#axioms

“The Axioms of Agorism

A free society is the goal of many people, not all of them agorists or even libertarians. Agorists can see nothing but a free market in a free society; after all, who or what will prevent it?

The First Axiom of Agorism: the closest approach to a free society is an uncorrupted agora (open marketplace).

An axiom is a principle or premise of a way of thinking. It is arrived at by insight, induction, and observation of nature. Theorems are arrived at deductively from axioms. A "zeroeth" axiom of agorism might be "there are no contradictions in reality and theory must be consistent with reality." Commonly known axioms in philosophy are "existence exists" and "A is A." Well-known mathematical axioms are "things equal to another thing are equal to each other" and "a statement leading to a contradiction with a theorem or axiom is false."

The first six chapters of this "primer" preceded the actual presentation of agorism to give you, the reader, enough understanding of economics, Counter-Economics, and libertarianism to see from where the insights that produced agorism were derived. They were not chosen arbitrarily but rather as a result of years of bitter experience and, in some cases, furious battles and acts of resistance. The "hard core" agorists had to have something worth dying for, and, far more important, worth living for.

The Second Axiom of Agorism: the agora self-corrects for small perturbations of corruption.

This axiom leads us to a far more detailed picture of what our nearly free society would look like. It means simply that free-market entities will defend the free market. People have to choose to do it, of course, but the incentive (offering of subjective-value satisfaction) will be present to motivate them to do so and will be sufficient to motivate enough people to do so. Occasional criminals will be discovered, sought, found, apprehended, tried, sentenced, compelled to deliver restitution, and (if possible) deterred from further actions.

The Third Axiom of Agorism: the moral system of any agora is compatible with pure libertarianism.

This axiom means that life and property are safe from all those who act morally in this society. We will describe this in the next section. But let us complete the axioms first.

The Fourth Axiom of Agorism: agora in part is agora in whole; to a workable approximation, the corruption of an agora raises protection costs and risks.

This axiom's use will become blindingly clear when we deal with the path.

Cybernetics is the science of communications and automatic control systems in both machines and living things.

Applying concepts from TSECpm and the individual treating their own emergent existence, life, ethology, and conscious experience, frame generation, as an ongoing engineering project using methods externally reviewed via the scientific community, machine learning and statistical analysis and subject to peer review and cybernetic modulation should provide a host of benefits including raising the quality of an individual personal experience much higher level and quality of self actualization and also bestowing the ability adapt to novel or challenging/stressful, potential or real, acute or predicted, situations effectively and efficiently a significantly faster rate. Perspective and personal engineering would allow for both a universal improvement in quality of life while still respecting personal differences in belief and self-expression which is essential to avoid a monolithic cultural force derived from accelerating and more coercive social pressures resulting in a homonormative general populace without the awareness of their own rights and capabilities enabled by TESCpm progression.

The total amount of all past and current human experience and the interactions of their respective axioms integrated significance, culture is theoretically impossible to measure and understand. With the exponential increase in the rate of TESCpm being created the current human faces a staggering amount of information, cognitive/behavioral options, and problems to manage and the challenges facing humanity are only going to grow in number and complexity. There is an explicit underutilization of resources and cognitive technologies freely available to the general public currently and entities that exploit these developments are only going to have increasingly coercive and unbalanced advantages in finance, marketing, ethology pressuring, and intellectual property. To establish frames of perception via the methodologies created by an individual themselves via the meta framework of perspective theory will enrich possible net frames found in a social environment.

If you reduce and classify all of human experience into a few manageable well defined domains with (e.g. technology, engineering, science, culture, philosophy, medicine, maths statistics.. etc.)

There is the danger of over reduction of experiential aspects of human lives but it is clear that while the qualia established in an individual establishing their own frame out of their own autonomy, that this approach respects both a cohesive social collective of well adjusting individuals and the individuals unique experience that they themselves are able to define their own EISOA boundaries of in the context of modelling the emergent net existence and functional cognitive and behavioral units of an individual as a viable system model

“Any open or closed system that can and perceive, assign, remove or modify meaning to parts of own system or other any other systems are a candidate for personal engineering

Current philosophy is extremely biased towards the human first person PoV perspective and if groups of people implement this system their lives there could be unprecedented new levels of complexity of communication between actors/entities

This model of human experience I proposed can be understood with the study of perspective in art. Using mathematics, deductive, inductive and abductive logic in abstraction in parallel with reduction along with any basic taxonomy/ontology.

It is possible to turn most things that can be described or observed to be remade into an axiom. This includes the external and internal and the objective, subjective, and inductive. It is also possible to construct modules of axioms that don’t represent anything yet existing in objective reality and then adjust or conform these extra external abstract axiomatic models to correspond to any EISOA phenomena or to generate new ontologies that may generate some insight or functionality

Disregarding some fundamental logic, epistemological assumptions, and understanding of TSECpm via establishing primary axioms categorized as self-evident, sound, and valid, it is possible to create a set of place holder axioms as an ontological scaffold that can be further refined to represent metaphysical categorizations of objective, subjective, or abstract reality in either egocentric and/or allocentric modes. An important consideration is that axioms in perspective theory are by their own nature arbitrary and not intended to fully describe objective, subjective, or abstract internal or external reality in their entirety, rather perspective theory is intended to be a potentially semi-automated on-going process that continues to approach the theoretical limit of what can be deduced or assumed about the nature of reality. However, the mere ability to construct a set of axioms requires a neurocyberphysical correlate that logically exist to support their embodiment in a cognitive or digital architecture that recursively indicates that these axiomatic sets are sound and viable which is an ad hoc iteration of “I think, therefore I am”.

One point can be described with multiple axioms and suspension of disbelief can be used to reduce conflicts. It is logical to assume that if opposing networks of axioms are embedded in a recursive meta framework that two or more ontologies that have axioms that conflict and would on the surface be incompatible would still be able to be nestled in a more expansive supporting ontology. A terrible example is the synchronicity of the left and right cerebral hemispheres despite each hemisphere containing brain regions that have opposing functions with the brain as a whole reconciling hemisphere function into one gestalt holistic integrated seemingly non modular experience. Perspective theory has the flexibility and capability to be adapted into already existing ontological frameworks such as the cybernetic viable system model which was inspired by the evolutionary psychology-based theories about emergent levels of brain function and their resultant ethology and inducive adaptability of the host organism (typically specified as humans past the age where theory of mind develops).

These sorts of protective yet cultivating frame parameters are featured quite heavily in paracybersocial networks of deceit yet these different agents can bundle frames in such as way that there isn’t much conflict between opposing sides or memeplexes and if this doesn’t reduce conflict then there should be many other interventions carried out by a handle

These axioms can be arranged via taxonomic/set theory (logic) principles to form a network or grouping of axioms which can have any logical rules assigned to an axiom or arrangement of interrelated axioms, arranged in any order or arrangement described in mathematics. As perspective theory is also intended to be utilized “offline in vivo”, this enables perspective theory the flexibility and functionality to be reconstructed mentally in a model form that is personable to an individual utilizing PT.

The axiom systems themselves can be abstracted or consolidated into new axioms to form systems of near infinite complexity for various purposes.

I think that the real importance of this document is to highlight how easily perception of reality can be changed how that certain alteration of axiomatic cognitive technologies results in a change of actualized and enacted ethology which can lead to abrupt change in the number of ways one can optimally interact with reality

However, before you get carried away it would be a lot easier to start using already defined axioms. Sciences, and normatively define areas of human knowledge and experience and so on. There has been extensive work and research on developing ontology for many fields of human knowledge, there are many interdisciplinary ontologies, there are specific software and data sets catering to the development and automation of ontology formation, and there are meta ontological frameworks which could be used in conjunction with perspective theory to model as many domains of existence and human experience as possible

Perspective in art can be used to get a more realistic and accurate representation of a perceived subject. Art is an essential tool to establish what could be and to also try to see if it is possible to ground these simulacrums in a foot hold of reality. Perspective theory in PT is no different, it is simply the art of discerning what is possible based on what you know

To get an idea of how this theory would work in vivo. In perspective theory (the canonical art theory) drawing the subject is drawn to appear more realistic as being displayed on a 2d medium, one or more vanishing points to give the illusion of perspective on a flat

Perspective in this case changes the eventually projected diagram of the box. It is the same box in each case, just in this case different points of axioms have been chosen to construct the final image. Perspective theory just means adding in new axioms as a point of perspective to construct a new model from. Adding and Removing axioms can radically change the resultant model allowing for deep insight into interesting relationships and emergent properties.

Oral Human language of just spoken word and no visual contact is conventionally one dimensional and there are many ongoing efforts to create poly dimensional communication systems

Roughly speaking We see a “3d” world in two dimensions

However, humans can think and operate in many dimensions, in this context include modular/non modular examples (define and provide examples).

Due to the vast interconnectedness in the brain conscious experience is not truly 3d either rather conscious experience follows a dense interconnected and twisted wireframe model making it difficult to visualize purely 3d shapes from a first-person perspective

An axiom in perspective theory can be a science or a branch of the sciences such as physics, biology, and chemistry. Going through day-to-day life with these axiomatic heuristics in the forefront of your mind can fundamentally change the way how you view yourself, your experience, and environment throughout a day functionally employing PE

Traditionally perspective in art has been used in a Euclidean sense however if you roll with subjectivity for a bit, you could represent anybody's view or any way of looking at the world as a new dimension/axiom. Using the systems described earlier you can paint or model a “picture” in your mind of a subject (x) described in many “dimensions” 3d perspective, color, biology, its materials, its physical properties, the public opinion, and any other sets you come up with while minimizing the occurrence of cognitive dissonance and keeping the total model logically consistent

Theoretically allowing any consciousness to utilize a method that could be potentially more effective at describing more aspects reality than science (Due to the equal importance and use of deductive, inductive abductive logic and a small pinch of subjectivity held in check by the principles of pure logic and mathematics)

A healthy human’s body, including the brain is a complicated machine and powerful supercomputer

Everything we are consciously aware of (Thoughts, feelings, internal narrative, sensations, senses and perceptions) a highly abstracted model. An edited and streamlined gestalt UI (selected for by natural selection to reduce the cost of adapting to a complex environment and promoting choices best for the organism's fitness), the system of the brain that has executive control decisions aka “you” the end user. Input is done on conscious attention and focus of the executive control system on certain aspects of the UI.

This model can predict the nature of some of the structures of the brain and their function

The selection pressure offered as an explanation for the evolution and development of consciousness will also yield some hypotheses to be tested.

This model is abductive in nature and need to pass critical tests and become highly corroborated considered to have the status of a true scientific theory

However even if the model isn’t robust, it still has some applications as a conceptual model to utilize in personal endeavors.

Assuming this model to be true or suspending disbelief, this model can be abstracted to form an axiom or “single unit” in a completely different model using a form of mathematics and logic.

Each domain can be abstracted to an axiom

These core axioms of human experience can be used to construct an easy to manage, modify and comprehend model of the totality of experience and to study the interactions of the axioms and any emergent properties.

Theoretically with this sort of modelling. With the same axioms and the same rules of interaction and logic. People would be able to avoid a lot of the issues of subjectivity.

Due to its nature, the model is not purely a truth-seeking enterprise and has some aspects of mathematics and art/aesthetics

The logical implication of establishing PE/PT in several hosts and subject to ongoing development and refinement of mechanisms and processes of functionality and quantification of objective reality and the correlating cognitive and mental phenomena/experience is that slowly the inner physics of the mind and brain will become elucidated and standardized to form general theories and axioms about conscious experience. PT and PE assumes that all subjective experience is subject to quantification and qualification, even if this can only be achieved via an abstraction of these states or phenomena until PE/PT has developed to the point where this data can be extrapolated. Another key mechanism involved in PE/PT is the use of ongoing and holistic biometry in order to create as much data points possible allowing an individual or researcher to reconstruct the exact frames and qualia that were experienced at a given point of time.

If my theory about physical monism is correct then it should be relatively more straight forward to be able to “trace” the developing ontology of experience, behavior's, and cognitions. An example of this is the exposure of a host to a novel word or association and tracing this learning to a subsequent ethological instance where this word or association is referenced or used in some sort of communication system or secreted to the cyberphysical environment memetically. Logically every word a human knows or can utilize has to either be learned or synthesized based on linguistic logic (or just a mistake))(but a mistake is still a creative iteration of a previous cyberphysical event)

Some philosophy is extremely biased towards the human perspective. One key experiential phenomenon experienced when manic is the misattribution of allocentric interactions to a egocentric frame. This indicates that there are frames where an individual does not consider themselves as an agent in a social interaction

However, the model of human experience I proposed earlier can be more easily understood with the study of perspective in art. Using mathematics, deductive, inductive and abductive logic in abstraction in parallel with reduction along with any basic form of taxonomy. Anything* that can be described can be remade into an axiom. These axioms can be arranged via taxonomic principles to form a network or grouping of axioms which can have any logical rules assigned to any axiom arranged in any order or arrangement described in mathematics. The axiom systems themselves can be abstracted or reduced into new axioms to form systems of infinite complexity.

Before you get carried away it would be a lot easier to start using already defined axioms. Sciences and so on

In perspective drawing the subject is drawn to appear more realistic one or more vanishing points to give the illusion of perspective on a flat surface

Human language is traditionally one dimensional

We see a “3d” world in roughly two dimensions

However, humans can think in multiple more dimensions and experience intertextuality

In this context, an axiom supergroup such as science or the general shared culture of human a demographic can be represented as a dimension

Perspective in art can be to get a more realistic and accurate representation of a perceived subject

However, in all human experience can be argued to be perceived

Traditionally perspective in art has been used in a Euclidean sense however if you roll with subjectivity for a bit, you could represent anybody's view or any way of looking at the world as a new dimension. Using the systems described early you can paint a “picture” in your mind of a subject described in many “dimensions” 3d perspective, color, biology, its materials, its physical properties, the public (or a normative shared perceptual value assignment) opinion while minimizing the occurrence of cognitive dissonance.

The MM is a 4D mental reconstruction utilized to quickly and efficiently draw upon cognitive heuristics that might normally be inaccessible in a depressive phase or even when euthymic or manic

Input is done on conscious attention and focus of the executive control system on certain aspects of the UI

This model can yield predictions and hypotheses that can be subjected to the scientific method

This model can predict the nature of some of the structures of the brain and their function

The selection pressure offered as an explanation for the evolution and development of conscious will also yield some hypothesis to be tested

This model is abductive in nature and need to pass critical tests and become highly corroborated considered to have the status of a true scientific theory

However even if the model isn’t robust, it still has some applications as a conceptual model to utilize in personal endeavors

Assuming this model to be true or suspending disbelief this model can be abstracted to form as an axiom or “single unit” in completely different model using in a form of mathematics and logic

If you reduce and classify all of human experience into a few manageable well-defined domains with (eg technology, engineering, science, culture, philosophy, medicine, math's, statistics... etc.)

Each domain can be abstracted to an axiom

These core axioms of human experience can be used to construct an easy to manage, modify and comprehend model of the totality of experience and to study the interactions of the axioms and any emergent properties.

Hopefully the model can provide an individual with a far greater and deeper understanding of themselves, others, society and the universe they live in.

The model also can be used to make and test predictions

As the model is based on axioms, the model itself can be changed in a similar way by removing axioms, adding new ones or changing existing ones potentially allowing for very powerful and complex simulations for exploring the big questions and even the small ones.

Theoretically with this sort of modelling. With the same axioms and the same rules of interaction and logic. People would be able to avoid a lot of the issues of subjectivity and post structuralism.

When we try to point out how the US stokes racism by fear-mongering, propaganda, and pushing the Red Scare 2.0, there will always be several people (who are usually white) who bring up that China has a colonist, censorship, and genocidal history and basically say that all the news criticism against them is valid.

And, yes, China does have capitalism, it's colonized countries, committed genocide, and has issues with racism. Of course those things should be talked about! Of course racism and oppression should be criticized no matter what country it's coming from.

The thing is, we're specifically talking about how the United States media criticizes China. China has never tried to colonize the US. The US is not threatened by China. The US is racist and has committed many more atrocities than China but the news doesn't talk about them nearly as much. Also, in all their discussions criticizing China, they rarely shed a light on how they've hurt the other nations other than America. The narrative is always about America. America is always the biggest victim. US news talked about Hong Kong for two weeks then dropped it. Am I saying China is a perfect paradise? No. Am I saying it's the hellhole third-world regime the US makes it out to be? Also no.

The oppressed can also be the oppressors of other people. The oppressors can be the oppressed of other people. No matter how much we morality to be easy, this is real life and there's nuance. Who criticizes who matters a lot, actually--especially if you're being blatantly hypocritical and performative. How history relates to it and how it actually affects people real-time matters a lot too.

Let's not forget that during World War II, when Japanese Americans were abused and raped, shoved into internment camps, forced to unlearn their native language, their mother country bombed, and racist propaganda churned out and gobbled up, the US government said it was justified and that they deserved it cause they were allying with germany and committed genocide against other countries, including China. Even though whites had no problems being racist towards them either, bombed other AAPI countries too, and made no effort to differentiate between Chinese, Japanese, and other asian americans (they still don't).