Philippe Schweizer

Here we will go beyond the variety of violence to show its unity, common points and continuities. For although there are multiple forms of violence, they are interrelated: they define a continuum from trivial to extreme violence. Violence against oneself, things, living things such as plants and animals, other nations, the other, one’s fellow human beings, therefore the violence of society against its members, which returns to self-violence. Another continuum is its spiral development, with violence generating violence and pushing it to grow. Violence can also be learned, we progress ever further in violence: in gangs, in armies, in society... Everyone is capable of violence, sometimes to a good advantage as in self-defence. Here it resides in necessity, that of survival, but in general it is impunity that allows and encourages it. In closed, totalitarian, universes: family, work, hospital, army, state... The proximity and distance between the perpetrator and the victim defines yet another continuity. We will discuss the various elements that contribute to its development. And paradoxically, to see that violence also serves to avoid violence. In this way, evacuating it, refusing it, is in fact feeding it, which makes today’s violence, which is an evolution of previous violence and which prepares and defines tomorrow’s violence.

Beyond the predominant paradigm of an essentially rational human cognition, based on the classical binary logic, we want to propose some reflections that are organized around the intuition that the representations we have of the world are weighted with appreciations, for example affective ones. resulting from our integration into a social environment. We see these connotations as essentially ternary in nature, depending on the concepts underlying neutrosophy: either positive, negative or neutral. This form of representation would then influence the very nature of the cognitive process, which in complex real-world situations, has to deal with problems of a combinatorial nature leading to a number of cases too large for our abilities. Forced to proceed by shortcuts on the basis of heuristics, cognition would use these assessments of the representations it manipulates to decide whether partial solutions are attractive for solving the problem or on the contrary are judged negative and are then quickly rejected. There is still the case of a neutral weighting that allows processing to continue. Thus a neutrosophical conception of our representations of the world explains how our cognition functions in its treatment of combinatorial problems in the form of producing processing accelerating heuristics, both in terms of partial solutions selection and processing optimization.

We want to highlight the strong link between learning systems such as deep learning neural networks and neutrosophy. The latter is above all a representation considering a neutral state which is at the heart of many phenomena of reality as well as mathematical and information theories. Here, we start from the recent understanding of neural networks, which considers their internal functioning and the learning that characterizes them as based on adapted representations (both of the information to be processed and of the task to be performed) that are in fact optimal compressions. Compression means discriminating the similar and the different between cases by identifying representative characteristics through focusing on the most significant and rejecting of the rest. These three operations of neural processing, learning and compression owe their existence to non-linear treatments which essentially amount to distinguishing a neutral zone between two filtered zones, corresponding to the neutrosophical approach.

Thought is the primary force of humans for their survival, it consists in the use of knowledge and beliefs to determine the most appropriate action in the current situation according to a rationally inspired treatment. The usual knowledge used in practical life is based on models that are representative of reality, such as descriptions and pairs of opposites. We discuss here our thesis that these types of representations of knowledge induce restrictive effects on thought. Indeed, in particular, these two types have specific characteristics that lead to binding effects on thinking such as limitation and influence. The result is a decrease in the capacity of being a rational autonomous agent harmful to one's own interests, which is characterized by deleterious behaviors: lack of reflection (resulting in), inaction, submission, imitation, being just a follower, persuasion by one's group, confusion, handing over to others... However, types of representations that are hardly more complex allow for a better consideration of one's preferences, including a type of representation that enables to move away from couples of opposites by adding neutrality, which produces a distancing from the immediacy of choices (and contrary binary alternatives) while facilitating personal appreciation. This type is in line with the mechanism for finding an optimal solution based on preferential weighting, which is one of the most widely used cognitive operations in human life. We indicate here that this type of representation is typical of neutrosophy, which is an extension of the dialectical thinking of Western philosophy.