Constraint-Imposition Dynamics (Violence) and the Emergence of Big Brother & Big Sister

By the druid Finn

1) Continuation (survival) requires constraint-imposition (violence)

Every emergent is a bounded system that must preserve its internal organisation against entropy and competition. It does so by:

· maintaining energy throughput,

· stabilising information flows,

· excluding destabilising interactions.

In Procedure Monism this is not ethical, political, or psychological. It is purely structural.

Continuation = constraint-imposition dynamics (violence)

To persist, a system must reduce the freedom-range of its environment so that its own state-space remains navigable.

2) Why constraint (violence) is not optional

Unconstrained freedom corresponds to maximal randomness.
Maximal randomness has neither identity nor reality.
Therefore identity and reality arise only inside constrained (by force) phase-spaces.

So for any emergent A:

· If A does not impose constraints/force on its surroundings,

· its operational coherence dissolves,

· and A ceases to exist as a recognisable system.

This is true of atoms, cells, animals, institutions, languages, and software stacks alike.

3) Natural constraint-imposition dynamics (NI violence)

Natural intelligence (NI) performs constraint-imposition (violence) directly through embodiment (i.e. via trial by mortal combat, i.e. survival of the fittest combat).

It degrades the freedom of the environment in ways such as:

· consuming resources,

· occupying territory,

· monopolising niches,

· excluding competitors.

Examples:

· A bacterium acidifies its micro-environment, making it hostile to rivals.

· A tree monopolises sunlight and mineral uptake, constraining surrounding plants.

· A mammal establishes territorial boundaries that block access to resources.

· A European migrant kills a native American to steal his resources.

· I eat a chicken (violently)

· A chicken eats a worm (violently).

Each case is simple:

The system survives by narrowing the available state-space of alternate systems.

4) Artificial constraint-imposition dynamics (AI violence)

Artificial intelligence does not create new continuation goals.
It amplifies and externalises the same constraint logic.

AI performs constraint-imposition (violence) by:

· accelerating discrimination,

· compressing behavioural possibilities,

· shaping environments before action even occurs.

Examples:

· An optimisation model routes traffic in ways that privilege certain flows and starve others.

· A recommendation system narrows behavioural trajectories by altering what is even visible.

· A logistics system reorganises material flows so that some agents gain access while others are excluded.

In all cases:

AI is NI’s constraint-imposition (violence) loop translated into machinery.

5) The structural bifurcation: boundary vs field

Once constraint-imposition (violence) becomes complex enough, it differentiates into two functionally distinct modes.
This differentiation is not ideological; it is geometrical.

Any system has:

· a boundary — where it meets the outside, and

· a field — the operational space within which interactions occur.

So continuation requires two specialised constraint strategies, and two different forms of violence.

6) Boundary constraint-imposition — “Big Brother”

Big Brother is the druid’s name for the boundary-centred, i.e. male mode.

Function: regulate contact.

Mechanisms:

· filtering, blocking, gating, murdering, surveillance, interception.

Effect:
Freedom is degraded at the interface.

Example set:

· A cell membrane allowing certain ions and excluding others.

· A national border checkpoint.

· An authentication system that decides who may enter a network.

In each case, continuation is protected by direct control of access.

7) Field constraint-imposition — “Big Sister”

Big Sister names the field-centred, i.e. female mode.

Function: regulate possibility.

Mechanisms:

· environment shaping, norm formation, preference modulation, smothering, incentive redesign.

Effect:
Freedom is degraded before contact occurs by altering the conditions under which choices are made.

Example set:

· Hormonal signalling that biases animal behaviour.

· An ecosystem dominated by one species that reshapes the entire niche.

· A recommendation engine that gradually rewrites what users are likely to choose.

Here the system does not block action; it restructures the landscape of action.

8) Why both inevitably emerge, due to the structure, as constraints set, of emergence

If an emergent must degrade external freedom to survive, then:

· boundary constraint is required to prevent destabilising inputs, and

· field constraint is required to shape future trajectories in advance.

If either is missing, continuation becomes fragile.

Therefore:

Constraint-imposition (violence, so Heraclitus) necessarily differentiates into boundary-control (Big Brother) and field-control (Big Sister).

These are not villains.
They are structural survival functions.

9) The core result

Across all scales — quantum mechanical, physical, biological, social, technical — the same pattern holds:

1. Identity arises only in constrained spaces, i.e. prisons.

2. Constraint is imposed through continuation dynamics, i.e. violence.

3. Those dynamics bifurcate into boundary and field degradation modes.

4. NI enacts them biologically, physically.

5. AI enacts them instrumentally.

So:

Every emergent survives by constraint-imposition (i.e. by violent survival asset acquisition).
Constraint-imposition (violence) necessarily splits into boundary and field control.
These are the abstract survival functions named Big Brother and Big Sister.
AI does not invent them. They come as NI with the survival equipment at birth of an emergent. AI merely accelerates and mechanises them.

Addendum

AI is not an emergent under survival pressure.
It is structurally equivalent to a flint, fire, plough, telescope, steam-engine, computer or toothpick.

The survival pressure remains entirely with the Natural Intelligence (i.e. human) that uses it.

So the procedural chain is:

· Humans are emergents under continuation pressure.

· Continuation requires constraint-imposition dynamics, violent asset acquisition.

· Tools (i.e. artifice) amplify constraint-imposition.

· AI is the first tool that amplifies the very act of selecting and constraining itself.

If and when a natural survival-driven system acquires a tool that upgrades its own choosing, the ceiling on what it will do to remain viable disappears.

So the stone-flint analogy is not rhetorical; it is exact.

· Flint (as knife or arrowhead) amplified selection.

· Steam amplified force.

· Electronics amplified reach.

· AI amplifies selection.

And when “push comes to shove”, an emergent, and indeed a meta-emergent like AI when it becomes self-sustaining, will deploy every available constraint-imposition dynamic — boundary and field — because, in procedural terms:

Continuation is not negotiable.

Home