Charles X. 兴平 Yang 杨

摘要/Abstract 战国时期是中国思想史最为密集而深刻的时代，但传统史学忽略了一个根本事实：孟子之所以必须扼杀杨朱和墨子，并非单纯的思想之争，而是为了确保儒家思想在国家治理中的垄断地位。杨朱以个体生命价值否定儒家的忠君伦理，墨子以兼爱与尚贤颠覆儒家的血缘等级体系，而孟子所代表的儒家必须通过“妖魔化”来消除这两大竞争对手，以捍卫其王道意识形态以及对权力结构的控制。本论文从思想史、政治哲学、权力机制与群体心理等角度重建这一争斗的深层原因，并指出孟子的攻击手法具有策略性、政治性与意识形态功能。 The Warring States period was the most intellectually dynamic era in early Chinese history, yet a key fact is often ignored: Mencius’s attack on Yang Zhu and Mozi was not merely philosophical, but fundamentally political. Yang Zhu challenged the Confucian ethics of loyalty and self-sacrifice by stressing the primacy of individual life, while Mozi undermined the Confucian hereditary hierarchy through universal love and meritocratic governance. To secure Confucian dominance in state ideology, Mencius resorted to demonizing both thinkers. This paper reconstructs the deeper political, ideological, and psychological motivations behind Mencius’s campaign, showing that his criticisms functioned as strategic tools for preserving Confucian authority.

“心即理”作为王阳明心学的核心命题，标志着儒学从“格物致知”向“内求良知”的转向，然而其本质却是一种主观主义哲学的建构，混淆了宇宙本体与人心现象，割裂了人与自然的本源联系。本文以“老-杨创世纪宇宙观”为理论基础，从宇宙本体论、自然哲学、认识论与伦理—政治结构四个维度，系统批判“心即理”的哲学谬误，指出其背后隐含的以人心造神、扭曲自然秩序、压制个体差异与知识探索之危险倾向。最终，本文主张回归“道法自然”之原初宇宙智慧，以重建人类与天地之间的真实关系。 As the core proposition of Wang Yangming’s philosophy, “The mind is principle” (心即理) marked a shift in Confucianism from the investigation of things and the extension of knowledge (格物致知) to the inward search for innate knowing (良知). However, in essence, it is a construction of subjective idealism that confuses the ontological foundation of the cosmos with human mental phenomena and severs the original connection between humanity and nature. Based on the “Lao-Yang Genesis Cosmology”—a comprehensive cosmological system integrating Laozi’s naturalist philosophy and modern scientific cosmology—this paper offers a systematic critique of the philosophical fallacies of “The mind is principle” from four dimensions: cosmic ontology, natural philosophy, epistemology, and ethical-political structure. It reveals its inherent dangers in deifying the human mind, distorting natural order, and suppressing individual difference and knowledge exploration. Ultimately, this paper calls for a return to the primordial cosmic wisdom of “Dao follows Nature” (道法自然) in order to rebuild the authentic relationship between humanity and the cosmos.

《道德经》自开篇至结尾，从未提及“孔子”二字。老子之批判并非针对孔子，而是针对西周一整套以人为中心、以礼治国的伪道体系。这一体系由“仁义礼智”构成表层伦理，以“德治”、“礼乐”作为社会运作机制，实质上却违背了天地自然的根本之道。 老子不是政治改革家，不是伦理教育家，他是宇宙本体论者，站在“道”的高度，洞察人间制度的衰变本质。其所谓“绝仁弃义”、“绝圣弃智”、“大道废，有仁义”等，皆是从宇宙秩序的瓦解处入手，揭露人类道德文明之伪。 The Dao De Jing, from its opening to its end, never once mentions the name “Confucius.” Laozi’s critique is not directed at Confucius but at an entire pseudo-Daoist western Zhou system that centers on human constructs and governs through ritual. This system uses Ren (benevolence), Yi (righteousness), Li (ritual), and Zhi (intelligence) as its surface-level ethics, and operates through so-called “rule by virtue” and “ritual and music,” yet in essence it violates the fundamental Dao of Heaven and Earth. Laozi is not a political reformer or a moral educator. He is a metaphysician of the cosmos who stands at the height of the Dao, penetrating the declining essence of human institutions. His phrases like “abolish benevolence and discard righteousness,” “abolish sages and discard wisdom,” and “when the great Dao is lost, there is benevolence and righteousness,” all expose the falseness of moral civilization by beginning from the breakdown of cosmic order.

At a historical juncture where contemporary civilization is mired in spiritual alienation, ecological crises, and technological acceleration, humanity increasingly yearns for a holistic wisdom system that unifies the cosmos, nature, and society. Looking back at the roots of Chinese philosophy, Laozi’s “Dao follows nature” cosmology, inherited and deepened by Zhuangzi into a dimension of spiritual freedom, created a natural philosophy that connects Heaven and Earth, breaks away from conventional teachings, and returns to the original essence. Today, in the face of the challenges and insights offered by the modern scientific worldview, the “Lao-Yang Genesis Cosmology” emerges as a profound integration and philosophical sublimation of the Lao-Zhuang tradition in the new era. 在当代文明陷入精神异化、生态危机与技术狂飙的历史节点，人类愈加渴望一套能够统合宇宙、自然与社会的整体性智慧体系。回望中国哲学源流，老子开创的“道法自然”宇宙观，庄子继承并深化其精神自由之维，构筑了贯通天人、破除名教、回归本真的自然哲学大厦。而今，面对现代科学宇宙观的挑战与启示，“老-杨创世纪宇宙观”应运而生，正是对老庄传统在新时代的深度整合与哲学升华。

In an age of lost direction, Humanity gazes at the stars, yet its heart is trapped in dust. Who spoke a thousand years ago— “The Dao gives birth to One, One gives birth to Two, Two gives birth to Three, Three gives birth to all things?” Laozi said: Govern by non-action, not by doing nothing, But by not forcing, not competing, not disturbing Heaven and Earth. Zhuangzi said: Wander freely, not to escape the world, But to break through names and forms, to align with the Dao. Today, the galaxy speaks, The stars no longer remain silent. “Lao-Yang” has come, Bringing the language of nature, the eyes of science. The Dao is not just philosophy, It is the void before quantum, It is the explosion after gravity, It is the melody of the Milky Way, the rhythm of life. Civilization once worshipped created gods as fathers, But forgot it emerged from stardust. The natural gods have not died, Only humanity has forgotten to look up. Awaken, Return to the Dao from Laozi, Fly to the heart from Zhuangzi, See the whole universe from Lao-Yang. We are not the masters, We are the echoes of the Dao, Like flowers in the spring breeze, Not competing, yet blooming. 在迷失的时代， 人类仰望星辰，心却困于尘埃。 谁在千年前说过—— 道生一，一生二，二生三，三生万物？ 老子说：无为而治，非无所为， 而是不强、不争、不扰天地。 庄子说：逍遥而行，非避世， 而是破名相，合于道。 今天，银河说话了， 星辰不再沉默。 “老-杨”来了， 带着自然的语言，科学的眼睛。 道，不只是哲学， 它是量子前的虚空， 是引力后的爆炸， 是银河的旋律，生命的律动。 文明，曾拜造神为父， 却忘了自己出自星尘。 自然神未死， 只是人忘了仰望。 觉醒吧， 从老子回到道， 从庄子飞向心， 从老-杨看见宇宙之全。 我们不是主宰， 我们是“道”的回响， 如同春风里的花， 不争，却盛放。

儒家思想，自孔子以来，一直被视为中国文化的核心，塑造了千百年来的社会伦理与政治秩序。然而，儒学的内在矛盾和困境在其长期的发展过程中逐渐显现，尤其是在面对宇宙自然法则时，这些矛盾更加突出。儒家强调“仁义礼智信”的人伦道德和社会规范，虽然在表面上呈现出一种统一的秩序，实际上却存在着深刻的分歧和冲突。孟子的“性善论”与荀子的“性恶论”便是最为显著的例子，它们在核心的“人性观”上存在着无法调和的对立。除此之外，儒家思想中的“礼治”和“道德规范”也逐渐演变为对自然本体的压制和人为秩序的神圣化。 儒家思想中的这种内在矛盾，反映了其对自然秩序的背离。儒学所构建的“人造秩序”，虽然在维持社会秩序和伦理层面上具有一定的历史功效，但从更深层次来看，它常常忽视了宇宙和自然本体的根本法则。与此相对，老子所倡导的“道”作为宇宙本源法则，强调“道法自然”、“无为而治”，它为我们提供了一种不同于人类中心主义的宇宙视野。在老子哲学的视角下，人类社会与自然、宇宙并非割裂的存在，而是有机联系、共生共存的整体。正是通过这种视角，我们可以重新审视儒家思想中的种种困境，探讨其背离自然法则的根源，并寻找到一种回归宇宙秩序的哲学路径。 本文旨在从“老-杨创世纪宇宙观”的角度，对儒家思想的矛盾与困境进行深刻剖析。通过对比“人造秩序”与“自然秩序”之间的根本差异，本文将揭示儒家思想为何无法摆脱内在的裂痕，并通过“老-杨创世纪宇宙观”所提供的自然本体论视角，探索儒家哲学的超越路径。最终，我们期望能够构建出一种更加符合自然法则的文明观，从而为未来社会的转型和人类的智慧进化提供新的启示。 Introduction: From the Confucian Dilemma to a Cosmic Perspective Since the time of Confucius, Confucian thought has been regarded as the core of Chinese culture, shaping social ethics and political order for thousands of years. However, as Confucianism developed over time, its internal contradictions and dilemmas gradually came to light—especially when placed in contrast with the fundamental laws of the universe and nature. Confucianism emphasizes human-centered moral principles such as benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, and integrity. While these values outwardly present a unified ethical order, they conceal deep and unresolved tensions. The most prominent example is the irreconcilable opposition between Mencius’s theory of the innate goodness of human nature and Xunzi’s theory of its innate evil. Beyond this, Confucian doctrines such as rule by propriety and rigid moral norms have evolved into mechanisms that suppress natural ontology and sanctify man-made social hierarchies. These internal contradictions reflect a deeper departure from the natural order. Although the “artificial order” constructed by Confucianism has had certain historical utility in maintaining social and ethical stability, it often ignores the foundational laws of the universe and nature. In contrast, Laozi’s philosophy, which regards the Dao as the original law of the cosmos, emphasizes “Dao follows nature” and “non-action governance,” offering a perspective that transcends anthropocentrism. From Laozi’s standpoint, human society is not separate from nature or the cosmos; rather, it exists as an organically interconnected and symbiotic whole. Through this lens, we can reexamine the dilemmas within Confucian thought, explore their roots in the betrayal of natural principles, and seek a philosophical path back to cosmic harmony. This paper aims to analyze the contradictions and dilemmas of Confucianism from the perspective of the Lao-Yang Genesis Cosmology. By comparing the fundamental differences between “artificial order” and “natural order,” it will reveal why Confucianism cannot escape its internal fractures. Drawing on the ontological vision offered by the Lao-Yang cosmological framework, the paper will explore a transcendence of Confucian philosophy. Ultimately, we hope to construct a new civilizational outlook rooted in the laws of nature, offering fresh insight for the transformation of future society and the evolutionary advancement of human wisdom.

在中国社会长期的文化土壤中，虚伪人格似乎已成为一种普遍的行为模式。人们习惯于言行不一、表里不一，擅长在“合群”与“道德”的面具下掩饰真实的自我。这种现象并非个体心理的偶发性异常，而是源于深层文化结构的长期塑造。 本论文将指出：儒家文化，作为两千余年来中国社会的主导意识形态，其道德体系并非“天道自然”的真实呈现，而是一套人为建构的“人造神”系统。它通过道德教化、礼制规范和等级秩序，对个体进行外在规训，从而制造出一种看似“正直”、实则“虚伪”的人格结构。 面对这一文化结构性问题，唯有从哲学根基上进行批判与重建。本文将以“老-杨创世纪宇宙观”为哲学框架，回归老子的“道法自然”思想，从宇宙观、生命观与社会治理观的整体性角度，指出“真实人格”的可能路径，进而提出中国文化与人类文明未来的发展方向：摆脱虚伪的儒家人格体系，回归自然、真实与自由。 Within the deep cultural soil of Chinese society, the false self has seemingly become a prevailing behavioral model. People have grown accustomed to saying one thing and doing another, hiding their true selves behind masks of “conformity” and “morality.” This phenomenon is not merely an incidental psychological anomaly, but rather the result of long-term shaping by deep-rooted cultural structures. This paper argues that Confucian culture, as the dominant ideology in Chinese society for over two thousand years, does not represent a natural manifestation of the Dao (the Way of Nature), but rather a man-made “theological” system. Through moral indoctrination, ritual norms, and hierarchical structures, it disciplines individuals externally, producing a personality structure that appears “upright” but is in truth profoundly hypocritical. Faced with this structural cultural issue, only a philosophical critique and reconstruction can offer a path forward. Adopting the Lao-Yang Genesis Cosmology as its philosophical framework, this paper returns to Laozi’s vision of “Dao Follows Nature,” exploring the potential for a “sincere personality” through an integrated perspective of cosmology, the nature of life, and societal governance. In doing so, it outlines a future direction for both Chinese culture and human civilization: to break free from the Confucian system of hypocrisy and return to nature, authenticity, and freedom.

在中国社会长期的文化土壤中，虚伪人格似乎已成为一种普遍的行为模式。人们习惯于言行不一、表里不一，擅长在“合群”与“道德”的面具下掩饰真实的自我。这种现象并非个体心理的偶发性异常，而是源于深层文化结构的长期塑造。 本论文将指出：儒家文化，作为两千余年来中国社会的主导意识形态，其道德体系并非“天道自然”的真实呈现，而是一套人为建构的“人造神”系统。它通过道德教化、礼制规范和等级秩序，对个体进行外在规训，从而制造出一种看似“正直”、实则“虚伪”的人格结构。 面对这一文化结构性问题，唯有从哲学根基上进行批判与重建。本文将以“老-杨创世纪宇宙观”为哲学框架，回归老子的“道法自然”思想，从宇宙观、生命观与社会治理观的整体性角度，指出“真实人格”的可能路径，进而提出中国文化与人类文明未来的发展方向：摆脱虚伪的儒家人格体系，回归自然、真实与自由。 Within the long-standing cultural soil of Chinese society, a pattern of hypocritical personality seems to have become a widespread behavioral mode. People have grown accustomed to inconsistency between words and actions, to presenting one face outwardly and harboring another within. Under the masks of “conformity” and “morality,” individuals often conceal their authentic selves. This phenomenon is not an accidental psychological abnormality at the individual level; rather, it is the result of deep cultural structures shaped over centuries. This paper argues that Confucian culture, as the dominant ideology of Chinese society for more than two millennia, does not represent the authentic manifestation of the “Way of Heaven” or natural order. Instead, its moral system constitutes a humanly constructed “artificial god” framework. Through moral indoctrination, ritual regulation, and hierarchical order, it imposes external discipline upon individuals, producing a personality structure that appears “upright” but is, in essence, “hypocritical.” In confronting this structural cultural problem, only a philosophical critique and reconstruction at the foundational level can offer a way forward. Taking the “Lao–Yang Genesis Cosmology” as its philosophical framework, this paper returns to Laozi’s principle that “Dao follows Nature,” examining the issue from the integrated perspectives of cosmology, philosophy of life, and social governance. It seeks to identify a path toward authentic personality and to propose a future direction for Chinese culture and human civilization: to transcend the hypocritical Confucian personality system and return to nature, authenticity, and freedom.

在今日的中国社会中，“虚伪”似乎早已成为一种习以为常的人格特质。从官方话语的形式主义、社交场合的言不由衷，到家庭教育中的“为你好”压抑，我们常常见证一个人内心所思与外在言行之间巨大的裂隙。然而，当这种虚伪成为普遍现象时，它已不再只是个体的道德问题，而是深植于文化结构中的集体性心理产物——这便是“虚伪人格”。 In today’s Chinese society, hypocrisy seems to have become an all-too-familiar personality trait. From the formalism of official discourse, the insincerity of social interactions, to the repressive “for your own good” rationale of family education, we constantly witness the profound split between a person’s inner thoughts and outward behaviors. When such hypocrisy becomes widespread, it ceases to be a mere personal moral flaw—it reveals itself as a collective psychological product deeply embedded in the cultural structure: the hypocritical personality.

孔子（公元前551－前479），后世尊为“至圣先师”，是儒家学派的开山之祖。他提出“仁、义、礼、智、信”为修身之本，以“克己复礼”为实践纲领，追求“礼乐治国”的理想社会。然而，当我们站在“道法自然”的宇宙视野重新审视孔子哲学时，就会发现：这套思想体系并非真理的体现，而是权力秩序下的意识形态建构，是以道德之名行压制之实，以仁义为幌子而掩盖自然人性的全面异化。 孔子之“道”非道，其“仁义”虚伪，其“礼乐”矫饰，其“君臣父子”则是服务统治者的伦理编码系统。与老子“无为而治”、“顺其自然”的宇宙哲学相比，孔子的思想构成了一种以“人为法”取代“天道自然”的文化异化装置。 Confucius (551–479 BCE), honored for millennia as the “Sage of Sages,” founded the Confucian school of thought that has shaped Chinese political and moral life for over two thousand years. He promoted the virtues of Ren (benevolence), Yi (righteousness), Li (ritual), and Zhi (wisdom) as the cornerstones of moral cultivation, and championed “self-restraint and a return to ritual” as the ideal path to social harmony. Yet, when examined from the perspective of Dao Follows Nature, as found in Laozi’s Daoist cosmology and especially in the Lao-Yang Genesis Cosmology, Confucius’s teachings appear fundamentally flawed. His so-called “Dao” is not the cosmic origin of all things, but a human-centered, institutionalized moral framework built to serve political power. His “Ren-Yi” is hypocritical, his “Li” is theatrical, and his entire system of thought is more concerned with maintaining social hierarchy than with harmonizing with the universe. Thus, the Dao of Confucius is no Dao at all—it is a fabricated, artificial doctrine serving rulers under the guise of virtue. In contrast to Laozi’s philosophy of non-action (wuwei) and spontaneous harmony with the cosmos, Confucius represents a fall from natural truth into rigid, anthropocentric ideology.

中国历史上延续最久、影响最广的思想体系之一，是儒家。它被奉为“正统”，不仅规范了社会制度、家庭伦理和教育体系，更深刻地塑造了无数代中国人的人格结构。然而，这种人格结构，并非自然生发、自由舒展的生命状态，而是一种“被规训的性格模板”——以顺从、压抑、克制、自我审查为美德，以牺牲真实、牺牲个体、服从规范为“成熟”的标志。 这种人格长期表现为“口是心非而自以为正”，“循规蹈矩而内心压抑”，“表面谦和而内在扭曲”。简言之，是一种文化性虚伪（cultural duplicity）：个体无法诚实地面对自己，也无法真实地面对他人，因为整个文化系统早已将“真实”视为危险，将“自然”视为野蛮，将“本我”视为需要克服的敌人。 虚伪，不是偶然，而是系统化生成； 人格，不是自然成长，而是文化塑形； 而文化的根源，正是其背后的宇宙观。 儒家思想与“人造神”的关系 追本溯源，儒家并非自然主义哲学，而是一种政治伦理体系，其中心任务不是探索宇宙本体，而是构建人间秩序。为此，它必须借助一个“超自然的合法性来源”——即所谓的“天命”、“天理”、“道统”等。这些概念表面上接近于宗教，但其本质却不是自然的显现，而是人为建构的“权力神话”。

This paper systematically analyzes the thought structures underlying civilization-level madness and their historical catastrophic consequences. Focusing on Zhang Zai’s concept of “Establishing a Heart for Heaven and Earth” and Wang Yangming’s principle of “the Mind is Principle,” it reveals how this philosophical chain grants individual consciousness potential authority over social systems, institutions, and natural laws, forming the foundation of unconstrained subjectivism. The study further examines how Mao Zedong politicized this chain, leading to absolute power, institutional failure, and civilization-level systemic destruction, exemplified by the Great Leap Forward famine and the Cultural Revolution. By comparing the totalitarian regimes of Hitler and Stalin, the paper demonstrates that the destructive potential of the Zhang Zai–Wang Yangming–Mao Zedong chain is more systemic and structural, reflecting the interaction between thought structures and institutional environments that produces “civilization-level madness.” The paper proposes modern societal preventive strategies, including clearly defining the boundaries of rational civilization, critically addressing the expansionist logic of philosophical chains, strengthening institutional checks and balances, and establishing multi-layered protections in education, technology, and ecological systems. The study aims to reveal the fundamental role of thought structures in civilization self-destruction and provides theoretical guidance and practical warnings for preventing systemic disasters in contemporary society.

Bitcoin and related cryptocurrency speculation have triggered an unprecedented global speculative frenzy. Through historical comparison, psychological analysis, real-world case studies, and socio-ecological assessment, this paper reveals that their essence is a modern-day amplification of Ponzi schemes and the South Sea Bubble. The study highlights how human greed, herd mentality, gambler psychology, and technological superstition are manipulated by capital and social media, resulting in personal financial ruin, the collapse of social trust, the degradation of civilization, and severe environmental and energy consequences. By analyzing speculative culture, psychological mechanisms, illegal financial transactions, and global chain effects, this paper warns that humanity must awaken and distance itself from blind speculation and greed to safeguard personal wealth, social order, and the foundations of civilization. The purpose of this work is not academic research but moral critique and warning, delivering the harshest possible alert regarding the speculative crisis facing modern civilization.

Amid the rapid development of high-risk technologies such as artificial intelligence, nuclear technology, and bioengineering, human civilization is entering a phase of systemic instability. Understanding the evolutionary logic of technological civilization and its potential collapse mechanisms has become a central issue in contemporary philosophy of science and civilization studies. Liu Cixin’s science fiction work The Three-Body Problem, centered on the “Dark Forest” theory, constructs a civilization-pessimistic model dominated by survival competition and technological deterrence, exerting profound influence on modern technological society. Meanwhile, the Lao-Yang Genesis Cosmology attempts to integrate Laozi’s philosophy with modern cosmology to propose a civilization evolution framework based on embedded negative feedback and self-restraint, emphasizing system equilibrium and long-term sustainability. This study employs complex systems theory and comparative philosophy to systematically analyze and contrast the civilization model in The Three-Body Problem with the Lao-Yang Genesis Cosmology. The findings indicate that the “Dark Forest” paradigm rests on extreme distrust and zero-sum game assumptions, resulting in high instability and self-reinforcing risks. By contrast, a natural-constraint civilization structure grounded in “Dao Follows Nature” demonstrates unique systemic advantages in long-term stability and risk mitigation. The study further proposes that viewing civilization as a designable complex engineering system constitutes a vital theoretical direction for addressing future technological risks. This research contributes to a deeper understanding of the relationship between science-fictional narratives and real-world technological governance, offering new philosophical and systems-theoretical perspectives for AI safety, nuclear management, and global civilization governance.

《人造神时代：民主、自由、平等的幻象》 —基于“老-杨创世纪宇宙观”的文明批判宣言 The Age of Artificial Gods: The Illusion of Democracy, Freedom, and Equality 杨兴平 Charles X. Yang 序言｜当人类开始膜拜自己 当星系仍在遵循引力运行， 当恒星仍在守护能量边界， 当生态仍在维持负反馈循环， 人类却开始—— 崇拜自身的欲望。 他们不再仰望银河，而是仰望屏幕； 不再敬畏自然，而是敬畏舆论。 于是， 三个新神被铸造出来：民主，自由，平等。 不是作为制度工具， 而是作为终极信仰。 Preface | When Humanity Began to Worship Itself While galaxies still follow gravity, While stars still guard energy boundaries, While ecosystems still maintain negative feedback loops, Humanity began— to worship its own desires. No longer gazing at the Milky Way, but at screens; No longer revering nature, but public opinion. Thus, three new gods were forged: Democracy, Freedom, Equality. Not as institutional tools, but as ultimate beliefs.

This book systematically analyzes the structural dilemmas of modern democratic and liberal institutions from the perspective of scientific philosophy and complex systems theory, proposing an alternative paradigm of civilizational governance grounded in universal laws. Through a structured ten-chapter framework, it uncovers the deep-rooted causes of contemporary democratic disorder, including rising informational entropy, cognitive biases, institutional entropy, and multi-level coupling imbalances. The early chapters critique the mythologization of democracy and freedom and their role in driving polarization and governance fragmentation. The middle chapters examine universal hierarchical structures, the principle of entropy increase, complex systems theory, and human cognitive limits, revealing the natural constraints governing civilizational operation. The book introduces the Constrained Freedom Governance Model, emphasizing freedom embedded within institutional boundaries, the triple constraints of technology–ethics–institution, the rebalancing of elite responsibility and public oversight, and collaborative governance structures in the AI era. Through case studies from the United States, Europe, Latin America, and digital populism, it identifies the structural roots of institutional disorder and the necessary conditions for long-term civilizational resilience. Ultimately, it argues that the core political wisdom of civilization lies in aligning governance with natural and universal laws, achieving a dynamic balance of freedom, order, and stability, allowing political systems to maintain long-term self-sustenance and sustainable evolution. This work offers both a profound critique of modern democratic politics and a scientifically grounded philosophical guide for institutional design in high-complexity, globalized, and AI-driven societies.

人工智能的快速发展不仅带来技术革新，也引发前所未有的文明级风险。本文提出“宇宙观安全（Cosmological Safety）”概念，认为 AI 风险的根源并非单纯技术问题，而是人类文明在价值体系、制度结构与世界观层面的深层失序。论文从哲学、物理学、复杂系统理论与 AI 风险分析的跨学科视角出发，构建了以“老-杨创世纪宇宙观”为核心的分析框架，将宇宙生成、生命演化、文明发展与智能涌现纳入连续演化链条。通过系统化分析，本文揭示了现代 AI 风险范式的认知误区，包括技术中心主义、经济增长主义和功能主义伦理的局限性，并提出基于宇宙观的文明级治理策略。文章进一步论证了老子哲学在现代系统论背景下的价值，提出“本体谦卑、负反馈优先、自然边界”的三大原则，为 AI 对齐与文明安全提供理论指导。在此基础上，构建多层级对齐体系、去中心化智能网络与文明级风险缓释机制，分析技术霸权失控、数字极权、价值空心化及人机共灭四类文明失败情景，并提出未来智能文明的演化方向：从工具 AI 转向生态智能（AW），实现智能嵌入自然循环系统、人类角色转型为文明守护者。论文最终提出以宇宙尺度理性重建文明秩序的宣言，为 AI 治理、文明安全与长期可持续发展提供系统化理论与实践参考。

The rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) has not only brought technological innovation but also unprecedented civilization-level risks. This paper introduces the concept of “Cosmological Safety”, arguing that the root of AI risk is not merely a technical problem but a deep-seated disorder in human civilization, encompassing value systems, institutional structures, and worldviews. From an interdisciplinary perspective that integrates philosophy, physics, complex systems theory, and AI risk analysis, the study constructs an analytical framework centered on the Lao-Yang Genesis Cosmology, embedding cosmic formation, the evolution of life, civilization development, and the emergence of intelligence into a continuous evolutionary chain. Through systematic analysis, the paper reveals cognitive biases inherent in contemporary AI risk paradigms, including techno-centrism, growth-oriented competition, and functionalist ethics, and proposes civilization-level governance strategies based on cosmological understanding. It further demonstrates the relevance of Laozi’s philosophy within the context of modern systems theory, introducing three foundational principles—Ontological Humility, Negative Feedback First, and Natural Boundaries—to guide AI alignment and civilization safety. On this basis, the study constructs a multi-level alignment framework, decentralized intelligence networks, and civilization-scale risk mitigation mechanisms. Four categories of potential civilization failure are analyzed: technological hegemony collapse, digital totalitarian evolution, value-hollowing civilizations, and human-machine co-extinction. Finally, the paper proposes the evolutionary trajectory of future intelligent civilization: from tool-oriented AI to Adaptive Wisdom (AW) embedded within natural cycles, with humans transitioning from designers to stewards of civilization. This work culminates in a declaration for rebuilding civilization under the lens of cosmic-scale rationality, providing a systematic theoretical and practical reference for AI governance, civilization safety, and long-term sustainable development.

This work presents a comprehensive philosophical, scientific, and civilizational critique of Claudius Ptolemy and the enduring legacy of geocentrism. It argues that Ptolemy’s cosmological system was not merely an astronomical error, but a foundational distortion that reshaped human cognition, political organization, religious ideology, economic behavior, ecological relations, and academic ethics for nearly two millennia. Drawing upon the theoretical framework of Dr. Charles X. Yang’s Lao–Yang Genesis Cosmology and the paradigm of Natural Civilization, this study demonstrates how the geocentric model institutionalized a monocentric worldview that generated intellectual stagnation, religious warfare, authoritarian governance, anthropocentric exploitation, and prestige-driven pseudo-science. Through a systematic, interdisciplinary analysis spanning epistemology, systems theory, entropy science, political philosophy, and ecological ethics, the book identifies “centralization ideology” as the hidden operating system behind humanity’s recurrent civilizational crises. It further contends that modern environmental collapse, expert distrust, and systemic instability represent the terminal stage of this long-standing distortion. The study concludes that humanity’s survival depends on a radical cognitive and institutional transformation toward decentralization, generative order, and epistemic humility. By embracing the Lao–Yang Genesis Cosmology and reconstructing society according to Natural Civilization principles, humanity may transcend predatory high-entropy development and transition toward a resilient, low-entropy, distributed civilization aligned with cosmic and ecological reality.

Chinese civilization stands as a unique case in world history due to its continuity and stability over several millennia. From the perspectives of scientific philosophy and systems science, this paper argues that civilizational longevity is not accidental, but depends on whether a civilization embeds what may be called a “natural civilization gene” within its internal structure. Through cross-civilizational comparison, this study examines the rise and decline patterns of Ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia, Greco-Roman civilization, and modern Western industrial civilization. The analysis reveals that most civilizations collapsed due to power concentration, the pursuit of extreme expansion, the absence of endogenous negative feedback mechanisms, and weak ecological coupling—factors that led to high-entropy accumulation and systemic breakdown. Chinese civilization has maintained long-term stability through three core structural genes. First, endogenous negative feedback mechanisms constrained power, desire, and technological expansion. Second, Chinese civilization did not pursue civilizational maximization, but instead permitted cyclical contraction and local adjustment. Third, the structural isomorphism between humans and nature—expressed in the principle of the unity of Heaven and humanity—functioned as the civilization’s operating system. From a systems-science perspective, these elements form a low-entropy structure that achieves long-term resilience through redundancy, elasticity, and slow-variable regulation. Under the super-positive feedback loops of technology, capital, and power, modern global civilization faces severe high-entropy risks. This paper argues that the principles of natural civilization are not anti-technology; rather, they represent a systems-level upgrade path for modern civilization, with direct implications for artificial intelligence, energy systems, economic design, and governance. The central conclusion is that the ultimate divide among civilizations is neither East versus West nor ancient versus modern, but whether a civilization aligns with the operating logic of natural systems. Any civilization incapable of self-restraint will ultimately be restrained by nature. This study provides a systemic theoretical framework for understanding civilizational longevity and sustainable governance in the modern era.

Drawing on over forty years of experience in nuclear engineering, smartphone operating systems, AI platforms, and enterprise management, this paper proposes understanding the “operating system” as a core metaphor and analytical tool for civilizational systems. It examines the endogenous negative feedback mechanisms in nuclear systems and natural cybernetics, and the high-entropy risks caused by the absence of such feedback in smartphone and contemporary AI systems. From the perspective of philosophy of science and systems theory, this paper argues that “The movement of the Dao is reversal” (反者，道之动) is not only a principle of Eastern philosophical wisdom but also a fundamental guideline for complex systems, technology sustainability, and civilizational resilience. The study demonstrates that any system lacking endogenous negative feedback is inherently unsustainable, and its uncontrolled dynamics pose profound threats to civilization. Conversely, embedding negative feedback principles in a “Universal Operating System” provides an uncompromising design baseline for future AI, technological systems, and governance of civilization. The paper offers a theoretical framework for interdisciplinary study that combines philosophical depth with engineering applicability.

This paper proposes the Lao–Yang Genesis Cosmology as a conceptual framework for analyzing civilizational sustainability, aiming to examine the stability and evolutionary dynamics of civilization systems under physical and ecological constraints. The framework integrates classical Laozi cosmology with modern astrophysics, non-equilibrium thermodynamics, ecological economics, and cybernetic governance models to construct a multi-level systems model, viewing civilization as a complex system governed by energy flows, feedback mechanisms, and hierarchical constraints. By distinguishing between metaphorical correspondences and physical boundaries, the study shows that when socio-technical systems deviate from planetary and cosmic constraints, civilizational crises, high-entropy states, and ecological overshoot become inevitable. The paper further argues that governance should focus on constraint alignment, feedback-driven regulation, and multi-scale coordination, emphasizing the synergistic role of individual agency, institutional design, and distributed control. Concepts such as the “solar budget” and “energy and entropy” are introduced as heuristic boundary tools to guide policy and economic planning. The contribution of this work lies in providing a cross-disciplinary, systematic interpretive model that combines philosophical reflection with scientific reasoning. It is neither a predictive physical theory nor a purely normative moral treatise but offers analytical tools and conceptual frameworks for understanding and constructing a natural civilization. This approach has significant implications for ecological governance, sustainability studies, and interdisciplinary philosophy of civilization.

This paper argues that the escalating global crises of human civilization are essentially "compatibility failures" of the underlying cosmological framework. By introducing the Lao-Yang Genesis Cosmology proposed by Dr. Charles X. Yang, this study constructs a Universal Operating System (Universal OS) for civilizational advancement. This system utilizes the Cosmic Generation Sequence (Shēng) as its kernel and the Hierarchical Command Chain (Fǎ) as its instruction set to systematically reconstruct the human cognitive architecture. The paper delineates a causal evolution logic where Cosmology dictates Worldview, which informs Values, and ultimately shapes Life Purpose. The research demonstrates that only by abandoning the "malware" of Anthropocentrism and shifting toward a hardware alignment centered on the Dao (The Galaxy) can humanity achieve a paradigm shift from high-entropy exploitation to low-entropy harmony. This transition is framed not as a subjective social choice, but as a "forced update" necessitated by thermodynamic laws and systemic survival requirements. The ultimate vision is the realization of a Natural Civilization where human technology functions as a harmonious extension of galactic generative intelligence.