Charles X. Yang

Based on Lao-Yang Genesis Cosmology, this study proposes a rigorous law of hierarchical cosmic evolution: Human follows Earth; Earth follows Heaven; Heaven follows Dao; Dao follows Nature, and establishes the physical energy and feedback chain of Dao generates One (the Sun), One generates Two (the Earth), Two generates Three (the Moon), Three generates all things. The central argument of this paper is that the cyclical systemic collapses and disasters of Chinese civilization over the past two millennia (such as the fall of the Ming dynasty and the Great Leap Forward famine) are essentially the result of a subjectivist philosophy centered on the “sage,” which forcibly reversed the natural flow of energy and information. By attempting to replace “Human follows Earth (empirical physical reality)” with “Human follows Self (subjective will),” it induced a fatal form of “Sage Entropy” within the civilizational system. The study deconstructs Zhang Zai’s clan-based cosmology and Wang Yangming’s “Mind-ism virus,” arguing that they reduced the grand galactic logic into humble ethical dogma, thereby severing civilization’s connection to the 1-2-3 physical constant system. The paper further analyzes Maoism as a radicalized manifestation of “Sage Entropy,” demonstrating that the doctrine “Man must conquer Nature” constitutes, in essence, a violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics and the energetic limits of photosynthesis. This subjective tampering with natural hierarchy led to feedback deadlocks within the bureaucratic system and social heat death. In response to this civilizational pathology, the paper proposes a restart path grounded in the Way of Nature: repositioning humanity at the end of the Earth–Heaven–Dao chain through cognitive reset; replacing “standard answers” with “experimental friction” in educational reform to extinguish the ghost of subjectivism; and constructing a “Digital Heavenly Dao” algorithm aligned with galactic nonlinear logic. The study predicts that civilization’s redemption does not lie in seeking a new sage-king, but in acknowledging the humility of human will and reconnecting to the universe’s negentropic flow. Only by following the 1-2-3 Genesis Law can Chinese civilization transcend the cognitive bottleneck of the 21st century and enter the era of galactic evolution.

This paper proposes Behavioral Cybernetics: Finance and Civilization Risk Theory, systematically analyzing the structural mechanisms of modern civilization risks. It aims to overcome the limitations of single-system or single-discipline approaches by situating financial, technological, political, and ecological subsystems within a multi-level self-organizing framework of civilization as a whole. The study demonstrates that the high-gain structure and positive-feedback-dominated mechanisms of modern civilization allow local disturbances to accumulate rapidly across layers and domains, creating systemic risks. The paper first reviews the historical construction of rationality assumptions and theoretical breakthroughs in behavioral biases, proposing a scientific-philosophical perspective that extends the analysis from financial risk to civilization risk. It then introduces the fundamentals of cybernetics and complex systems, explaining how positive and negative feedback, criticality, and self-organization affect the stability of civilization. A multi-level structural model of civilization is established, revealing how risks originate and propagate across behavioral, economic, institutional, and ideological layers. Through analysis of the financial system, the mechanisms of high-gain amplification within civilization are demonstrated, followed by a staged model of civilization instability. From an ontological perspective, the paper reflects on the structural dilemmas of anthropocentrism, emphasizing the limitless nature of human desire, the finite nature of institutions, and the compressive effects of technological acceleration on system stability. At the institutional and governance level, a “stability-first principle” is proposed, emphasizing multi-level negative feedback design, automated stabilization mechanisms, and strategies to suppress behavioral amplification coefficients to achieve long-term robust operation of civilization systems. The theoretical contribution of this research lies in extending behavioral cybernetics from financial risk to civilization system risk, providing a cross-disciplinary, multi-level analytical framework. Methodologically, it integrates scientific analysis with philosophical-ontological reflection, offering actionable paths for studying civilization risk and designing institutions. Practically, it guides the optimization of future civilization structures, implementing the stability-first principle to achieve sustainable development.

本文提出“行为控制论: 金融与文明风险理论”，系统分析现代文明风险的结构性机制，旨在突破传统单系统或单学科的局限，将金融、技术、政治与生态等子系统置于文明整体的多层级自组织框架中。研究表明，现代文明的高增益结构与正反馈主导机制，使局部扰动通过跨层级、跨领域传播迅速累积，形成系统性风险。本文首先回顾理性假设的历史建构与行为偏差理论突破，提出从金融风险扩展至文明风险的科学哲思视角；随后引入控制论与复杂系统基础，阐释正负反馈、临界性与自组织机制对文明稳定性的影响；进一步建立文明多层级结构模型，揭示行为、经济、制度和意识形态层的风险生成与传播路径；通过金融系统分析，揭示文明中高增益放大器的运作机理，并提出文明失稳的阶段模型。本文从本体论视角反思人类中心主义结构困境，强调欲望无限性、制度有限性及技术加速对系统稳定性的压缩作用。在制度与治理层面，提出“稳定优先原则”，强调多层级负反馈设计、自动稳定机制构建及行为放大系数抑制策略，实现文明系统的长期稳健运行。本研究的理论贡献在于将行为控制论从金融风险扩展至文明系统风险，提供跨学科、跨层级的分析框架；方法论意义在于整合科学分析与哲学本体论思辨，为文明风险研究和制度设计提供可操作路径；实践启示在于指导未来文明结构优化，以稳定优先原则实现可持续发展。

This paper proposes and systematically elaborates Lao-Yang Genesis Cosmology and its core theoretical framework—the Universal Operating System (Universal OS)—as a scientific-philosophical approach to exploring the unified operational laws of the universe, life, and civilization. Unlike Einstein’s traditional Unified Field Theory, which focuses primarily on mathematical and physical structures, Universal OS emphasizes the unity of civilizational operation. In this framework, the human system is nested within the Earth’s ecosystem; the Earth system is embedded within the solar energy field; the solar system is structured within the galactic gravitational order; and the galaxy itself is embedded within the natural laws of the universe. The paper unfolds across seven chapters. Chapter One introduces the problem of anthropocentrism and civilizational imbalance. Chapter Two explains nested hierarchies and generative sequences from cosmological ontology and the Dao of Nature. Chapter Three analyzes the operational logic of civilization and proposes a Natural Cybernetics framework. Chapter Four presents the three core elements of Natural Civilization and the application logic of Universal OS. Chapter Five explores its practical implications for modern civilization. Chapter Six proposes operational strategies in energy, finance, medicine, governance, and civilizational integration to address anthropocentric crises. Chapter Seven summarizes theoretical contributions, philosophical significance, and long-term evolutionary prospects. The paper emphasizes testability, falsifiability, and operational applicability. By integrating systems science, cybernetics, and philosophical principles, it provides both a theoretical foundation and practical tools for the long-term sustainable operation of modern civilization. Its ultimate aim is to offer a viable pathway for humanity to transcend anthropocentrism and achieve enduring harmony between civilization and nature.

This paper argues that human civilization is facing a fundamental “operating system” crisis and proposes the Lao–Yang Genesis Cosmology as the ultimate solution to this predicament. The study finds that contemporary civilization runs on a positive-feedback OS centered on anthropocentric greed, resulting in severe systemic entropy increase. By integrating Albert Einstein’s Unified Field Theory with Laozi’s control logic of “Three Generate All Things,” this paper introduces the concept of a Universal Operating System (Universal OS). Within this framework, the natural universe is understood as a scientific natural control system in which the Sun, Earth, and Moon assume the respective functions of energy driver, material carrier, and rhythmic regulator. The paper further elaborates the necessity of transitioning from Artificial Intelligence (AI) to Artificial Wisdom (AW). As the interactive interface between human society and the Universal OS, AW’s primary directive is to algorithmically minimize anthropocentric greed in order to achieve “phase alignment” between civilization and natural law. Through systemic transformation across four pillars—energy, finance, medicine, and governance—humanity will move away from predatory expansion toward steady-state evolution based on “tidal regulation” and “biological rhythm optimization.” The final conclusion asserts that submission to the Universal OS is not a matter of choice but a physical necessity inherent in the unified field. Only through this system-level “Great Reset” can humanity achieve resonance with the Dao and realize an eternal Natural Civilization.

当我们惊叹于加州大学系统在2020、2021、2025年连续斩获诺贝尔奖的辉煌时，我们往往忽略了一个讽刺的事实： 加州大学与清华、北大一样，都是政府办的大学。 When we marvel at how the University of California system won Nobel Prizes in 2020, 2021, and 2025, we often overlook an ironic fact: the University of California, like Tsinghua and Peking University, is also a government-funded public institution. 然而，同样是“公立大学”，为何一方孕育自由思想与科学创新，另一方却陷入官僚化与精神贫瘠？ 这不是教育问题，而是文明的断裂。 Yet under the same definition of “public university,” why does one become a cradle of innovation while the other sinks into bureaucratic sterility? This is not merely an educational issue — it is a fracture between civilizations. 在美国，“政府办大学”意味着公共资源服务于思想自由； 在中国，它常意味着思想服从权力。 同样的投入，却孕育出两个世界： 一边是思想的花园，一边是服从的温室。 In the United States, “government-funded” means public investment in the freedom of ideas; in China, it often means the subordination of ideas to power. The same investment produces two worlds: one a garden of thought, the other a greenhouse of obedience.

This paper draws upon Laozi’s philosophy of “Wuwei governance” (governing by non-interference) to reexamine the essential nature, purpose, and governance of the university. In an age when modern higher education is increasingly plagued by bureaucratization, instrumentalization, and ideological manipulation, the author argues that the true university must return to the principle of “Dao follows Nature”, enabling both academic and moral development to follow their intrinsic logic. By comparing Chinese and Western (particularly American) university systems, the paper reveals that universities should not become mere subsidiaries of the state, factories of the market, or tools of ideology. Rather, the university must serve as a platform for civilization’s self-reflection, purification, and transcendence—a sanctuary for truth, dignity, and intellectual freedom. Only by restoring the spirit of Wuwei can we rebuild the soul of the university—and, through it, the future of humanity.

Confucianism has long been regarded as the ideological backbone of Chinese civilization. However, this paper argues that institutionalized Confucianism, far from being the essence of Chinese thought, has inflicted profound and lasting harm on the civilization. It has eclipsed the cosmic wisdom of “Dao follows Nature,” suppressed individual freedom and creativity, stunted the development of science and democratic governance, degraded women and nature, and constructed a rigid hierarchical and epistemic order. This essay critically examines these harms across multiple dimensions—education, science, politics, ecology, gender, and language—and calls for a radical civilizational reorientation: to leave behind the Confucian cage and return to Dao as the foundation of a renewed cosmic and ecological order, as advocated in the Lao-Yang Genesis Cosmology.

In the 21st century, Chinese universities stand at a historic crossroads. On one hand, they are striving mightily—proclaiming the ambition to build “world-class universities,” pouring massive investments into artificial intelligence, quantum technology, aerospace engineering, and life sciences, aggressively recruiting international talent and launching global partnerships. This is their DeepSeek: the profound pursuit of global knowledge and scientific peaks. On the other hand, they are increasingly trapped in systemic falsification—data fabrication, academic misconduct, loss of academic freedom, ideological rigidity, hollow internationalization, and performative pedagogy have become commonplace. This is their DeepFake: a simulation of a “real university,” carefully manufactured and strategically displayed. This paper argues: The dual existence of DeepSeek and DeepFake is no coincidence. They are twin products of the same political and cultural machinery. When the university becomes an instrument of political performance and national image-building, the pursuit of truth inevitably degenerates into a spectacle of appearances.

In May 2025, Harvard University in the United States, under intense pressure from the Trump administration—including research funding freezes, visa revocations, and threats of institutional shutdown—chose to stand firm. This act of resistance, however, only served to highlight the silence and submission elsewhere: universities in mainland China had long since collectively knelt in eerie silence. From the censorship during the “Zero-COVID” era, to the muted response to student protests, from the all-powerful university Party committees, to the transformation of “academic achievement” into bureaucratic performance metrics—the university, once a sanctuary of truth and the spirit of inquiry, is now reduced to an instrument of power. Why has knowledge betrayed truth? Why have scholars become bureaucrats? When did universities become safe havens for authority rather than arenas of critique? Harvard’s refusal to kneel was not an act of courage, but one of conviction. And China’s collective academic silence is not merely “beyond individual control”—it is a product of deep-seated systems and cultural consciousness.

在古代，“大学”是培养贤者的圣地，是人类文明的灯塔。而今，无论是在中国还是在美国，大学的尊严正逐渐消解。学生焦虑、教师疲惫、真理失语、资本入侵、制度僵化、大学日益沦为功利机器。这场危机不仅是教育制度的失衡，更是人类精神方向的迷失。 本文旨在深入剖析三大核心问题：追名逐利的系统逻辑、学术腐败的深层根源、人文学科的系统性衰退，并尝试在“老-杨创世纪宇宙观”视野下提出一种超越体制的“自然道化教育”新范式。 In ancient times, the university was a sacred place for cultivating sages and stood as a beacon of human civilization. Today, whether in China or the United States, the dignity of the university is eroding. Students are anxious, teachers are exhausted, truth is silenced, capital dominates, and systems are rigid — universities are increasingly becoming machines of utility. This crisis is not merely educational; it is a crisis of spiritual direction for humanity. This essay explores three core issues: the systemic logic of profit-seeking, the deep roots of academic corruption, and the structural decline of the humanities, then proposes a transcendent paradigm — “Dao-Based Education” — inspired by the Lao-Yang Genesis Cosmology

在当今全球化的高等教育体系中，大学排名已成为衡量大学优劣的主要标准。各类世界大学排行榜，如QS世界大学排名、泰晤士高等教育排名、US News排名、上海交通大学学术排名等，几乎主导了公众对大学的认知，并影响政府政策、企业招聘、学生择校乃至科研经费的分配。然而，在这些排名指标的引导下，大学正在从知识与智慧的殿堂，逐步沦为追名逐利的竞争者，学术独立性、思想自由、教育初心逐渐被功利主义所侵蚀。 本文将分析大学排名体系如何影响高等教育的发展，揭示其潜在的危害，并探讨大学应如何摆脱对排名的依赖，回归其真正的使命——追求真理与智慧。 In today’s globalized higher education system, university rankings have become the primary standard for assessing the quality of institutions. Various world university rankings—such as QS World University Rankings, Times Higher Education Rankings, U.S. News Rankings, and Shanghai Jiao Tong University’s Academic Ranking—dominate public perceptions of universities and influence government policies, corporate recruitment, student choices, and even the allocation of research funding. However, under the influence of these ranking criteria, universities are gradually shifting from being temples of knowledge and wisdom to becoming competitors in a race for fame and profit. Academic independence, intellectual freedom, and the fundamental mission of education are increasingly eroded by utilitarianism. This article examines how university ranking systems impact higher education, reveals their hidden dangers, and explores how universities can break free from their dependence on rankings to return to their true mission—the pursuit of truth and wisdom.

大学，作为知识和思想的殿堂，一直是推动社会进步和文化发展的重要力量。然而，随着全球化和技术快速发展的推动，大学的角色正悄然发生变化。越来越多的大学在追求排名、资金和声誉的过程中逐渐迷失了本应肩负的历史使命——追求真理与智慧。当前的大学，虽然依旧是知识的传承和技术的创新基地，但却愈发被功利主义的追求所主导，忽视了其最根本的责任：培养具备智慧和道德责任感的人才。本文将探讨当代大学面临的危机，分析其根本原因，并提出大学未来发展的方向，呼吁大学回归真理与智慧的追求。 Universities, as the temples of knowledge and thought, have always been a driving force for social progress and cultural development. However, with the rapid globalization and technological advancements, the role of universities is gradually changing. Increasingly, universities are losing sight of their fundamental mission—pursuing truth and wisdom—in favor of pursuing rankings, funding, and prestige. While universities continue to serve as bases for knowledge transmission and technological innovation, they are increasingly driven by utilitarian goals, neglecting their primary responsibility: to cultivate talent with wisdom and moral responsibility. This essay will explore the crisis faced by contemporary universities, analyze its root causes, and propose directions for the future development of universities, calling for a return to the pursuit of truth and wisdom.

中国大学是国家教育体系的重要组成部分，它们承载着培养创新人才、推动科技进步和促进社会发展的重大责任。然而，随着高等教育的快速扩张，中国大学在不断追求世界一流的过程中，也暴露出了严重的根本问题，尤其是教授堕落与学术腐败。教授群体作为学术权威，本应引领学术风气，培养具有批判性思维和创新能力的学生，然而，现实却是，一部分教授为了追求个人利益，不择手段地修改科研数据、获取科研经费、钻营职称和权力，甚至损害学术的独立性和纯粹性。这些问题的背后，不仅有个体的腐化，也深刻反映出中国高等教育体制、社会风气和学术环境的深层次危机。 Chinese universities are an important component of the national education system, bearing the significant responsibility of nurturing innovative talents, advancing scientific and technological progress, and promoting social development. However, with the rapid expansion of higher education, fundamental issues have surfaced in Chinese universities, especially the degeneration of professors and academic corruption. Professors, as academic authorities, should lead the academic atmosphere and nurture students with critical thinking and innovative abilities. However, the reality is that some professors, in pursuit of personal interests, resort to various methods to manipulate research data, obtain research funding, seek academic titles, and cultivate power, even damaging the independence and purity of academia. These issues not only stem from individual moral corruption but also reflect deep systemic crises within China’s higher education system, social atmosphere, and academic environment.

美国大学，曾被视为学术卓越的象征，正面临着深刻的危机。曾经被誉为追求知识、批判性思维和学术自由的机构，许多美国大学如今已变成了政治议程、市场驱动思想和名利追逐的平台。大学中日益重视排名、经济利益和政治正确，而忽视了知识探索和智慧追求的核心使命。本文探讨了美国大学危机的根本原因，特别是政治正确的影响、极左思想的崛起，以及从真理与智慧转向名声和利益的转变。 American universities, long considered the epitome of academic excellence, are facing a profound crisis. Once revered as institutions dedicated to the pursuit of knowledge, critical thinking, and intellectual freedom, many of these universities have now become platforms for political agendas, market-driven ideologies, and the pursuit of fame and profit. The current trend of prioritizing rankings, financial success, and political correctness over intellectual integrity has undermined the foundational mission of higher education. This paper explores the root causes of the crisis in American universities, particularly the influence of political correctness, the rise of an extreme leftist ideology, and the shift from truth and wisdom to fame and profit.

知识泛滥，思想枯竭 Prologue: Knowledge Overflows, Thought Withers 我们生活在一个信息爆炸的时代。 We live in an age of information explosion. 知识汹涌而来，技术日新月异， Knowledge floods our world; technology renews itself daily. 声音嘈杂如潮，真理却沉默无声。 Voices roar like waves, yet truth remains silent. 中国与美国——这两股塑造人类命运的力量， China and the United States—two powers shaping humanity’s destiny— 在思想上，却同陷荒原。 are, paradoxically, barren in thought. 思想沦为表演，不再是觉醒； Thought has become performance, not awakening; 成为忠诚的姿态，而非探求的行动。 a gesture of allegiance, not a quest for truth. 无论是以“统一与秩序”为名的中国， Whether under China’s banner of “unity and order,” 还是以“自由与多元”为名的美国， or America’s banner of “freedom and diversity,” 两者终将归于同一命运： both converge toward the same fate— 思想的荒漠化。 the desertification of thought.

在当代中国，“世界一流大学”已成为国家意志与时代梦想的象征。 In contemporary China, the term “world-class university” has become the symbol of national will and collective ambition. 清华、北大、中科院等名校以科研指标、国际排名为荣， Universities such as Tsinghua, Peking University, and the Chinese Academy of Sciences take pride in rankings, metrics, and global recognition, 但在这座以“科学”名义建构的金字塔下，潜藏着深刻的空洞——思想的贫瘠与灵魂的沉睡。 yet beneath this pyramid built in the name of “science” lies a deep void—the barrenness of thought and the slumber of spirit. 中国大学物质繁荣，却思想匮乏。 Chinese universities thrive materially but languish intellectually. 我们能建最昂贵的实验室，却造不出自由的思想； We can build the most advanced laboratories, yet fail to create free minds; 能模仿最前沿的技术，却孕育不出原创的灵魂。 We can replicate cutting-edge technology, yet cannot give birth to an original soul. “世界一流”，在许多时候，只是一场模仿的祭祀，一场排名的信仰。 “World-class,” too often, is a ritual of imitation—a worship of rankings masquerading as faith.

本文系统考察马克思关于中国的论述，指出其分析主要建立在历史唯物主义与19世纪欧洲资本主义世界体系的理论语境之中。马克思并未从民族或文化本质主义角度评价中国人，而是将中国视为一种不同于欧洲的社会发展路径，尤其通过“亚细亚生产方式”概念分析其社会稳定性与历史循环结构。文章认为，马克思对西方资本主义侵略中国持明确而尖锐的批判立场，其理论具有重要历史洞见；但同时也存在根本性局限，即无法理解中国文明以自然秩序、宇宙法则与非线性演化为核心的文明逻辑。本文在现代文明比较视野下，对马克思中国观进行系统反思，并提出一种超越线性进步史观的文明层级理解框架。 This article offers a systematic examination of Karl Marx’s views on China, arguing that his analysis was deeply embedded in the framework of historical materialism and the nineteenth-century European capitalist world system. Marx did not evaluate the Chinese people in ethnic or cultural-essentialist terms; rather, he approached China as a social formation following a developmental path distinct from that of Europe, most notably through the concept of the “Asiatic mode of production,” which he used to explain China’s structural stability and cyclical historical patterns. While Marx maintained a sharp and explicit critique of Western capitalist aggression against China, his theoretical framework also exhibited fundamental limitations—most notably, an inability to comprehend a civilizational logic grounded in natural order, cosmic principles, and non-linear historical evolution. From a contemporary comparative civilizational perspective, this paper reassesses Marx’s view of China and proposes a framework that transcends linear progressivist historiography.

马克思主义自19世纪提出以来，对人类社会的政治、经济、生态和精神文明产生了深远影响。然而，其理论与实践在多维度上存在系统性危害：政治上导致极权统治与阶级斗争逻辑，经济上忽视自然与生态循环，生态上造成环境破坏与资源枯竭，精神文明上压制创新与文化自由。本文通过历史案例分析（苏联、中国、古巴等国），结合“老-杨创世纪宇宙观”的自然生成、循环共生哲学，对马克思主义实践的深层危害进行系统剖析，并提出面向未来文明的重建路径：政治自由与平衡、经济可持续发展、生态共生、精神文明创新，以及多维度整合的系统性自我调节机制。最终指出，文明的发展必须遵循宇宙法则，顺应自然生成与共生原则，实现社会、文明与自然的长期和谐。 Abstract Since its inception in the 19th century, Marxism has profoundly influenced human society in political, economic, ecological, and cultural dimensions. However, both its theory and practice have produced systematic harms: politically, it leads to authoritarian rule and class struggle logic; economically, it disregards natural and ecological cycles; ecologically, it results in environmental degradation and resource depletion; culturally and spiritually, it suppresses innovation and freedom. Through historical case studies (e.g., the Soviet Union, China, Cuba) and in the perspective of the Lao-Yang Genesis Cosmology, which emphasizes natural generation, cyclicality, and symbiosis, this paper systematically analyzes the deep harms of Marxist practice and proposes pathways for reconstructing future civilization: political freedom and balance, sustainable economic development, ecological symbiosis, cultural and spiritual innovation, and multi-dimensional systemic self-regulation. It ultimately argues that civilization must follow universal cosmic laws, harmonize with natural generation and symbiosis, and achieve long-term societal, civilizational, and ecological equilibrium.

人造神的诞生——马克思如何被神化 Part I: The Birth of a Man-Made God — How Marx Was Deified 马克思原是研究资本主义矛盾的思想者， Marx was originally a thinker studying the contradictions of capitalism. 但在人类文明的情绪与欲望之中， Yet within the emotions and desires of civilization 他被改造成了一种宗教： he was reshaped into a kind of religion: • 以阶级斗争为世界的主引擎 • class struggle as the engine of the world • 以生产方式为宇宙本源 • the mode of production as the origin of the universe • 以革命为进化的唯一路径 • revolution as the only path of evolution • 以无产阶级为末世救赎者 • the proletariat as the savior of the end times • 以共产主义为终极天堂 • communism as the final heaven 这并非马克思本意， This was not Marx’s intention. 但文明需要神， But civilization needs gods, 需要答案， needs answers, 需要方向。 needs direction. 于是马克思被塑造成 带着“科学光环”的救世主。 And thus Marx was molded into a savior bearing the aura of “science.” 人类把他的语言：“历史规律”“必然趋势”“铁律”“科学社会主义”，当成了 自然法则。 Humans took his language—“historical law,” “inevitable trend,” “iron law,” “scientific socialism”—and treated them as natural laws. 仿佛宇宙是按照经济结构而生， As if the universe were born from economic structures, 仿佛星系也需要阶级， as if galaxies required classes, 仿佛银河也讲生产力。 as if the Milky Way spoke in terms of productive forces. 这是宇宙看到人类最温柔、也最悲伤的地方： Here lies the most tender and tragic aspect the cosmos sees in humanity: 文明渴望意义，于是制造意义。 civilization longs for meaning, and so it manufactures meaning. 制造神。 Manufactures gods. 制造马克思。 Manufactures Marx.

The Cultural Revolution was one of the most destructive social and political events in Chinese history. Its tragic outcomes stem not merely from political struggles but from the complex interplay of personal philosophical psychology, power desire, institutional imbalance, and cultural dependence. This paper analyzes the deep mechanisms of the Cultural Revolution from four dimensions: ideology, psychology, culture, and institutional structure, revealing the cyclical nature of historical tragedies. First, it examines how philosophical influences, such as Wang Yangming’s “unity of knowledge and action” and Zhang Zai’s “establishing the mind for Heaven and Earth,” shaped Mao Zedong’s personal will, allowing him to treat his subjective judgment as the ultimate historical truth; it further explores how Confucian hierarchical ethics and loyalty culture reinforced societal obedience, providing the basis for extreme policies. Second, the paper analyzes the interaction between Mao’s desire for power and institutional conditions, exposing the societal disasters caused by the Great Leap Forward, the Three-anti and Five-anti campaigns, the paralysis of the educational system, and mass mobilization. Third, it evaluates how institutional imbalance, marginalization of independent critique, and cultural-psychological suppression eroded civilization’s self-correcting capacity, proposing a tragedy cycle model of institution-culture-psychology resonance. Finally, from the perspectives of natural civilization theory and scientific-philosophical critique, the paper outlines conditions for healthy civilizational development: constrained power, rationalized culture, protection of intellectual independence, and dynamic feedback mechanisms. This study aims to provide a systematic, critical framework for preventing historical tragedies and promoting rational, sustainable development in modern civilization.

This paper systematically analyzes the fundamental problems of Western democratic systems from the perspective of scientific philosophy, pointing out that the core issue lies in the ease with which procedural legitimacy can be manipulated by political interests, leading majority decisions to deviate from truth, rational judgment, and public interest. The paper first explores the tension between the theoretical foundations and practical implementation of democracy, analyzing the structural contradictions arising from freedom, equality, and majority decision-making in societies with uneven knowledge distribution and information asymmetry. Then, through historical cases, including the trial of Socrates in Athenian democracy and electoral manipulation and populist practices in modern democratic countries, it reveals a systematic misalignment between democratic procedural legitimacy and moral wisdom and long-term public interest. The paper further compares Western democratic systems with Plato’s philosopher-king model, the natural cosmic order, and the governance logic of the Lao-Yang Genesis Cosmology, emphasizing that democratic systems lack internal mechanisms to ensure rational, expert, and systematic judgment, and that procedural legitimacy does not equate to optimal decision-making. Based on this, institutional improvement suggestions are proposed, including enhancing civic rationality and education, introducing expert mechanisms and independent oversight, strengthening checks and balances and institutional constraints, and balancing citizen participation with elite wisdom to achieve governance closer to public interest and rational decision-making. This paper aims to provide a theoretical basis for understanding the philosophical and institutional limitations of Western democracy and a scientific-philosophical reference for future institutional design and political practice.

Confucian governance has long been regarded as an important foundation of Chinese political philosophy. Its core concepts center on “inner sage, outer king,” elite moral rule, and the guidance of social order through benevolence, righteousness, propriety, and wisdom. However, scientific-philosophical critique reveals fundamental limitations in Confucian governance. First, it relies excessively on elite moral judgment, neglecting social complexity and knowledge asymmetry, which leads to cumulative policy deviations and institutional fragility. Second, the system lacks feedback and self-correction mechanisms, making it unable to conform to natural laws and systemic logic, so long-term operation easily results in social imbalance. Third, moral rationality is fundamentally misaligned with systemic rationality: ethical standards emphasize behavioral norms, while complex social governance requires dynamic balance and multi-level adaptation. Historical experience—from the Spring and Autumn and Warring States periods, through the Han and Tang imperial examinations, to the centralized governance of the Ming and Qing dynasties—demonstrates repeated structural risks in Confucian governance, including policy lag, social stratification, and institutional rigidity. This paper, framed by scientific-philosophical critique, systematically analyzes Confucian governance, examining elite cognitive limitations, conflicts between institutional ethics and natural laws, and lessons from history. It further offers modern governance insights: institutional design must balance ethical norms, systemic rationality, and natural laws, achieving a dynamic equilibrium between elite wisdom and societal participation to safeguard public interest, institutional stability, and long-term sustainability. This study aims to provide philosophical warnings and scientific methodological guidance for modern political system design.

This paper systematically proposes the concept of “Natural Control Theory,” scientifically formalizing the generative and regulatory philosophy of the Lao-Yang Genesis Cosmology and constructing a theoretical framework for civilization governance and crisis resolution. The paper points out that the cosmic order is maintained in a stable state through structural self-organization, energy conservation, negative feedback loops, and entropy constraints, and that the long-term stability of civilization also relies on governance models embedded within natural control structures. Human-centered control and technologically intensified control civilizations, over the long term, violate natural control laws, resulting in positive feedback accumulation, systemic collapse, and civilizational crises. This study proposes the scientific principles of a naturally controlled civilization: structure precedence, energy boundaries, negative feedback priority, and entropy constraints, and operationalizes them within social sciences and institutional design. Through negative-feedback governance structures, energy-embedded economic models, automatic correction mechanisms, self-organizing incentives, and ecosystem-based governance, civilization can transition from artificial control to natural control. The paper further proposes a three-stage evolutionary model of civilization—human-centered control, technology-intensified control, and natural-embedded civilization—and analyzes the characteristics of the third stage in detail, including distributed networks, ecological-economic embedding, long-cycle decision-making, and adaptive institutions. Finally, the paper summarizes the theoretical innovations of Natural Control Theory: the integration of philosophy and cybernetics, models of civilizational crises, negative-feedback governance structures, and systematized civilizational transition pathways, providing a scientific-philosophical foundation for modern civilization governance, social institutional design, and sustainable development.

Natural Civilization: From Fallen Human Civilization to Natural (Cosmic Divine) Civilization systematically analyzes the structural problems in the evolution of human civilization from a science-philosophical perspective, revealing the root causes of civilizational collapse and proposing a long-term stability framework centered on cosmic law. Volume I discusses the ontological inversion caused by anthropocentrism, revealing how artificial deities, ideology, and highly concentrated power distort civilizational structures. Volume II establishes cosmic hierarchical laws based on the Lao-Yang Genesis Cosmology, elucidating the generative chain from Dao (the Milky Way) to the Sun, Earth, Moon, and all life, emphasizing that life and civilization must follow self-organizing cosmic principles. Volume III presents the philosophical core of Natural Civilization, highlighting that civilization should be law-led, achieving systemic order through balance, cycles, synergy, and feedback mechanisms, rather than being centered on human will. Volume IV designs the institutional architecture of Natural Civilization, including circular economy, distributed governance, science-philosophical education, and ecologically coordinated technological innovation, providing practical models for a functional civilization system. Volume V constructs an operational model for Natural Civilization, implementing information feedback, entropy management, resilience design, and extension of civilization to the cosmic scale, achieving long-term self-organization and stability. The work integrates cosmology, complex systems theory, and philosophical reasoning, offering both a theoretical framework and practical roadmap for humanity to reshape its relationship with nature, shift civilization from domination to compliance with cosmic order, and achieve intergenerational sustainability and long-term cosmic stability.