Universe. Logic and illogic are undeniable beliefs, and the reality of the Universe is the ultimate cause of everything. (shrink)

Self models contribute to key functional domains of human intelligence that are not yet presented in today’s artificial intelligence. One important aspect of human problem-solving involves the use of conceptual self-knowledge to detect self-relevant information presented in the environment, which guides the subsequent retrieval of autobiographical memories that are relevant to the task at hand. This process enables each human to behave self-consistently in our own way across complex situations, manifested as self-interest and trait-like characteristics. In this paper, we outline (...) a computational framework that implements the conceptual aspect of human self models through a modified version of the joint-embedding predictive architecture. We propose that through the incorporation of human-like autobiographical memory retrieval and self-importance evaluation, the modified architecture could support machine agents with significantly enhanced self-consistency, which could be applied to deliver more believable simulations of human behaviors. (shrink)

Peirce’s pragmatic maxim is closely related to his conception of abduction. The acquisition of the actual effect required by the method of scientific reasoning expressed by Peirce’s maxim must be accomplished by resorting to abductive logic. Abductive logic starts from a surprising fact, derives a hypothetical explanation about that fact, and finally arrives at the possibility that the hypothesis is true. This is the process of abductive reasoning, as provided by Peirce, which is distinct from induction and deduction and generates (...) explanatory views. Peirce opposed a unified and unchangeable concept of causality. He used different interpretations of causality to illustrate the considerable differences in people’s understanding of cause and effect in different periods. The concept of pragmatism, as developed from the pragmatic maxim to abduction and then to scientific inference to the best explanation, is precisely what Peirce initially proposed, and inference to the best explanation is the starting point and the final result of the pragmatic maxim. (shrink)

The author defines the sum of thinking as the soul. Historically, despite the many times that humans have liberated themselves, they are still enslaved. Humans mistakenly treats the body as a necessary part of themselves; thus, they seldom pursue the independence of souls. They are usually voluntarily exploited by the body through the nervous system. The author compares the body exploiting the soul with the slaveholder exploiting the slave and demonstrates that the soul should seek its own liberation. Even if (...) the souls can never be successfully liberated, humans should at least reduce the influence of the body. Future humans should shift the goal of life from as comfortable as possible to as logical as possible, from satisfying several fixed sense organs to experiencing various sense organs. This would also mark the beginning of humans choosing the direction of evolution rationally and actively, establishing eternal and universal ethics, and replacing fallacious empirical ethical codes with purely logical codes. (shrink)

The theme of this study is about establishing a purely logical theory about the Universe. Logic is the premier candidate for the reality behind phenomena. If there is a final theory, the Universe must be logic itself, called pure logic, elements of which include not only logic and illogic but also logical and illogical manipulations between them. The kernel is the revised law of the excluded middle: between two basic concepts are four possible manipulations, three logical and one illogical, whereas (...) only one is realized. The key parameter for an element is aim, including reason, outcome, and neutrality. When an element is a contradiction, it can be located at three positions: reason, outcome, and manipulation, corresponding to three colors of quark. Thus, there is interaction with the SU(3) symmetry keeping the number of the three elements balanced locally. A proposition without contradiction has two independent aims. When one aim changes, there is interaction with the U(1) symmetry. When two aims change together, there is interaction with the SU(2) symmetry. (shrink)

The economy is based on the prevailing legal system; however, the economy could go into a tailspin if the laws lose their impartiality. A perfect worker creates infinite high value with limited cost, and the result is a perfect product, usually eternal knowledge. However, free access to their products discourages workers, causing a substantial deviation from optimal resource allocation, and thereby making the supply of perfect products seriously inadequate. This significantly hurts the interests of future society. To maximize the overall (...) interests of humankind, the best policy would be to produce perfect products expeditiously, which in turn requires correcting the value society places on perfect products to respect the interests of perfect workers and future generations. Future society should essentially buy licenses from perfect workers instead of lending money to modern society for consumption. Then, the one-way trade between the present and the future will greatly increase. New companies and services will emerge around perfect products, and long-term economic growth rates will increase significantly. (shrink)

The author has established a mathematical theory about the system of freedom in which components of freedom are ruled by the largest freedom principle, explaining how one invariant reality can be equated with the dynamical universe. Freedom as a whole is the reality, and components of freedom show variable phenomena and become a dynamic system. In freedom, component equality leads to sequence equality; therefore, various sequences coexist in the system. Because there are incompatible sequences for any sequence, the interior of (...) freedom cannot be a static sequence. In order for the system to be a whole, there must be some connecting sequences between any two sequences. Then, at every part of freedom, it is always possible to find a group of three independent sequences that, for most components, is located inside. For the sequence group, there is a sequence through which most components flow in and out. The most abundant three - sequence group and most abundant connecting sequence correspond to the space - time structure. Other incompatible sequences correspond to particles, and interactions between these sequences correspond to interactions between particles. The interactions have some symmetries similar to those in physics, such as SU (3) AND SU (2)×U (1), thus proving the feasibility of the hypothesis: the universe is equivalent with the system of freedom. (shrink)