Intelligenism’s Solution to the Dilemma of Defining Complex Things

In many complex human social scenarios, defining boundaries is extremely difficult. For example, it’s difficult to define certain individuals as good and others as bad. The complexity of society gives rise to complex and ambiguous boundaries across various dimensions. The pursuit of clear boundaries is inherently mechanistic, and the mechanistic approach to defining and understanding human society has significant limitations. In human society, the boundaries of affairs are often complex and ambiguous. It’s even difficult to firmly believe that managing human society is a purely scientific endeavor; it involves both art and Mysticism. Within the Intelligenism framework, human society as a whole is even viewed as a larger intelligent agent, with the individual human being merely a humble neuron within this vast entity.

In this human society rife with uncertainty and ambiguity, rather than relying on a mechanistic obsession to define complex issues with clear boundaries, it’s better to embrace the Intelligenism framework of theoretical adaptability, encouraging individuals to adapt theories to different scenarios based on their own perceptions and goals. At this point, the duty for defining the complexity and ambiguity of human society is decentralized to billions of individuals. These individuals, through their own perceptions within limited contexts, autonomously adapt theories and foster collaboration and influence among themselves. In this complex and information-rich human society, intelligenism should advocate for responding to the complexities of the group environment by allowing for greater complexity, rather than ignoring the inherent complexity of the system through wishful, simplistic definitions.