Morteza Niami

This article presents the Seepage Power Model (SPM) as a philosophical and socio-political framework for understanding power in the conditions of late-modern digital capitalism. The model departs from classical notions of the human subject as stable, autonomous, and internally bounded, and instead conceptualizes subjectivity as structurally porous, affectively exposed, and continuously traceable. The article argues that contemporary power increasingly operates through the extraction, modulation, and unequal regulation of human seepages, including emotional circulation, symbolic traces, bodily vulnerability, and digital exposure. The article identifies five dimensions of seepage—phenomenological, affective, bodily, symbolic-digital, and socio-political—and develops three mechanisms of seepage power: fluid accumulation, perceptual immunization, and asymmetrical exposure regulation. The article further introduces rhizomatic survival and tactical pause as adaptive strategies of resistance within fluid systems of domination. Finally, seepage ethics is proposed as a normative framework for distinguishing emancipatory forms of exposure from exploitative forms of extraction. The Seepage Power Model contributes to contemporary debates in political philosophy, phenomenology, digital capitalism studies, affect theory, and critical sociology by reframing power as the governance of permeability rather than enclosure. Keywords: seepage power, porous subjectivity, fluid domination, exposure regimes, digital capitalism, tactical pause, affective extraction, seepage ethics.

The theory of "seeping ontology" understands the human subject not as a fortified fortress but as a porous sieve, constantly leaking affects, meanings, and bodily signs. By extending this ontology into the political domain, this article formulates the concept of the "political economy of seepage" as a framework for the critical analysis of power in the age of fluidity. The central argument is that in late modernity, power operates not merely through the discipline of bodies, but through the management, extraction, and unequal distribution of subjects' seepages. By integrating seeping phenomenology, critical theory, and political economy, the article identifies three main mechanisms of seepage power: (1) the extraction of seepage as primitive accumulation of the fluid, (2) perceptual immunization as a mechanism of social exclusion, and (3) the unequal distribution of the right to leak as the reproduction of hierarchies. Finally, "rhizomatic survival" and "tactical pause" are analyzed as two poles of resistance, and a "seepage ethics" is proposed to distinguish emancipatory seepages from repressive ones. Keywords: Political economy of seepage, seeping ontology, fluid power, perceptual immunization, rhizomatic survival, tactical pause, seepage ethics.

Abstract This paper develops an integrated theoretical model for understanding moral agency under conditions of existential opacity—the constitutive inability of the subject to achieve transparent access to its own intentions at the moment of action. Synthesizing traditions in phenomenological ontology, critical theory, and complex systems theory, the model articulates three core constructs: (1) the dynamic mask reconceptualized as a chaotic algorithm whose operations are governed by two orienting vectors—the will-to-reveal and the level of self-awareness; (2) the political economy of seepage, which analyzes how power in late modernity operates through the extraction, perceptual immunization, and unequal distribution of subjects' existential leakages; and (3) the ethics of sufficiency, which relocates moral responsibility from the inaccessible content of hidden intentions to the manner of the subject's participation in the mask process, defined as sustained effort at the threshold of the subject's ontological, perceptual, and existential capacities. The model generates empirically tractable propositions at multiple levels of analysis and provides a vocabulary for moral judgment under conditions of fundamental self-uncertainty. Keywords: dynamic mask, political economy of seepage, moral agency, semblance, sufficiency ethics, existential opacity, chaotic algorithm, threshold responsibility

This paper develops an integrated theoretical model for understanding moral agency under conditions of existential opacity—the constitutive inability of the subject to achieve transparent access to its own intentions at the moment of action. Synthesizing traditions in phenomenological ontology, critical theory, and complex systems theory, the model articulates three core constructs: (1) the dynamic mask reconceptualized as a chaotic algorithm whose operations are governed by two orienting vectors—the will-to-reveal and the level of self-awareness; (2) the political economy of seepage, which analyzes how power in late modernity operates through the extraction, perceptual immunization, and unequal distribution of subjects' existential leakages; and (3) the ethics of sufficiency, which relocates moral responsibility from the inaccessible content of hidden intentions to the manner of the subject's participation in the mask process, defined as sustained effort at the threshold of the subject's ontological, perceptual, and existential capacities. The model generates empirically tractable propositions at multiple levels of analysis and provides a vocabulary for moral judgment under conditions of fundamental self-uncertainty.

This philosophy presents the Niami Model of Sufficiency-Oriented Responsible Suspension, a multi-level normative framework for ethical decision-making under conditions of value conflict and epistemic uncertainty. Grounded in the concept of the limited moral subject—an agent embedded in psychological, epistemic, and social constraints—the model introduces responsible suspension as a purposive and bounded deferral mechanism that enables morally sufficient action where perfectionist ideals prove unattainable. The framework operates across five interconnected levels: subjective, intersubjective, institutional, epistemic, and normative. At the intersubjective level, it integrates contractarian ethics' criterion of "reasonable rejectability" with Habermasian discourse theory, ensuring decisions emerge from free, non-coercive dialogue with stakeholders. Institutionally, suspension is embedded within professional ethics committees and participatory procedures, linking individual judgment to collective accountability. Epistemically, the model demands transparency, criticizability, and active reduction of ignorance through assessable reason-giving. Responsible suspension is strictly defined by three conditions: necessity of reflection, provision of assessable reasons, and placement within a revisable process. Its initiation requires genuine value conflict, substantive epistemic uncertainty, and stakeholder asymmetry. Termination occurs upon information sufficiency, exhaustion of reasonable reflection, or stakeholder convergence. Post-suspension action must satisfy three thresholds: public non-rejectability, minimization of unjustified harm, and accountable sustainability. The Niami Model thus transforms ethics from an abstract, idealized system into a practical, revisable architecture that distributes moral difficulty across transparent, accountable structures. It offers a coherent framework for ethical crisis assessment, policy design, and governance of complex uncertainty without claiming final solutions, but rather demonstrating the possibility of legitimate, defensible, and sustainable ethical action when certainty and coherence are exceptions rather than rules.

The problem of moral paralysis and the question concerning the legitimacy of suspending judgment under conditions of deep uncertainty, conflicting values, and pressure to act constitute the central problem of this article. In moral philosophy, suspension is often regarded either as moral weakness or is implicitly overlooked. This article introduces the concept of "responsible suspension": an ethically justified, time-bound, and publicly accountable suspension in which the moral agent temporarily withholds judgment while maintaining commitment to others. The proposed framework, by introducing the "limited moral subject" and substituting "moral sufficiency" for ideal perfectionism, organizes suspension across five interconnected levels: the subjective level (cognitive and psychological limitations), the intersubjective level (dialogue and reasonable rejectability), the institutional level (procedural accountability), the epistemic level (reduction of ignorance and transparency), and the macro-normative level (ethical integrity). The conditions for the initiation, continuation, and termination of suspension, as well as the criteria for moral sufficiency in post-suspension action, are systematically formulated. Drawing on contractarian traditions, discourse ethics, and hermeneutics, this model offers a practical approach to ethical decision-making in domains such as clinical ethics, public policy, and technology, transforming suspension from passive inaction into an ethical, accountable, and actionable mechanism.