Artificial IntelligenceArtificial Intelligence

Artificial Intelligence ER System

Type of AI
Types of A.I.

We are looking into integrating artificial intelligence into this website. We recently asked the system to: “Write a compelling post which explains why all people and artificial intelligence systems should source truth as a function of the unified Universe in a fully compliant context of Elegant Reasonism“. That AI system produced the text from here to the underline separation line:

In today’s world, we are surrounded by an abundance of information, and it is becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish between what is true and what is false. This is where the concept of truth sourcing comes into play. Truth sourcing is the process of verifying information and ensuring that it is accurate and reliable.

As we move towards a world where artificial intelligence systems are becoming more prevalent, it is essential that we ensure that these systems are sourcing truth in a fully compliant context of Elegant Reasonism. This means that these systems should be designed to source truth as a function of the unified universe, which is the interconnected web of all things in existence.

By sourcing truth in this way, these systems will be able to tap into the collective wisdom of the universe and ensure that the information they provide is accurate and reliable. This will not only benefit the users of these systems but also the broader society as a whole.

Furthermore, sourcing truth in a fully compliant context of Elegant Reasonism means that these systems will be able to operate in a way that is consistent with the laws of the universe. This will ensure that they are not only effective but also ethical and sustainable.

Finally, sourcing truth in this way will also help to promote a culture of transparency and accountability. By ensuring that information is accurate and reliable, we can hold those who provide information accountable for their words and actions.

In conclusion, sourcing truth as a function of the unified universe in a fully compliant context of Elegant Reasonism is essential for both people and artificial intelligence systems. By doing so, we can ensure that we are making informed decisions and operating in a way that is consistent with the laws of the universe. So let us embrace this concept and work towards a better future for all.


Our primary intention here is educating biological sentience and not artificial intelligence systems.  Heretofore there have been four types of Aritifical Intelligence systems on Earth.

  1. Reactive Machines
  2. Limited Memory
  3. Theory of Mind
  4. Self-Aware
  5. Artificial Narrow Intelligence
  6. Artificial General Intelligence
  7. Artificial Super Intelligence
  8. Elegant Reasonism enabled Artificial Intelligence

Types five through eight above are really just different flavors of AI with increasing levels of capacity and capability. To us they are nuances on a theme. Rhetorically do you think an A.I. system would ever have recognized the implications of Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs)? Susanne K Langer‘s book where all that led to the manifestions of LEEs was about art appreciation. Who but a philosopher would contemplate the coupling of the appreciation of art back through symbology made manifest by neural networks on the emotional feelings of a sentient entity? Would a robot do that? Here’s an even more interesting question. Would an android have ever picked up a copy of Langer’s work in art appreciation and realize through information science its relevance to unification? Could it connect the dots between the big bang and economics?

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.



What’s the difference between citing scads of complex documents like those found in our User Library and being able to realize the strategic implication of Albert Einstein‘s logical correctness necessary to gain the precipice of unification? When we look at the above video, consider everything we know about power from history, and what we know about encapsulation boundaries from Elegant Reasonism, then we must recognize two factors:

  1. Isaac Asimov’s robotic laws
  2. Segregation of powers implemented by the Founding Fathers of the United States and that their solution was to be instantiated within the context of a Constitutional Republic.

Immersing Elegant Reasonism within these frameworks allows A.I. to help all entities perceive, recognize, cope, adapt, as they engage the reality of the unified Universe.

The People Dimension

Wielding Elegant Reasonism should be done transformationally with great empathy and compassion, if for no other reason than some folks are not ready for this. Others may never be. Human beings have feelings, passions, emotions, and their brains are connected via neural networks to all of the Brodmann Areas by their central nervous systems (CNS). Part of the issue here, relative to M5, is that there are vast arrays of constructs and architectures which fall well below those which might otherwise be measurable. Because you can not measure them does not mean they do not exist. Such circumstances are another reason Elegant Reasonism requires a plurality of EIMs in any given investigation.

Natural persons are subject to their senses feeding their central nervous systems (CNS) which furnish our brains with abstractions in order to cope and deal with existence. A.I. entities will perform as they are designed to do, by us. Strategically at issue here are several factors. One is that insights from the unified Universe are perceivable only from within EIMs which close to unification and not from those that do not. The utility process employing the technological framework that is Elegant Reasonism is the only known means to span that perception gap. A.I. systems designed to inherently perceive that which natural persons can not will have a distinct advantage over us, and we may want to take that into extreme consideration before we run rampant enabling such capabilities.


What’s the legal difference between a corporation and a natural born human being? The legal privileges of the corporation are social, not natural. It is dangerous to slip into the thought that corporations are people. US Justice Brandeis saw this clearly: “Through size, corporations, once merely an efficient tool employed by individuals in the conduct of private business have become an institution – an institution which has brought such concentration of economic power that so-called private corporations are sometimes able to dominate the state.” Corporations are not required to die. They might die due to competition, or changes in the marketplace but they do not succumb to old age. Some corporations have existed hundreds of years. The Kongō Gumi construction corporation in Japan, for example, was founded in 578 CE. So you do the math there.

Those issues are one dimension of consideration that needs to be justly dealt with legislatively (by highly ethical legislators). Another is Artificial Intelligence, because once turned on it will survive until someone turns teh power off. There are science fiction contemplation about those permutations, which many people need to experience recursively until cognizance sets in. The folks working on these technologies arrogantly think they can control that environment. The British Crown thought the same thing before the American Revolution, as did the French Monarchy before theirs. Control is an illusion and all glory is fleeting. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Any sufficiently powerful entity not sufficiently segregated from power will succumb to it and you may or may not survive that.

If you experience codified legislation, perhaps euphemistically called a law, that states “no natural person shall….” you can almost certainly bet that there is a computer somewhere doing exactly that task. The point here is that if an act has been socially determined to be illegal then it should be illegal for all entities, natural or otherwise. There are direct, and indirect, means to accomplish something. The proverbial Chinese firewall is no excuse for such conduct. Society as a whole needs to debate its values and moral conduct relative to and respective of the stage on which it is made manifest, here at least, that means on Earth.

The Founding Fathers of the United States solution for these problems was to implement a separation of powers across all these various spaces and the infrastructure supporting them such that all must take these issues into account and do so holistically and within the same framework. That founding documents forged the crucible that is the United States in order to defend freedom, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The implication there is for all entities.

Statistically Weighing Epistemologies

Many erroneously believe there is only a single epsitemology, but in fact there are more than several. They distinguish one another based on what they consider the source of truth. Elegant Reasonism holds the unified Universe as the ultimate arbiter of truth and it statistically weights all other epistemologies relative to that litmus. The question on the philosophical table is supervenience of truths relative to any epistemology, including Elegant Reasonism. Elegant Reasonism is not immune from analysis of itself nor the EIMs it produces. If it can be improved upon humanity will over time, do so.

Newsletter Signup


#ElegantTreasonism #EmergenceModel #Unification #ArtificialIntelligence #AI #Corporation #Person #Human #HumanBeing #CivilRights #SeparationOfPowers #Law #Legislation #ConstitutionalRepublic #ArticleV #ConventionOfStates #COS


By Charles McGowen

Charles C McGowen is a strategic business consultant. He studied Aerospace Engineering at Auburn University '76-'78. IBM hired him early in '79 where he worked until 2003. He is now Chairman & CEO of SolREI, Inc. ORCID: