The reader will only be able to understand the purpose and meaning of this annotation and its relationship to the Natural Social Contract (NSC), if s/he has first read the Introduction section of the NSC and its explanatory and elucidating annotation.
1) It is important to note that the NSC is constructed to make no distinctions even between different kinds of lifeforms, with respect to its Entitlements and Requirements. Any Material Existent that can communicate to Freemen and indicate that s/he Will abide by the Stipulations of the NSC is acceptable as a Freeman until such time as either s/he Terminates The Contract or hir Actions have resulted in a Finding of Breach of the NSC, and thus hir Status has Changed to Ex-Freeman. After trying every way possible of which I could think, I concluded that there is no logically valid manner to classify and to deal with multiple Categories of Existents such that each Category is fully differentiated from the other and each is granted a (different) set of Entitlements appropriate to its Members, except where:
Those Material Existents who have Entitled themselves are the Category of Freemen. The only Category recognized by the NSC, the Members of which are Entitled by individual Freemen, is the Category of Property which Entitles the Material Existent to the protection from other Freemen afforded by being Owned by a Freeman. This Category includes Material Existents with respect to whom its Freeman Owner InterActs in some of the same ways as s/he InterActs with some other Freemen and with respect to such Actions, the Material Existent responds similarly to a Freeman, but which Material Existent, for whatever reasons, does not have the Status of "Freeman" who are generally referred to as dependents, eg. children or some Ex-Freemen. Therefore the NSC defines only 3 mutually exclusive Social Categories (classes) of Existents: Freemen, Existents that are Owned Possessed or Controlled by Freemen, and all other Existents. Members of the first two Categories are also Members of the Freeman Society and are called Social Existents. Existents that are neither Freemen nor Owned, Possessed or Controlled by Freemen (ie. are not Members of the Freeman Society) are those that are currently either UnWanted (and not Owned) or are UnOwnable. However, note again that, as opposed to the definition of a Society, whose Members are all humans, the Freeman Society may contain (as a Freeman Member) any Material Existent that can Execute the NSC, and also contains all Existents Owned, Possessed or Controlled by its Freeman Members. For more details about the initial State of a Material Existent who becomes a Freeman see the annotation: Connection - Initiation of Social Interaction.
2) There is a need at this point to discuss some kinds of Social InterAction that do not involve Entitlements, Requirements, Violations, Restitutions or Breach and can, thus, not be part of the NSC even though these kinds of InterActions are crucial for the success of the NSC in particular and the Freeman Society in general. The Theory of Social Meta-Needs implies that it is of paramount importance to ensure the optimality and self-ordering stability1 of the Freeman Society that all Freemen be completely open and honest with respect to all Information relating to their conduct under the NSC and the conduct of their lives in general. Only such complete openness about Personal Social Characteristics and total rejection of what is currently called personal privacy will enable each Freeman to apply adequate Choice Estimation and discrimination (also called Social Preferencing) to each other Freeman both before and after Initiating a Connection with hir. Such continuous s-Evaluation, by all other Freemen, of how well a given Freeman is adhering to the Social Meta-Needs (ie. s-Evaluation of the State of such adherence) is needed for the Freeman Society (actually any Society would greatly benefit from it) to contain the necessary self-adjusting feedback to cause everyone to alter their behavior so that the Society will function in a manner that will efficiently enable its Members to gain Happiness proportional to the Benefit that they create for themselves and others. (Such produced Benefit is actually the difference in the s-Value of some State after the Actions of the Freeman from what it was before hir Actions.) Gaining Happiness proportional to the Benefits produced by one's Actions is what is often referred to as "justice", although I have intentionally decided to not attempt to clearly define and use that word because its meaning is so contentious and ambiguous in the vernacular language. Such s-Evaluating and preferencing Actions by all, of all, enables and promotes the kinds of Social incentives, rewards, disincentives, ratings and discrimination (weak and individualized forms of ostracism) that constitute the self-ordering feedback necessary to alter behavior. Unfortunately, it is just these kinds of necessary Social Preferencing that are discouraged, thwarted and generally lacking in current Society (because of the penchant of so many for total tolerance and privacy), even though they could easily be accomplished by means of the Internet (prototype for the UCN). It is my contention that if they were encouraged and practiced (as they were more in the past), then even the current Society would become more optimal with respect to the generation of Total Future Happiness for most individuals.
Another way to understand the importance and operation of methods to generate spontaneous Social ordering is by use of the example of fluidity with respect to market Evaluative mechanisms. It is well known that free market Exchanges work best (optimally increase the gain of every participant) when each participant (trader) has the most possible Information available concerning the Attributes of goods and services on which to base hir individual subjective Evaluations of those goods and services and hir Estimations of their chance of increasing hir Total Future Happiness, before making hir buying Actions. For the same reasons and to the same extent, the marketplace of InterPersonal Relationship Exchanges (Decisions concerning with whom to InterAct and the actual InterActions to mutual Benefit with such Freemen) will work best when each participant (trader of Personal Values) has the maximum possible Information available on which to base hir own subjective Evaluations of the worth of the various Attributes of other participants in that Social marketplace, as part of Choosing (making a Decision about) with whom s/he wishes to establish a Relationship and to Exchange Personal Values (ie. to InterAct with), and finally Acts to effect such Exchange. For more reading on these ideas see the essays: Anonymity - Hazard, Not Protection; Limitation, not Enhancement, Personal Characteristics as Market Commodities and Social Preferencing - Evaluation and Choice of Association; A Method for Influence.
In summary, the NSC is only the first part of the practical implementation of the Theory of Social Meta-Needs, with the methods of Social Preferencing being the equally necessary second part which completes the implementation.
3) Although I have attempted to make the definitions within the NSC general enough that they will apply to all cultural notions of what are correct principles of justice in human InterRelationships (so that other Social Contracts could use the same definitions), I am well aware that the members of some very culturally different Societies will require modifications to the Social arrangements that are detailed in the NSC. However, since I am also convinced that the current Agreement (NSC) contains both the minimum and maximum reduction of Freedom below Potential Actions required for an optimal human Society (ie. any fewer or greater Constraints would be detrimental to the operation of the Society), any such modifications to it by humans of any culture will therefore be negative from the point of view of optimally increasing Total Future Happiness for each Executor of any such agreement. While it is possible that some other agreement will create a more optimal Society of humans than the NSC, if I really thought that it would do so, then the NSC would already be it (or if such more optimal modifications are brought forth, then the NSC will be altered accordingly). From this consideration arose the need to Decide how to deal with those humans who have a different view of their own Social Meta-Needs and wish to adhere to different principles of Social order. I have resolved this conflict (in a weak sense of resolve) by defining and using the concept of a Social Contract as being a Valid Contract and thus, by definition, one which cannot Require or even allow any Breach of the NSC, and calling such Contracts Acceptable. Ultimately what my solution means is that Freemen will generally not InterAct with those who are operating under social arrangements that are not Social Contracts (ie. UnAcceptable social arrangements). However, Freemen are most certainly still allowed to individually operate under any such UnAcceptable social arrangement in order to deal with Members of that other Society. In this manner such Freemen can be "go-betweens" for the different cultures. Since in the Freeman Society created by the NSC all useful or desirable and Ownable Material Existents, parcels of Real Estate or sets of Information will be Property Owned by Freemen (after all, there will be no government to Own anything and if UnOwned, Ownable and of Value, it will soon be Owned and possibly Registered) and thus will be Members of the Freeman Society, the NSC contains within it methods for dealing with other social arrangements.
4) Just as with any other Valid Contract, the NSC can be Breached and upon validation of such Breach by a Trial, the Status of the Breaching Freeman will become that of "Ex-Freeman" and s/he will be in the category of an UnOwned Material Existent unless and until some Freeman Acts to make the Ex-Freeman hir Property and perhaps Registers hir (likely using hir already existing Identifying Information). In this manner an Ex-Freeman or other lifeform may become a part of the Freemen Society and gain the advantages of that Classification, even though not capable of being or Entitled to be a Freeman. As Freemen become a large group of humans globally with an even larger amount of intellectual and material assets, such a Change of Status by an individual will ipso facto lead to a major loss of actual Freedom for that individual and, thus, hir ability to optimally increase hir Total Future Happiness. For NSC details of how Freemen are to deal with Ex-Freemen, particularly when they may still have Contracts and InCompleted Restitution with Freemen, see the section of the NSC titled Breach, Arbitration and Termination of The Contract and the annotations to that section.
5) The separation implied by the terms body and mind is purely illusory. The mind is nothing more nor less than a portion of the structure of and Information Represented within the body. All scientific evidence suggests that all the Attributes, Information and potential Processes that are called the mind reside within the brain portion of the body, although not all Attributes, Information and Processes of the brain are part of the mind. The concept of the Person as being the integrated source of all human Action whether from the body or the mind must be fully understood before the requirements of an optimal Society can be correctly analyzed. From this definition of Person, the definitions of Environment2 (a Freeman's Non-Person), Internal Actions, External Actions, Inward Actions, Outward Actions, Personal Characteristics and Personal Social Characteristics follow naturally.
1. For a discussion for Environmental stability see "Social Meta-Needs: A New Basis for
2. For a further discussion of Environment as distinguished from the self see "Social Meta-Needs: A New Basis for Optimal Interaction".