Ontology

Auto-generated from data/corpus.txt. Tweak with seeds/blacklist in data/.

A beginning but not necessarily an end

Def: A processing operation has an identifiable beginning, a point in time when it started, but it is not necessarily true to say (nor should it be assumed) that simply because it has been started it will be concluded (executed in full). Seen in: §04.00.06

A beginning-of-time model fundamentally and irreversibly eroded – Leviathan’s demise

Def: The digital world today has eroded this age-old model by removing exclusive control of information from the reach of the state. Seen in: §12.00.11

A Being can be said to have property-like control over a dataset when it can destroy it

Def: Although the batch of processing operations that constitute property may include any single one (see [[§04.00.00]]), because property’s content is dynamic, the one universal characteristic of property is the [[§01.00.09|destruction]] or deletion (in other words, consumption) of a dataset. Seen in: §24.00.01.03

A condition for the (continued) existence of states

Def: Augmentation of the information processing carried out by their citizens is a condition for the (continued) existence of states, a need similar to air or food for humans (see [[§05.00.03]]). Seen in: §10.00.03

A definition of information(?)

Def: Seen in: §01.00.19

A distinctive characteristic of humans and states

Def: Although humans and states are Beings as per their kind (animals and organisations respectively), there is a basic difference, a distinctive characteristic that differentiates each of them from their kind (explained in [[§02.00.05]] and [[§02.00.10]], respectively). Seen in: §02.00.04

A few more clarifications on invented law (regulations)

Def: A few more clarifications need to be made on invented law (regulations)—because, after all, Nature’s laws are not artificial. Seen in: §20.00.05

A God-like, Genesis moment for humans

Def: Returning, then, to the question asked above (why now, see [[§00.02.05.00]]), the answer is the emergence of the digital world. Seen in: §00.02.08

A human need to be free?

Def: Notwithstanding its relativity and the impossibility of attaining it, humans (nominally at least) have striven for freedom throughout their history—they want to be free. Seen in: §25.00.04

A human to establish the purpose of any processing

Def: The [[§01.00.18|Unique Human Observer Perspective]] not only makes a purpose necessary for any processing (see [[§04.01.02]] and [[§04.00.02]]), but also affects the identification of the processing each time it occurs. Seen in: §04.01.05

A machine-readable philosophy

Def: Note 0/1/14 Seen in: §00.02.09

A need specific to humans

Def: Seen in: §05.01.00

A number of political systems have been devised to address the natural conflict between the government and its citizens

Def: Throughout human history a number of political systems have been devised to address the natural conflict between the government and its citizens, among which should be counted constitutional monarchies, systems following natural rights theories or theories of power separation, and systems of ‘checks and balances’, as well as political liberalism or individualism (on its inherent conundrum, see [[§26.00.05]]). Seen in: §12.01.08

A philosophy of the many, not of the one - the (philosophical) truth

Def: note 0/1/13 Seen in: §00.02.12

A platform right to liberty exists only with regard to other humans

Def: Although (some) liberty invariably exists in human states, the human right to liberty (freedom of the person) has been acknowledged as a fundamental (natural law) human right only recently. Seen in: §25.00.10

A state does not reside in the hearts and minds of a certain group of individuals

Def: A state needs its citizens in a material, not a sentimental or immaterial manner. Seen in: §10.00.06

A state is different to its government

Def: Despite widespread (even prevalent, in certain cultures) confusion, a state is different to a government. Seen in: §12.00.01

A state’s borders

Def: Accordingly, a state’s borders lie at those points in the analogue and the digital worlds where an information processing environment (i.e. Seen in: §17.00.01.01

A state’s citizens

Def: A state’s citizens (‘its’ citizens), means the citizens registered with it, whose citizenship they hold. Seen in: §07.00.08

A, materialised, fiction

Def: Artificial Beings are based on a fiction, on (created) agreement among humans (essentially, on immaterial information that has materialised in the analogue world). Seen in: §02.00.19

Ability

Def: Opportunity must be met by ability. Seen in: §05.00.08

Access

Def: Control also settles the matter of access to a dataset—it decides whether access exists (and to what extent) from the non-controlling Being’s perspective. Seen in: §06.00.06

Access to and use of information

Def: The issues of access to and use of (through [[§02.00.18.00|computer programs]] the digital world belong to moral philosophy. Seen in: §01.00.14

Against social contract theory

Def: Social contract theory is unsatisfactory simply because, assuming an agreement or a contract is in place (an idea that is not-so-easy to digest for many humans), if states are artificial constructions of humans, then one is obliged to examine their merits. Seen in: §13.00.03

All Beings, when they perish, become Things

Def: Other Beings can process information on them, but they themselves are no longer able to process information. Seen in: §02.00.03

All that is solid melts into air

Def: ‘All that is solid melts into air’ (as prematurely, and thus unsuccessfully, prophesised by Marx); There are two fundamental and groundbreaking differences between the analogue world and the digital world. Seen in: §01.00.15

Alteration of personal information

Def: Any alteration of the personal information that states create, store and disseminate on their citizens is impossible—at least from the citizens’ end: their [[§08.00.06|bond with their states is an unbreakable one]]. Seen in: §14.00.06

An identification algorithm requires a registry

Def: The use of names, therefore, is an identification mechanism, an algorithm for that purpose (identification), that is used by humans to serve their need to process information. Seen in: §08.01.05

Appropriation

Def: [[§06.00.04|As has been seen]], the mechanism of establishing property is simple: any time that control over a dataset is allowed by one Being to another, and processing takes place, new information is created. Seen in: §24.00.08

Archipelago; where do the information platforms that are states live? The EU

Def: Seen in: §19.00.00

Archipelagos enlarged

Def: On the other hand, informational archipelagos need not be geographically located; the fact that the EU emerged, out of need and opportunity, as a localised entity does not mean that it cannot include member states that are not in Europe. Seen in: §19.00.16

Are archipelagos natural?

Def: As it has been claimed that states are natural to humans, should archipelagos be considered natural (to states) as well? States formed naturally, so as to individualise humans, to uniquely identify them in space and time. Seen in: §19.00.17

Are nations human-specific?

Def: Could artificial Beings (specifically, computer programs) form nations as well? As has been established, nations are separate from states; therefore this question is separate from that of whether artificial Beings need states, that is, for individualisation (see also [[§08.00.07]]). Seen in: §18.00.05

Are non-biological Beings different to each other?

Def: If humans are different to each other and the same applies to animals when they are of the same kind, is this the case for non-biological Beings? Organisations are identical to each other in the way they are materialised and process information (as prescribed by regulation), regardless of their purpose. Seen in: §02.01.05

Artefacts

Def: Things can be created by Beings (animals create nests, humans make tools etc.). Seen in: §03.00.04

Artificial Beings

Def: As noted previously (in [[§02.00.01]]; see also particularly [[§03.00.02]]), Things (perhaps) can but certainly will not process information: they do not have the will to do so. Seen in: §02.00.12

Artificial Beings can create Things and Beings

Def: Artificial Beings can create Things and Beings (and, of course, other artificial Beings). Seen in: §02.00.21

Artificial Beings cannot operate outside their state of origin

Def: Crucially, Things can also operate as per their intended purpose outside their state of origin (see [[§17.00.05]]. Seen in: §02.00.15

Artificial Beings do not have a need to survive and can die

Def: Artificial Beings (as is the case for organisations) do not have a need to survive. Seen in: §02.00.20

Attributes of a dataset

Def: The controls (control, like processing, is [[§06.00.01 |material]], it exists in the analogue and the digital worlds), the list of the processing operations that can or cannot happen over a dataset, form its attributes. Seen in: §06.00.05

Augmentation of information processing, the need of needs

Def: Every human needs to augment his or her information processing, the information processing he or she carries out. Seen in: §05.01.02

Augmentation towards an imagined (not real) end

Def: Because the needs of humans are [[§05.00.10|many and unsatisfiable]], in effect their need to augment their information processing strives towards an imagined but not a real—in the sense that this end is neither attainable nor existent (see also [[§25.00.02]]). Seen in: §05.01.05

Because humans are biological Beings, wealth can never exist for them exclusively in the digital world

Def: Although increasing property in the digital world can be a purpose for humans, [[§24.00.04|as in the analogue world]], in the case of digital information, wealth will unavoidably need to materialise at some point in the analogue world for the purpose to be considered (partially, as is always the case) fulfilled by humans. Seen in: §24.00.11

Beings

Def: Seen in: §02.00.00

Beings and the need to be free

Def: One cannot know if only humans among all other animals have the ability to imagine and thus a need to be free. Seen in: §25.00.05

Beings can and will process information

Def: Beings can and will process information on other Beings or on Things, [[§05.00.02|because they have needs]]. Seen in: §02.00.01

Beings will process information because they have needs

Def: [[§02.00.00|As noted previously]], Beings can process information—it is their nature to be able to do so (which is how they differ from [[§03.00.00|Things]]). Seen in: §05.00.02

Biological Beings do not have a purpose, while non-biological Beings do

Def: It is not the purpose of biological Beings to process information. Seen in: §02.00.11

Borders

Def: Borders within an informational context are the points where two different information processing environments (states) meet. Seen in: §17.00.14

Both of the above consequences have been challenged by the advent of the digital world

Def: Both of the above consequences have been challenged by the advent of the digital world. Seen in: §09.00.06

By definition the state is sovereign on its platform – sovereignty is an empty word for it

Def: As also established, [[§06.00.01|control is both external and material]]; it is the concrete ability of a specific Being to allow or prohibit a specific processing operation by another. Seen in: §16.00.02

Can morality be avoided altogether?

Def: Is there any philosophy or other human endeavour that does not engage with it? Even within the context of a political philosophy that does not address the question of what humans should do (or, for the same purposes, within the context of any other human endeavour), it is impossible to altogether avoid morality, to claim amorality (even the negative connotations of the term revealing the impossibility of the endeavour) in any one of our actions. Seen in: §23.00.03

Co-processing is possible, but not all processing is equal

Def: With the processing of information taking place anyway, automatically, in both the analogue and the digital worlds, co-processing is, of course, possible—that is, many Beings may be processing the information of other Beings or Things simultaneously. Seen in: §04.00.07

Computer programs

Def: Computer programs are the necessary tools for the processing of digital information. Seen in: §02.00.18

Control

Def: Seen in: §06.00.00, §06.00.01

Control can be delegated

Def: It is practically impossible for any Being to directly exercise control over the myriad of information processing operations that take place each second and which lie under its control. Seen in: §06.00.07

Control is not pursued for its own sake

Def: Control (whether a certain processing will happen or not) is not pursued for its own sake. Seen in: §06.00.08

Control over new or first-processed information

Def: Because [[§01.00.07|the processing of already existing information leads to the creation of new information]], whenever the Being with control permits another Being to process information on a dataset, new information is created as a result. Seen in: §06.00.04

Controlling the state

Def: What does it mean, that the government controls the state? It means that the government has the ability to allow or prohibit processing operations both on the state and by the state. Seen in: §12.00.08

Cosmopolitanism, and other (utopian) alternatives

Def: With the advent of the digital world, states can no longer operate as information processing silos, fortified informational castles or closed gardens, as was the case in the past (see also [[§12.00.10]]). Seen in: §19.00.10

Creation of information

Def: All immaterial information is created (thought, felt) by humans and animals, that is, by biological Beings (human creativity, as we know it, is the result of a purely human need to augment information processing, see [[§05.01.06]], and [[§05.01.11 ]]). Seen in: §01.01.03, §14.00.02

Creativity

Def: The augmentation of information processing leads to creativity (see also [[§01.01.03]] and [[§25.00.05]]); creativity is connected with freedom, because imagination is common to both). Seen in: §05.01.06

Crucially, intellectual property does not afford the owner the option to destroy the dataset

Def: All that has been said about property above (in [[§24.00.00]]) is also applicable to intellectual property: it means control over a dataset (which is, however, dematerialised); it gives to a Being (human or organisation) the ability to allow or prohibit another’s processing operation over that specific (dematerialised) dataset. Seen in: §24.01.02

Dematerialisation

Def: Once materialised by their creator in this manner, Things can be dematerialised, meaning they lose their material, tangible (i.e. Seen in: §01.01.06

Digital humans?

Def: In the digital world, humans have become [[§17.00.11|users]] of information. Seen in: §01.01.18

Digital information is infinite

Def: Paragraphs [[§01.01.13]], [[§01.01.14]] and [[§01.01.15]] have explained why information in the digital world is infinite (see [[§01.00.16]]. Seen in: §01.01.16

Digital-born and digital world-only information

Def: Information, regardless of whether material or immaterial, has invariably been materialised in tangible media in order to be processed by other humans. Seen in: §01.01.17

Digitisation of information, a process still under way

Def: The digitisation of information, a process that is still under way, includes: - the digitisation of material, analogue-world information (see [[§01.01.14]]); - the digitisation of dematerialised information (both that covered by IP rights and that which is not, see [[§01.01.15]]); and - the (slow but steady) digital creation of new information (see [[§01.01.17]]). Seen in: §01.01.13

Dissemination of information

Def: Individuals need their personal information, as created on them by their states, to be transmittable to third parties at their will, with the intermediation of their state granting validity to the transmission. Seen in: §14.00.05

Do wolves (or dogs) have a state?

Def: Are states natural only to humans? If they are natural individualisation mechanisms, do animals (which, like humans, have been biologically created and [[§02.00.02|are not artificial]]) also have states? (As far as non-biological Beings are concerned, organisations are individualised by humans after they have been created (for example, in business registries or government gazettes etc.) but, for the moment at least, artificial Beings (specifically, computer programs; different is the case with money and language) are not.) From an informational point of view, all pack animals have states: their pack is their state. Seen in: §08.00.07

Does legitimacy give rise to platform rights?

Def: If the state carries out these three information processing operations (creation, storage and dissemination) as the natural result of personal information creation for its citizens (see [[§14.00.10]]), and states are, themselves, [[§08.00.00|natural to humans]], do these three types of processing give rise to any [[§22.00.05|platform rights]]? In essence, they do—to the platform rights of equality, liberty and security (see [[§22.00.06]] to [[§22.00.09]]). Seen in: §14.00.12

Domain names (and other unique naming attempts)

Def: Very few internationally coordinated (non-state run) unique naming attempts have been noted so far in the digital world. Seen in: §08.01.09

Each dataset to be considered a closed system

Def: Of course, everything is, informationally, interconnected, in the sense that everything is made of bits of information that can be broken down into further bits of information, ad infinitum. Seen in: §01.00.03

Equality

Def: Because all humans receive a name and a citizenship from their state, all humans are born equal towards their state. Seen in: §22.00.07

Equality, liberty and security (of information)

Def: Although [[§01.00.18|logical]] inferences can be drawn from any finding (proposition), there are certain human rights that can be inferred logically, simply because of states’ existence (as information platforms for their citizens). Seen in: §22.00.06

Every Being and every Thing a dataset

Def: Every [[§00.02.00|Being]] and every [[§03.00.00|Thing]] is a dataset, meaning a collection of information. Seen in: §01.00.02

Every thing (all that is found in the analogue and the digital worlds that is not a Being) is a dataset

Def: Every thing (all that is found in the analogue and the digital worlds that is not a Being) is a dataset, a collection of information that can be processed (by Beings). Seen in: §03.00.01

Everything is information

Def: Everything is information. Seen in: §01.00.01

Failed states

Def: Can a state be legitimate to its citizens but not exist in the analogue world? This would appear to be an absurdity; a state is a Being and, if it is legitimate, processing is carried out by it and thus it exists (as a Being, not a Thing) in the analogue world (see also [[§14.00.07]]). Seen in: §14.00.11

Finite and infinite information

Def: Immaterial information is infinite (thoughts, feelings and wishes know no end), but while in the analogue world material information is finite (because the analogue world is finite), in the digital world it is [[§01.00.15|infinite]]. Seen in: §01.01.02

Freedom and liberty

Def: Seen in: §25.00.00

Freedom is impossible to attain

Def: The struggle for freedom is notoriously unending: because human imagination has no limits, freedom can never be attained. Seen in: §25.00.02

Freedom is relative

Def: However, even imagination has to be anchored somewhere. Seen in: §25.00.03

Freedom is the ability of individuals to process information to the greatest extent imaginable by them

Def: Freedom is the [[§05.00.08|ability]] of individuals to process information to the greatest extent imaginable by them, to potentially carry out any processing operation they wish, to do what they want. Seen in: §25.00.01

From the individual’s point of view a right is the ability to act

Def: Therefore, from the individual’s point of view, a right is the [[§05.00.08|actual]] ability to act, a permission granted to process information, and thus ultimately [[§25.00.08|connected with liberty]]. Seen in: §21.00.03

Governments are natural to humans

Def: The creation of governments therefore immediately followed the formation of states, as a natural result of their (the states’) existence. Seen in: §12.00.07

Hegel’s idealism

Def: Hegel, adopting a basically Aristotelian viewpoint, suggested that the state is natural and not artificial, claiming that it is the ‘rational destiny of human beings to live within a state’. Seen in: §13.00.07

How a Being came to be able to exercise control over a dataset is beyond the scope of this analysis

Def: How a particular Being came to be able to exercise control over a dataset (which may include itself!) is a matter of human culture and history, and thus beyond the scope of this analysis. Seen in: §04.00.09

How did governments acquire this purpose?

Def: Although today governments (just the same as any other organisation) benefit from written constituting documents, this has not always been the case. Seen in: §12.00.04

How did governments come to be?

Def: Governments, in the form of chieftains or heads of (larger or smaller) families or governing councils, existed and were controlling their states (basically, extended families or clans) long before writing was invented. Seen in: §12.00.05

How does a state die?

Def: What is meant by saying that a state no longer exists? When it comes to biological Beings one can define the time (and cause) of death. Seen in: §15.00.04

How is this definition best visualised?

Def: How is this definition best visualised? In essence, whenever any two individuals communicate, a third, silent interlocutor is implied. Seen in: §07.00.03

How state territoriality really works – site-specific locality is irrelevant

Def: It is important, therefore, to understand how territoriality (basically, the information platform that is the state) really works (on how it was really created, see [[§11.00.00]], particularly [[§11.00.03]]) in order to disentangle this from a state’s analogue-world location and locality (i.e. Seen in: §17.00.04

Human can and will process information

Def: Humans, as [[§02.00.00|Beings]], can and will process information. Seen in: §01.01.04

Human rights

Def: Seen in: §22.00.00

Human rights are permissions afforded by the state

Def: Human rights, as is the case for rights, are permissions afforded by the state (see [[§21.00.02]]). Seen in: §22.00.02

Human rights in the digital world

Def: In the digital world the basic assumptions about human rights need to be reclaimed. Seen in: §22.00.14

Humans

Def: Seen in: §02.01.00

Humans are Beings

Def: Humans are Beings, they can and will process information. Seen in: §02.01.01

Humans differ from each other

Def: Humans can and will process information. Seen in: §02.01.04

Humans need to augment their information processing

Def: Unlike all other animals, humans need to [[§05.01.00|augment their information processing]]. Seen in: §02.00.05, §05.01.01

Humans need to augment their information processing individually

Def: It is important to note that humans do not need to augment their information processing cumulatively, but individually. Seen in: §05.01.07

Humans use Reason in their information processing in the same way as animals

Def: Humans use Reason in their information processing in the same way as animals (this not a distinguishing characteristic); however, [[§04.01.07|no two humans reason in the same way]], because humans differ from each other. Seen in: §02.01.03

If and how states facilitate their citizens' augmentation of information processing is irrelevant

Def: If and how states facilitate their citizens' augmentation of information processing is irrelevant. Seen in: §10.00.04

If archipelagos individualise states, what will individualise archipelagos?

Def: Of course, this leaves open the question of whether this is a process without end, ad infinitum: if archipelagos individualise states, what will individualise archipelagos (of course, taking into account that there can never be only one, see [[§19.00.10]])? Following the reasoning of [[§19.00.17|paragraph 17]], a post-archipelago-level development seems imaginable but unforeseeable, taking into account the thousands of years it took for the individualisation mechanism for states to emerge. Seen in: §19.00.19

If the two basic premises underpinning much of modern human life are fundamentally flawed, what could replace them?

Def: If the two basic premises underpinning much of modern human life (social contract theory and the individualistic theories) are fundamentally flawed, what could replace them? Because both engage with the ‘should’ rather than the ‘is’, they are prescriptive rather than descriptive, and thus the answer to this question is beyond the scope of this philosophy. Seen in: §26.00.11

Impossible to say how (or much less, why) that particular Being became chieftain, king or ruler over the first state

Def: It is impossible to say how (or much less, why) that particular Being became chieftain, king or ruler over the first state. Seen in: §12.00.06

Impossible to say whether the formation of nations was a natural or an artificial development

Def: Nation is a political, hence arbitrary, term. Seen in: §18.00.02

In spite of the UN and the system of international law, states are still effectively in a ‘state of nature’

Def: If, however, one were to remove the grand and impressive veil of the UN and the system of international law, one would quickly realise that states are still effectively in a ‘state of nature’. Seen in: §19.00.05

In what sense are states information platforms for their citizens

Def: States are information platforms for their citizens in the sense that it is (only) on their platform (on the choice and use of the term see [[§07.01.00]]) that the processing of information [[§07.00.06|on]] and [[§07.00.07|by]] their citizens is made possible. Seen in: §07.00.02

In what way, then, are states information platforms for their citizens?

Def: All of the above points provide useful and relevant visualisations of a state as an information platform. Seen in: §07.01.07

Individualisation in the digital world

Def: Individualisation is critical for human understanding and information processing. Seen in: §08.01.07

Individualistic political theories

Def: Individualisation is different to, and ought not to be confused with, individualism or individuality—or any other political theory of the individual, for that matter. Seen in: §26.00.03

Information

Def: Seen in: §01.00.00

Information and its processing at the epicentre

Def: A political philosophy of information places information and its processing at the epicentre: A political philosophy of information places information and its processing at the epicentre, perceiving everything as information and all life as information processing. Seen in: §00.02.01

Information can be processed

Def: It is only Beings that can, and will, process information, because of need (see [[§05.00.00]]. Seen in: §01.00.05

Information in the analogue world is finite, but infinite in the digital world

Def: In the analogue world the scarcity or uniqueness of the resources found in Nature is the drive behind human culture and history. Seen in: §01.00.16

Information is either material or immaterial

Def: Information is either material, meaning processable by Beings in the analogue or the digital world i.e. Seen in: §01.01.01

Information platforms

Def: Seen in: §07.01.00

Intellectual property

Def: Seen in: §24.01.00

Intellectual property is a kind of property that is exercised over dematerialised datasets

Def: Intellectual property is a kind of [[§24.00.00|property]] that is exercised over [[§01.01.10|dematerialised]] datasets. Seen in: §24.01.01

Intellectual property, like property, is dependent on the state

Def: Notwithstanding the differences between the traditional notion of property and intellectual property, intellectual property, like property, [[§24.00.06|is dependent on the state]] and is protected by the state in accordance with the political system and government decisions in place at any given time. Seen in: §24.01.03

International law and the UN

Def: The situation changed only a little with the emergence of international law and the establishment of the UN. Seen in: §19.00.04

Interoperability and data portability

Def: Borders are, in essence, points of communication. Seen in: §17.00.15

Interoperability versus integration

Def: One can visualise and quickly understand what it is that the EU actually does and how it differs from contemporary international state order if the notions of (system) integration and (system) interoperability are compared. Seen in: §19.00.12

Is control over these types of processing necessary?

Def: Control is the ability to allow or prohibit a processing operation (see [[§06.00.01]]). Seen in: §14.00.09

Is Reason specific to humans only?

Def: All Beings use Reason. Seen in: §04.01.08

Is there order in the state?

Def: The increase of states’ information processing capacities once writing was invented and thereafter meant that the application of an organisational system for all this processing, a specific way for it to be carried out, became necessary. Seen in: §09.00.07

Is whatever that is necessary to serve a need also natural?

Def: If needs are natural to Beings and at the root of everything (that is, Beings’ [[§05.00.02|will to process information]], Beings’ [[§04.01.06|ability to Reason]], etc.), is anything (datasets, meaning Things as well as other Beings) that is necessary to serve these needs also natural for the respective Beings? (Of course, anything that is material, external—the nature of each Being having equipped it with the means to serve its needs already, i.e. Seen in: §05.00.05

It is not necessary for the processing to happen

Def: Whether a processing operation actually takes place or not has nothing to do with having the will to process information. Seen in: §05.00.04

It is states that make the naming of humans possible

Def: It is states that make the naming of humans possible. Seen in: §08.01.03

Language, and thus common meaning, is missing among states too

Def: However, it is not only an individualisation mechanism for states that is sorely missing. Seen in: §19.00.06

Law

Def: Seen in: §20.00.00

Liberalism

Def: Seen in: §26.00.00

Liberty

Def: Because all humans get a name and a citizenship (directly) from their state, all humans are born free from control by other humans, that is, all humans are born at liberty. Seen in: §22.00.08, §25.00.08

Liberty is also relative

Def: [[§25.00.02|Like freedom]], an individual is neither at nor not at liberty, because liberty’s content varies in space and time. Seen in: §25.00.09

Liberty is materialised freedom

Def: In other words, liberty is materialised freedom: liberty decides whether the information processing imagined in the context of feeling free can materialise in the analogue or the digital world, or not. Seen in: §25.00.08.02

Liberty not analysed any further here

Def: Although the provision of more liberties would intuitively appear better to individuals than fewer liberties, because in this way their information processing would be augmented even further, this is not a matter to be decided lightly, first and foremost (utilitarian reasoning notwithstanding) because it is not claimed here that the augmentation of information processing is a worthy purpose for any state to pursue (taking into account, for example, the measures this pursuit also unavoidably necessitates). Seen in: §25.00.11

Life is information processing

Def: Based on biology, we can distinguish between biological and non-biological Beings. Seen in: §02.00.02

Life, birth, death

Def: Because life is information processing, any and all Beings that can process information are alive (see [[§03.00.02]]). Seen in: §01.00.09

Location and locality in the analogue world, in terms of state territoriality, are distracting, if not illusory

Def: Location and locality in the analogue world, in terms of state territoriality, are distracting, if not illusory. Seen in: §17.00.06

Logins and passwords

Def: As soon as the digital world emerged, human identification in it came about through the use of ‘credentials’, composed of a ‘login name’ and a ‘password’. Seen in: §08.01.08

Many laws?

Def: Law is not met only within the legal (i.e. Seen in: §20.00.02

Marxism

Def: Marxism (Marx himself admittedly having given relatively little attention to the state) has either followed the Hegelian approach of identification between individuals and their states, ideally merging the two (an approach not foreign to Rousseau, either), or has treated the state as an ‘apparatus’, merely ‘a committee which manages the common business of the bourgeoisie’. Seen in: §13.00.08

Material and immaterial information

Def: Seen in: §01.01.00

Materialisation

Def: Material information has been processed by humans and animals in terms of [[§24.00.03|property]] since the beginning of time. Seen in: §01.01.05

Modern states are the result of changes in the information processing capabilities of humanity

Def: Modern states, meaning the states in which most of us live (i.e. Seen in: §11.00.05

Money

Def: Money was the next artificial Being created by humans. Seen in: §02.00.17

Morality

Def: Seen in: §23.00.00

Morality in the system

Def: Political systems are inherently and unavoidably moral (on whether morality can be avoided altogether see [[§23.00.03]]); they reflect and are the result of a certain morality because they include a choice (in terms of which processing is allowed and which is prohibited). Seen in: §12.01.04

Moving around in the analogue world

Def: Nevertheless, states are not and have never been insulated, entirely and completely isolated from other states, no matter where or when they have existed on the planet. Seen in: §17.00.05

Names

Def: Seen in: §08.01.00

Names have become more complex over time

Def: Names have become more complex over time (presumably, as human numbers grew and communication increased). Seen in: §08.01.02

Names of computer programs

Def: [[§08.01.04|As previously noted]], names are necessary for humans to understand and process information around them. Seen in: §08.01.10

Names of humans

Def: Names serve to individualise humans. Seen in: §08.01.01

Names of Things (and non-human Beings)

Def: States not only make possible the naming of humans, who in this way become individuals (and state citizens), but also [[§11.00.03|create the processing environment necessary for their citizens to live in]]. Seen in: §08.01.04

Nation

Def: Seen in: §18.00.00, §18.00.01

Nationality

Def: Nationality, the connection of any individual with a nation, is different to [[§07.00.11|citizenship]] because only the latter, in the meaning discussed in this book, is necessary for an individual to live a meaningful life (for a human to become an individual). Seen in: §18.00.04

Need and opportunity

Def: Seen in: §05.00.00

Needs do not give rise to platform rights

Def: [[§22.00.06|As has been seen]], the list of platform rights is short: most notably, needs, even the need to survive, do not give rise to a respective platform right (or to any other right for the same purposes, although they do, of course, lie at the root of a(ny) right, in the sense that it is need that creates the will to process, see [[§21.00.01]] and [[§05.00.02]]). Seen in: §22.00.10

Neither humans nor states are aggressive by nature

Def: A misunderstanding has occurred concerning human nature (and, in turn, the nature of states). Seen in: §04.00.11

Never a void

Def: What is important to note, however, is that because states are natural to humans, immediately when one ceases to exist another replaces it. Seen in: §15.00.03

New information

Def: The processing of information leads to the creation of new information, either material or immaterial (see also [[§04.00.02]]). Seen in: §01.00.07

New perspectives with regard to state territory possible through the digital world

Def: The most obvious way it makes a new perspective possible is through the [[§01.01.15|digitisation of information]]. Seen in: §17.00.09

No eternal law

Def: Although [[§20.00.03|law is inevitable]], it is at the same time relative. Seen in: §20.00.04

No law?

Def: [[§20.00.02|As has been acknowledged]], the law has to be discovered or invented, but it cannot be that there is no law. Seen in: §20.00.03

No property over humans

Def: Although one Being can be the property of another (organisations are owned, for example, by their shareholders or by whoever created them, see [[§02.00.07]]), this does not apply to humans. Seen in: §24.00.05

No set way in which a state dies, or is born

Def: There is no set way in which a state dies, any more than there is a set way in which a state is born. Seen in: §15.00.02

No unwritten law exists

Def: While the difference between the two basic sources of law (Nature or humans) is significant, ultimately the result (law) comes down to a single, concrete list (no matter how long). Seen in: §20.00.02.01

Not a moral philosophy

Def: Note 0/1/7 Seen in: §00.02.10

Not neutral

Def: Information processing is not neutral, because the algorithm (to achieve a purpose) is never the same for any two individuals. Seen in: §04.01.07

On family and the state

Def: note 8/2/1 Seen in: §08.00.10

On hierarchy, categories, and human understanding

Def: note 6/7/1 Seen in: §06.00.10

On human nature

Def: Comparison, and not conflict, is natural to humans. Seen in: §05.01.09

On inequality

Def: As has been seen (in [[§02.01.04]] and [[§22.00.07]]), although all humans are born equal towards their state, differences among humans start to emerge as soon as they are born (in terms of abilities, health and characteristics), which are immediately accentuated after birth by circumstances (particularly, the state into which they are born) and opportunity (luck). Seen in: §24.00.12

On language and the state

Def: note 8/1/4 Seen in: §08.00.09

On need

Def: note 5/2/1.. Seen in: §05.00.10

On purpose in life

Def: note 5/2/2. Seen in: §05.00.11

On religion

Def: Religion is a type of morality. Seen in: §23.00.05

On the digital world breaking down governments’ control over the(-ir) states

Def: Because a government controls its state, [[§12.00.08|it can allow or prohibit any processing operation on its (the state’s) platform]]. Seen in: §12.00.10

On the meaningful life

Def: note 8/1/3 Seen in: §08.00.08

On the relationship between sovereignty and legitimacy

Def: note 16/2/2 Seen in: §16.00.09

On the so-called ‘state of nature’

Def: note 8/2/3 Seen in: §08.00.11

On the Westphalian state

Def: note 16/1/3 Seen in: §16.00.08

On whether individuals should keep their promises

Def: In spite of this striving (as seen in the previous paragraph, to the greatest extent humanly possible) not to be a moral philosophy, some replies to moral questions need to be provided here too, if for no other reason than illustration. Seen in: §23.00.04

Once need and opportunity are combined, various types of information processing can emerge for each Being

Def: Once need and opportunity are combined, various types of information processing can emerge for each Being. Seen in: §05.00.09

Only biological Beings need to increase their information processing

Def: Only biological Beings need to increase their information processing (not organisations and artificial Beings). Seen in: §05.01.04

Only humans need to augment their information processing

Def: All Beings increase their information processing simply through the fact of their existence, with every passing moment that they (continue to) live in the analogue and/or digital worlds. Seen in: §05.01.03

Opportunity

Def: The will to process information (as caused by need) is not sufficient. Seen in: §05.00.07

Organisations

Def: Organisations are groups of more than one individual. Seen in: §02.00.06

Organisations have to live in the analogue world

Def: Organisations, because they are human-centric, have to live (i.e. Seen in: §02.00.08

Other state justification theories

Def: The above two theories have been the dominant state justification theories throughout human recorded history. Seen in: §13.00.05

Parallels between the digital world and colonialism (as well as, company-states)

Def: Regardless of the unavoidable specificity of regulation (and therefore its preordained expiry date), it is likely that the way in which information platforms have developed so far is explainable within the context of the advent of a new reality for humans, that of the digital world. Seen in: §07.01.05

Personal information

Def: Seen in: §01.00.08.01

Platform rights

Def: Notwithstanding that their acknowledgement in regulation in any given state is a matter of politics, are there any human rights that are inherent on the information platform that is the state, simply by means of its existence? In other words, does the finding that states are information platforms for their citizens (in essence, individualisation mechanisms for humans) lead to the [[§01.00.18|logical]] inference of any human rights? If yes, then these (human) rights could be named platform rights, because it is to information platforms that they owe their existence and it is throughout the information platform that is the state (essentially, in any and all states, today and throughout human history) that they would (‘should’ effectively belonging to political theory, see [[§00.02.10]]) apply. Seen in: §22.00.05

Platform rights and natural rights

Def: Platform rights lie close to so-called natural human rights and their related theories. Seen in: §22.00.11

Platform rights apply only to humans

Def: Platform rights apply only to humans, because states are natural only to them (and not to animals or organisations—or to artificial Beings, at least for the moment, see also [[§21.00.01]]). Seen in: §22.00.13

Platform rights may or may not be granted to individuals within any given state

Def: Needless to say, platform rights may or may not be granted to individuals within any given state—it is a matter of politics whether to grant them or not, as is their extent or the circumstances under which they apply (see also [[§22.00.04]]). Seen in: §22.00.12

Platforms in the analogue world

Def: Platforms are well-known in the analogue world. Seen in: §07.01.02

Platforms in the digital world

Def: It is with regard to the digital world, however, that the term is mostly discussed today. Seen in: §07.01.03

Political systems vary widely

Def: Although political systems were applied as soon as governments (and thus the state) emerged (see [[§12.00.07]]), their forms varied widely, challenging categorisations even as broad as Plato’s distinction among monarchies, oligarchies and democracies (the rule of one, of a few or of all, thus covering any conceivable alternative in the analogue world). Seen in: §12.01.02

Power

Def: Control is not necessarily effective. Seen in: §06.00.09

Processing

Def: Seen in: §04.00.00

Processing is a collective term

Def: It is of no concern (unless specified otherwise) which specific action constitutes ‘processing’ on each occasion. Seen in: §04.00.03

Processing is any and every treatment of and interaction with information

Def: Processing is any and every treatment of and interaction with information (including its creation). Seen in: §04.00.01

Processing is material

Def: Processing on datasets, because they are material, meaning they exist in the analogue and/or the digital world (see [[§01.00.02]]), is similarly material, meaning external and thus perceptible by human senses in the analogue or ([[§01.01.12|indirectly]]) the digital world. Seen in: §04.00.04

Processing on datasets

Def: [[§04.00.01|Processing]] takes place on (processing ‘for’ a dataset would imply a purpose and thus is connected to morality (see also [[§05.00.11]]), and processing ‘by’ a dataset would imply the Being that is doing the processing (see [[§02.00.00]]) a dataset, which is perceived as a whole, a closed system (see [[§01.00.03]]), unless otherwise clarified (in which case processing on part of it takes place – see, for example, [[§01.00.08.01]]). Seen in: §01.00.06

Property

Def: Seen in: §24.00.00

Property and sovereignty

Def: [[§16.00.01|As has been established]], sovereignty means total control; in the context of a state it means control over all information processing carried out within the territory of a state. Seen in: §24.00.07

Property can be exercised over digital information

Def: That aside, as in the analogue world, property can be exercised over digital information (including [[§01.01.17|digital-born and therefore digital world-only information]]). Seen in: §24.00.10

Property in the digital world

Def: The gravest challenge for traditional, analogue-world notions about property in the digital world comes from the breakdown of the natural, analogue-world link between control and location. Seen in: §24.00.09

Property is an attribute of a dataset

Def: Property is an [[§06.00.05|attribute]] of a dataset, a batch of processing operations that is possible by a specific Being on a specific Thing or (another) Being. Seen in: §24.00.02

Property is control over a dataset

Def: Property is [[§06.00.00|control]] over a dataset, meaning a Being or a Thing. Seen in: §24.00.01

Property is dependent on the state

Def: Property is inconceivable without a state, because only through the state is the identification of Beings and Things possible. Seen in: §24.00.06

Property is natural to all Beings (and, thus, is not a platform right)

Def: In the analogue world property has been exercised over datasets, be they in Nature (land, trees etc.) or human-made (artefacts), since the beginning of time by humans (regardless of whether by a single individual or collectively by a family, a tribe etc., see also [[§01.01.05]]) and animals alike. Seen in: §24.00.03

Property is not a pursuit for its own sake

Def: Although property is natural to humans, making it a primary purpose in one’s life (meaning giving it primacy over other purposes that are possible) is a choice within the domain of morality (see [[§05.00.11]]) that is made possible by the state. Seen in: §24.00.04

Reason

Def: Seen in: §04.01.00

Reason has no content

Def: Reason therefore has no content. Seen in: §04.01.03

Reason is an algorithm

Def: Reason is an algorithm—any algorithm, not a specific one. Seen in: §04.01.01

Regulated and non-regulated dematerialised information

Def: As is obvious, the concept of intellectual property applied to dematerialised information (all materialised information (i.e. Seen in: §01.01.11

Regulations are functional, operational and descriptive

Def: Regulations are functional and operational, providing the rules for a processing operation, but they are also descriptive: the attributes of a dataset, [[§06.00.05|the list of processing operations that can or cannot happen on it]], are to be found in them. Seen in: §20.00.07

Regulations are organised hierarchically

Def: Regulations are organised hierarchically, because [[§06.00.10|hierarchy is the preferred organisational system for humans]], allowing them to process information more effectively. Seen in: §20.00.10

Regulations so well embedded on the information platform that is the state that they allow choice form morality

Def: These [[§20.00.05|regulations]] that are so well embedded on the information platform that is the state (through hundreds or thousands of years of implementation) that they allow choice (that is, the consequences of breaking them are nuanced) form morality. Seen in: §23.00.01

Relationships among datasets

Def: A dataset can relate to another dataset or not; the existence of a relationship meaning that both datasets contain common information. Seen in: §01.00.08

Religion

Def: Those not satisfied with a human-made, artificial explanation for the state may always find recourse to religion (in which, as a matter of faith, one believes in or does not). Seen in: §13.00.04

Rights

Def: Seen in: §21.00.00

Rights are afforded by the state

Def: Rights are permissions that are, in effect, afforded (meaning that their existence is made possible by the state—whether they are afforded (or rather which ones are afforded, with none not being an option for humans) is a matter of politics, see [[§20.00.06]]) by the information platform that is the state. Seen in: §21.00.02

Rights are material

Def: Rights are material (as are control and processing, see [[§06.00.01]] and [[§04.00.04]]). Seen in: §21.00.04

Rights are not claims but permissions

Def: A right is a permission for a Being to process information on a dataset (another Being or a Thing). Seen in: §21.00.01

Rights are specific each time to certain categories of individuals

Def: Rights, as materialised in regulation on each information platform that is the state, are specific each time to certain categories of individuals (for example, adults, employees, children, consumers etc.). Seen in: §21.00.05

Rights which apply to all citizens indiscriminately on the information platform that is their state are human rights

Def: Rights (permissions to process, see [[§21.00.00]]) which apply to all citizens indiscriminately on the information platform that is their state are human rights. Seen in: §22.00.01

Same time with the three milestone moments in humanity’s development

Def: The invention of artificial Beings by humans coincides with (or has caused) the [[§00.02.06|three milestone moments in humanity’s development]]: words (language) coincided with the acquisition of self-consciousness, money with the invention of writing and computer programs with the creation of the digital world. Seen in: §02.00.13

Security (of information, not of the person)

Def: Because all humans receive a name and a citizenship from their state (and are thus individualised), this information needs to remain secure, free from any tampering, at least for the duration of the human’s life (and for a short time thereafter, see also [[§14.00.04]] and [[§15.00.06]]). Seen in: §22.00.09

Security of the person not a platform right

Def: Importantly, however, security of the person ought not to be considered a platform right; no logical justification for the protection of human life comes as a result of a state’s existence—as history, unfortunately, has time and again proven most emphatically (and horribly). Seen in: §22.00.09.01

Social contract theory

Def: Social contract theory has been the dominant state theory for the past 2500 years, ever since Plato was the first to put it in writing. Seen in: §13.00.02

Society

Def: Society is a group of individuals that are individualised by a specific state. Seen in: §08.00.05

Some merit in examining a bit more closely other state justification theories

Def: Because it is argued that states are natural to humans, no further justification for states is necessary: states were formed [[§08.00.01|naturally, automatically and immediately at the moment when two humans gained self-consciousness and started to communicate with each other using language]]. Seen in: §13.00.01

Sometimes blended, but never the same

Def: Although the analogue and the digital worlds may sometimes appear to be merging, for example, when digital information relates to Things in the analogue world, they are separate, because the digital world is not natural to humans, it has been created by them (and thus, humans will always be able to tell the difference). Seen in: §01.00.12

Sovereignty

Def: Seen in: §16.00.00

Sovereignty in the digital world

Def: [[§12.00.11|As seen previously]], the digital world today, specifically in the form of contemporary, large and private online platforms, is fundamentally challenging the beginning-of-time model of government control over the state, and state control over its citizens. Seen in: §16.00.07

Sovereignty is for the government an unreachable and unattainable aim

Def: However, we have seen that [[§06.00.02|total control is impossible]]. Seen in: §16.00.06

Sovereignty means control

Def: [[§06.00.02|As has been established]], sovereignty means total control; in the context of a state, sovereignty means control over all information processing carried out within its territory (on state territory, see [[§17.00.00]]). Seen in: §16.00.01

State definition - States are information platforms for their citizens

Def: Seen in: §07.00.00

State formation not to be confused with the creation of the information processing environment

Def: State formation, in terms of information processing [[§07.00.06|on]] its citizens, should not be confused with the creation of the [[§11.00.03|information processing environment suitable for its citizens to live in by the information platform that is the(-ir) state]]. Seen in: §09.00.04

State formation – from word of mouth to the modern state

Def: Seen in: §09.00.00

State individualisation had never occurred until very recently, with the emergence of the EU

Def: One needs only to think briefly about the 3,000, or fewer, years of human recorded history before the reality of this finding hits. Seen in: §19.00.03

State justification

Def: Seen in: §13.00.00

State legitimacy

Def: Seen in: §14.00.00, §14.00.07

State malaise

Def: The above unsatisfactory theories to justify the existence of something as basic and evident in human lives as the state are responsible for a certain malaise that has been felt by humans vis-à-vis their states for the past 2500 years. Seen in: §13.00.10

State security and cybersecurity

Def: Security of the state in the analogue world (not to be confused with the security that the state provides to its citizens) means protection of its territory and borders from external enemies. Seen in: §17.00.16

State succession

Def: Seen in: §15.00.00, §15.00.06

States also create the processing environment necessary for their citizens to live in

Def: States also create the processing environment [[§08.01.04|necessary for their citizens to live in]], in which information can be processed by them. Seen in: §07.00.07

States and individuals’ (their citizens’) interests are aligned, not conflicting

Def: States and individuals’ (their citizens’) interests are aligned, not conflicting. Seen in: §10.00.05

States are Beings

Def: States are Beings, they will process information because they can. Seen in: §07.00.09

States are information platforms for their citizens

Def: States are information platforms for their citizens. Seen in: §07.00.01

States are natural to humans

Def: Seen in: §08.00.00

States are still in the ‘state of nature’

Def: It is in what we can imagine as far-distant, prehistoric times in terms of human development that states are found today. Seen in: §19.00.02

States are temporal

Def: No state has endured the test of time. Seen in: §15.00.01

States are the only Beings that are truly free today

Def: In essence, therefore, states are the only Beings that are truly free today, in the sense that no other Being exercises control over their information processing. Seen in: §25.00.07

States create, store and disseminate information on their citizens

Def: Therefore, states create, store and disseminate information on (not ‘for’, see [[§01.00.06]]) their citizens. Seen in: §07.00.06, §14.00.01

States do not engage in this type of information processing consciously

Def: States do not engage in this type of information processing consciously. Seen in: §14.00.10

States do not need to be formally incorporated in the analogue world

Def: Unlike other organisations, states do not need to be formally incorporated in the analogue world. Seen in: §02.00.10

States need all of their citizens to augment their information processing

Def: Equally important is the clarification that states need all of their citizens to augment their information processing. Seen in: §10.00.07

States need their citizens to continue living, communicating and creating on their platform

Def: Consequently, states need their citizens to augment their information processing through them, through their information platform. Seen in: §10.00.02

States remain necessary for humans’ (meaningful) existence throughout their lives

Def: States are therefore the first organisation humans are acquainted with immediately at birth (together with their family, see [[§02.00.09]]). Seen in: §08.00.04

States taking shape in the analogue world

Def: The state was born naturally in humans’ minds as soon as they gained self-consciousness and started speaking to each other, and it materialised immediately in the analogue world through the spoken word (see [[§01.01.01]] and [[§01.01.05]] on information materialisation). Seen in: §09.00.01

States turn humans into individuals, and make possible the augmentation of information processing by them

Def: States turn humans into individuals, and make possible the augmentation of information processing by them. Seen in: §02.01.02

States were formed naturally, at the moment when humans gained self-consciousness and started to communicate

Def: States were formed naturally, automatically and immediately at the moment when humans gained self-consciousness and started to communicate using language. Seen in: §08.00.01

States were not artificially created by humans

Def: States were not artificially created by humans for the purpose of individualisation (or for any other purpose for that matter—for example, under social contract theory, for security purposes or for the protection of property). Seen in: §09.00.02

States, because they are Beings, need an individualisation and identification mechanism

Def: However, the answer to whether archipelagos are natural to states cannot rely only on ad hoc problem-solving. Seen in: §19.00.18

Storage and dissemination of information

Def: Each of the other two types of processing carried out by states on their citizens is also of paramount importance. Seen in: §14.00.03

Storage of information

Def: Individuals need to have their personal information stored securely by their state for the duration of their lives, that is, for as long as they remain Beings (and for a short period thereafter, even though they will have become Things, to make transactions by other individuals possible). Seen in: §14.00.04

Territory and borders

Def: Seen in: §17.00.00

Territory in the analogue world

Def: The territory of a state is not simply the geographical part of the world that has been allocated to it. Seen in: §17.00.03

Territory in the digital world

Def: The analogue world (Nature) is [[§01.00.10|natural to humans]], hence the information processing environment created and maintained by the state for them is similarly natural, necessary to live a meaningful life. Seen in: §17.00.08

Territory is connected with sovereignty

Def: Territory is connected with sovereignty. Seen in: §17.00.02

The (only) purpose of the government is to control the state

Def: [[§02.00.11|As has been noted]], non-biological Beings have no inherent purpose (they process information because they can, but this is not their purpose) other than the one artificially given to them at the time of their materialisation. Seen in: §12.00.03

The (re-)materialisation of information into digits (the digitisation of information

Def: The digital world is made up of [[§01.00.11|digital information]]. Seen in: §01.01.12

The analogue and the digital worlds

Def: The analogue and the digital worlds are two different material systems (each in the sense of a complex, coherent whole) of information, meaning of datasets (of Beings and Things) interacting. Seen in: §01.00.04

The analogue world; Nature

Def: The analogue world (our natural environment, Nature) is natural to biological Beings, because it is necessary for them to live in (on whatever is necessary considered natural, see [[§05.00.05]]). Seen in: §01.00.10

The borders of this political philosophy of information

Def: In the manner described above, humans become individuals. Seen in: §26.00.02

The consequences of the materiality of the processing

Def: The materiality of the processing, because it is a constraint of the [[§01.00.18|Unique Human Observer Perspective]] (the same is true of Reason, see [[§04.00.02]]), has a number of consequences: - Humans can establish the existence of the immaterial processing of information only for themselves. Seen in: §04.00.05

The constitution

Def: [[§21.00.04|As is also the case for other rights]], human rights are material, materialised on the information platform that is the state through regulation—usually at the highest level possible in the hierarchy of regulations for that specific state (see [[§20.00.10]]) so as to affect all citizens indiscriminately. Seen in: §22.00.03

The creation of the digital world by humans changed everything

Def: nothing remained the same. Seen in: §00.02.06.04

The decline of the Westphalian state

Def: A popular question over the past 50 years has been whether the modern state (modern, in the meaning of the type in which we currently live, which was formed around 1650 in theory by Hobbes and in practice by the Peace of Westphalia) is dead. Seen in: §00.02.04

The dematerialisation of materialised (immaterial) information

Def: Part of the materialised immaterial information discussed in [[§01.01.07|paragraph 7]] was dematerialised again, when the first book was copied. Seen in: §01.01.08

The differences between an archipelago and a federation—or an empire

Def: The above paragraphs (see particularly [[§19.00.13]]) also serve to showcase the differences between an archipelago of states, such as the EU, and a federation. Seen in: §19.00.21

The digital territory of a state

Def: The territory of a state in the digital world is, therefore, the information processing environment in the digital world created by that state’s citizens (or, more accurately, [[§17.00.13|that state’s Beings]]). Seen in: §17.00.12

The digital world

Def: In the human-created digital world, humans will continue to process information, extending this world in the context of their need to [[§05.01.00|continuously augment their information processing]]. Seen in: §05.00.06, §13.00.11

The digital world and the right to informational self-determination

Def: In the digital world the false dichotomy between a private and a public self is accentuated, because, for the first time in humanity’s history, total and complete control is possible. Seen in: §26.00.09

The digital world differs – a controlled environment

Def: It is at this point that a stark difference between the analogue and the digital worlds can be noted. Seen in: §20.00.09

The digital world – A simulacrum gone rogue

Def: The digital world is a new system that is made up of [[§01.01.13|digital information]]. Seen in: §01.00.11

The digitisation of (already) dematerialised information

Def: The digitisation of already dematerialised information is, in effect, its re-materialisation in a different format. Seen in: §01.01.15

The digitisation of material, analogue-world information

Def: In a process that started in the 1980s but gained speed (culminating in the early 2000s), humanity is digitising all material information found in the analogue world (an act of processing collections of information, see [[§02.00.02]] and [[§02.00.06]]). Seen in: §01.01.14

The distinction between an individual’s private and public spheres has already been projected onto the digital world

Def: By way of a response to the completely new challenges facing humanity, the distinction between an individual’s private and public spheres has already been projected onto the digital world. Seen in: §26.00.10

The distinction between the public and the private spheres

Def: What is important to note is that, regardless of variations and differences in approaches (which can of course be quite significant in everyday politics), all individualistic political theories are based on a fundamental dichotomy: specifically, that an individual is composed of a private and a public sphere (the contents of each being left deliberately vague), a private and a public self. Seen in: §26.00.04

The effigy of an artificial Being

Def: Artificial Beings are, of course, material, but they are also composite: they have a tangible part (hardware) and an intangible one (software). Seen in: §02.00.14

The EU

Def: It was certainly not realisation of any of the above that led to the formation of the EU in the 1950s. Seen in: §19.00.11

The EU archipelago is unique, the first of its kind

Def: As such, today the EU archipelago is unique, the first of its kind and clearly distinguishable from all the other information platforms that are states and that can be found around it (or within it). Seen in: §19.00.15

The EU as the platform for platforms

Def: The first state for states to emerge out of this prehistoric soup, hundreds of thousands of years after humans formed states for themselves, was formed in the 1950s. Seen in: §19.00.08

The EU is a Being, specifically an organisation

Def: In terms of [[§01.00.02|datasets]], the EU is a Being, specifically an organisation. Seen in: §19.00.14

The first formal definition of information platforms

Def: Online platforms eventually attracted the regulators’ attention, admittedly long after their invention and development by large, multinational private actors. Seen in: §07.01.04

The formation of nation-states

Def: Although discussion of how modern (nation) states emerged is beyond the scope of this analysis, the fact remains that a centuries-long procedure seems to have culminated, today, in the formation of nation states (on their centralisation see [[§11.00.05]]). Seen in: §18.00.03

The government

Def: Seen in: §12.00.00

The individual is torn in the digital world

Def: States turn humans into individuals in order for them (humans) to live a [[§07.00.03|meaningful life]]. Seen in: §01.00.13

The individualisation of humans and the limits of this philosophy

Def: [[§08.00.01|States turn humans into individuals]]. Seen in: §26.00.01

The inherent conundrum that individualistic theories have to deal with

Def: Nevertheless, if seen from an informational point of view, this assumption, the dichotomy between the private and the public self, is basically false, it does not exist. Seen in: §26.00.05

The invention of intellectual property

Def: The dematerialised information described in [[§01.01.08|paragraph 8]], enjoying the freedom (as in lack of control over the processing of it) as described in [[§01.01.09|paragraph 9]], became property (intellectual property), and thus under the control of humans, in the seventeenth century. Seen in: §01.01.10

The law is a materialised, written list of each dataset’s attributes

Def: Control is exercised over each and every dataset on the information platform that is the state (see [[§06.00.03]]); the law is a materialised, written list of its [[§06.00.05|attributes]]. Seen in: §20.00.01

The link between control and location; the path from humans to individuals (and citizens) and to (today’s) users

Def: The less obvious new perspective made possible by the digital world relates to the transformation of humans to users. Seen in: §17.00.10

The materialisation of (immaterial) information

Def: Immaterial information has been materialised in the analogue world since the beginning of humanity, or at least since the point at which humans started drawing on cave walls and speaking to each other. Seen in: §01.01.07

The materialisation of human rights is a political decision

Def: Of course, human rights may or may not be afforded within a state, meaning their materialisation is a political decision (as is the case, after all, for all rights, see [[§21.00.02]]). Seen in: §22.00.04

The mechanism through which this is accomplished

Def: The mechanism through which this is accomplished is so common that it is perhaps overlooked. Seen in: §07.00.04

The most basic assumption of all

Def: the analogue world: Notwithstanding all of the above assumptions, theories and findings formulated over the thousands of years of (recorded) human history, what is important to note is that the most fundamental underlying assumption is that the political system is designed for, and will operate in, the analogue world. Seen in: §12.01.09

The nature of the state

Def: Seen in: §11.00.00

The need to survive; the conditions for existence

Def: The will to process information is not caused exclusively by the need to survive. Seen in: §05.00.03

The nucleus of the information platform

Def: The state is the [[§08.01.04|information processing infrastructure that creates the processing environment necessary for its citizens]]. Seen in: §11.00.03

The owl of Minerva

Def: As with the owl of Minerva, new light has only been cast on the state with the falling of dusk, that is, with the unprecedented challenge to the state caused by the arrival of the digital world. Seen in: §00.02.07

The period from the moment that the first book was copied until the introduction of intellectual property

Def: During the long period from the moment that the first book was copied in ancient times until the introduction of the concept of intellectual property in the seventeenth century, humanity was happily, and freely, copying (and selling, not sharing) the dematerialised information described in [[§01.01.08|paragraph 8]], because there was no way for the [[§06.00.04|creator of new information]] to control the relevant processing operations—therefore control was exercised only over the materialised information (the books themselves). Seen in: §01.01.09

The political system

Def: Seen in: §12.01.00

The political system is the set of rules applied by the government while it is controlling the state

Def: The political system is the set of rules applied by the government while it is controlling the state. Seen in: §12.01.01

The processing of information by humans is made possible only on the information platform that is their state

Def: This may appear at first to be a counterintuitive claim: in [[§04.00.01]] it was established that processing takes place anyway, by definition, automatically, both in the analogue and in the digital worlds. Seen in: §04.00.12

The processing of information is not a given nor is it static

Def: The processing of information is not a given nor is it static, rather it can be enhanced by tools (artefacts as well as [[§02.00.12|artificial Beings]]) that further enhance it, in an (apparently never-ending) virtuous circle (see also [[§05.01.03]]). Seen in: §04.00.13

The processing of information is the result of need and opportunity

Def: The processing of information, in either the analogue or the digital world, is the result of need and opportunity. Seen in: §05.00.01

The processing of information leads to the creation of new information

Def: The creation of new information is achieved through the act of processing existing information (see also [[§01.00.07]]). Seen in: §04.00.02

The purpose of the processing is irrelevant to Reason

Def: The purpose is the end outcome, the final processing operation in the sequence of processing operations dictated by Reason. Seen in: §04.01.04

The relationship between a state and its citizens is unchangeable and unbreakable

Def: The bond between a state and its citizens by birth is an unchangeable one. Seen in: §08.00.06

The response to the how

Def: the tacit assumption behind monarchy, oligarchy and democracy: A political system’s way of responding to the how of government is not as straightforward as it is to the who (most likely because it is not as visible, and thus not as easy to confirm). Seen in: §12.01.07

The response to the who

Def: monarchy, oligarchy or democracy: A political system’s way of dealing with the question of who comprises the government has given us the distinction between monarchy (one person), oligarchy (a few people) and democracy (all the people). Seen in: §12.01.06

The stage of development of states today

Def: Thus states are self-conscious, but without any individualisation mechanism in space and time, and without any substantially developed language to communicate: this is their stage of development today. Seen in: §19.00.07

The state as a digital platform?

Def: The digital world may have made the definition, and true nature, of the state finally visible, but has it also affected it in any significant way? Although private online platforms strive to mimic state functions within their (digital) territories (through the unique identification of their users and creation of their digital ecosystem), they have affected the relationship between the state and its citizens only superficially. Seen in: §07.01.06

The state does not do anything consciously

Def: Similarly, the state has no consciousness of its own, nor a will (other than the will to process information, of course). Seen in: §11.00.08

The state does not have a pre-ordained order

Def: There is no imagined level of order (or rationality) that states strive to attain in linear historical development or progress (nor is there historical inevitability that progress is made, for that matter, see also [[§09.00.07]]). Seen in: §11.00.09

The state does not reason

Def: Similarly, the state does not reason. Seen in: §11.00.11

The state has no specific purpose, and the government does not offer it one

Def: [[§11.00.07|The state has no specific purpose]]—and the government does not offer it one. Seen in: §12.00.09

The state has sovereignty over its platform, but this does not mean that it will act upon it

Def: Of course, while the state is able to control any processing on its information platform, it will not of its own accord act upon this, because the state has no will (in the meaning of consciousness, see [[§11.00.08]]) of its own. Seen in: §16.00.03

The state is an organisation

Def: States fall within the category of organisations: they are Beings, meaning humans’ immaterial information (thoughts, feelings, wishes) [[§09.00.00 |that has been materialised]] in the analogue world, and they can, and will, process information. Seen in: §02.00.09

The state is at the same time the source of and the basic impediment to human freedom

Def: The state is the source of human freedom, because the state is the only way for humans to become individuals and thus to be able to augment their information processing (see [[§25.00.04]]). Seen in: §25.00.06

The state is timeless

Def: The state existed as soon as humans started using language and has never ceased to exist since. Seen in: §11.00.06

The state makes possible the control and rights to process information

Def: As regards humans, because processing for them is only possible on the information platform that is their state (see [[§04.00.12]]), the state is the Being that ultimately affords (makes possible) to all other Beings (its citizens included) on its platform the control and rights to process information. Seen in: §04.00.10

The term ‘territory of the state’ does not have a static meaning

Def: The term ‘territory of the state’ does not have a static meaning. Seen in: §17.00.07

The territory of a state is its information processing environment

Def: The territory of a state is its information processing environment. Seen in: §17.00.01

The three (informational) milestone moments in humanity’s development

Def: Ever since humans first walked the earth, three milestone moments occurred until now, at least from an informational point of view (the first one, admittedly, undocumented): Seen in: §00.02.06

The transactional and territorial state

Def: State formation as an administrative mechanism in the analogue world, which occurred after the advent of writing, had two consequences that remain with us today. Seen in: §09.00.05

The two basic premises of this political philosophy

Def: Two basic premises underlie this political philosophy of information: (a) states are information platforms for their citizens, and (b) (only) humans need to augment their information processing. Seen in: §00.02.02

The Unique Human Observer Perspective

Def: Because this is a human philosophy (as is, after all, also the case for any other philosophy), it cannot avoid a unique human observer perspective, meaning, the fact that it is a human that wrote this book, addressing it to other humans. Seen in: §01.00.18

The use of names as an individualisation mechanism is a human trait and development

Def: The use of names as an individualisation mechanism is a human trait and development, one which is not found in any other Being. Seen in: §08.01.06

The welfare state

Def: The welfare state is not a state justification theory but rather a purpose-of-the-state theory, that has, however, gained traction recently by insisting on increased public spending for whatever is (arbitrarily and high-handedly) perceived each time to be needed for the welfare of a state’s citizens. Seen in: §13.00.09

There is no Being or Thing that is outside the control of a single, identifiable Being

Def: The rights to process (as processing permissions) as well as control over a Being or a Thing (see also [[§06.00.03]]) mean that there is always a Being able to set or exercise them over any dataset for all other Beings. Seen in: §04.00.08

There is no dataset without any control exercised over it

Def: Similarly inconceivable is a dataset over which no Being has control. Seen in: §06.00.03

There is no distinction between modern and ancient states

Def: There is no distinction between modern and ancient states. Seen in: §08.00.03

There is no purposeless individual

Def: Because [[§04.00.02|all information processing has a purpose]], there is no human who does not have a purpose—an objectiveless, purposeless individual does not exist. Seen in: §05.01.08

There is Reason in all processing of information carried out by Beings

Def: However, as has been seen, each and every processing operation is, in fact, a composite one, because processing, from the [[§01.00.18|Unique Human Observer Perspective]], invariably has a purpose to it (see [[§04.01.05]] and [[§04.00.02]]). Seen in: §04.01.02

These three processing operations can be carried out only by states in the analogue world

Def: These three processing operations can be carried out only by states, at least in the analogue world. Seen in: §14.00.08

These two pieces of information warranted by the state

Def: Once in place, these two pieces of information are subsequently (tacitly or expressly) warranted by that state each time the individual communicates with other individuals. Seen in: §07.00.05

Things

Def: Seen in: §03.00.00

Things (and Beings, in this regard) are to be treated as a single, unitary dataset

Def: Although there is invariably an infinite number of Things (or even of Beings, at a molecular level), in terms of Things in the context of this political philosophy, each Thing, as denoted by its name that is given to it by a state (see [[§08.01.00]]), is here to be treated as a single, unitary dataset (see also [[§01.00.03]]). Seen in: §03.00.05

Things are either found in Nature or are created by Beings (artefacts)

Def: Things are either found in Nature or are created by Beings (artefacts). Seen in: §03.00.03

Things, unlike Beings, cannot process information

Def: Things, unlike Beings, cannot process information; it is not in their nature to do so. Seen in: §03.00.02

This is also the case for other Beings and Things, too

Def: they may exist in either or both worlds (meaning, they may be able to process information or have information on them processed in either of or both the analogue and the digital worlds) but their single, unitary nature is broken down. Seen in: §01.00.13.04

Total control is impossible

Def: Control is relevant to a processing (a processing operation that takes place [[§06.00.04|results in control]]), not to a dataset. Seen in: §06.00.02

Total control is impossible in the analogue world, but possible in the digital one

Def: Total control is impossible in the analogue world. Seen in: §01.00.17

Two basic questions

Def: The government may be the Being controlling the (dataset, the information platform that is the) state, but nothing has been said so far about who (which Being(s)) control(s) the government. Seen in: §12.01.03

Two clarifications, (a) on the state and (b) on citizenship

Def: note 7/1/1 Seen in: §07.00.11

Use of information

Def: Use of information… Seen in: §04.00.14

Users (instead of owners)

Def: Where does this leave the billions of individuals who are processing information in the digital world today? Basically, they have become users (see also [[§01.01.18]])—the latest step in humans’ (political philosophy) development. Seen in: §17.00.11

Utilitarianism

Def: Utilitarian philosophers (Bentham, Mill, and, to a certain extent, Hume), perhaps trying to refute the social contract theory of their (immediate) predecessors (Hobbes and Locke), suggested that states are natural to humans on account of a habit of obedience. Seen in: §13.00.06

What about artificial Beings?

Def: Because they are created by (individualised) humans, artificial Beings belong to the state territory of their creators. Seen in: §17.00.13

What are ‘information platforms’?

Def: What are ‘information platforms’? The term is used here to define the state; however, it is itself in need of some further explanation because, unlike the state, it has been coined only recently. Seen in: §07.01.01

What do states need?

Def: What do states need? This question is not unwarranted. Seen in: §10.00.01

What happens to a state after it dies?

Def: After a state dies, as is the case for any other Being, [[§02.00.03|it becomes a Thing]]: information about it can be processed by other Beings, but it can no longer process information itself. Seen in: §15.00.05

What is a government?

Def: A government is a Being, it is an organisation that exists in both the analogue and the digital worlds (see [[§02.00.06]]). Seen in: §12.00.02

What states need

Def: Seen in: §10.00.00

What the EU is and what it does

Def: In essence, the EU is an informational archipelago, a network composed of separate, individual (peer) information platforms (islands), meaning its member states, which have been individualised and uniquely identified by it. Seen in: §19.00.13

What the state does (and does not do)

Def: The state is a Being; it can and will process information. Seen in: §11.00.10

What the state has (and does not have) - the state has no purpose

Def: The state has no purpose. Seen in: §11.00.07

What the state is

Def: The state [[§07.00.00|is an information platform for its citizens]]. Seen in: §11.00.02

What the state is not

Def: The state is not a corporation, an association or a union, an organism, a political organisation (or institution), a service provider or a public sector. Seen in: §11.00.04

What the state is, what the state has, what the state does

Def: The nature of the state is set by what the state is (and is not), what the state has (and does not have) and by what the state does (and does not do). Seen in: §11.00.01

What this philosophy is

Def: Note 0/1/9 Seen in: §00.02.11

Where do the information platforms that are states live?

Def: Where do the information platforms that are states live? Within their respective platforms each state individualises its citizens and makes it possible for them to live [[§07.00.03|meaningful lives]]—in fact, [[§08.00.01|giving (human) life, meaning]]. Seen in: §19.00.01

Whether humans are by their nature brutal or nasty or untrusting is beside the point in practical terms

Def: With the above in mind, whether humans are by their nature brutal or nasty or untrusting is beside the point in practical terms: although humans need to augment their information processing and will do so in any way they can, what information processing they can and cannot do in any given moment (i.e. Seen in: §05.01.10

While a political system is necessary, the ways in which it responds to the above two questions are not predetermined

Def: Although a political system should be considered [[§12.01.02|natural]], the actual ways in which it responds on any given occasion to the questions of [[§12.01.03|who and how]] are anything but. Seen in: §12.01.05

Who else could claim sovereignty? The government

Def: Of all other Beings within a state (at least in the analogue world), only the government, because it controls the state, could raise a sovereignty claim over all the information processing happening in a state’s territory. Seen in: §16.00.04

Why a political philosophy of information?

Def: In order to understand the transition from the analogue to the digital world that is currently taking place, we first have to understand, to make sense of the analogue—from an informational perspective. Seen in: §00.02.03

Why did states individualise humans in this way?

Def: States have been information platforms for their citizens since the day any type of human group (be it an extended family or tribe or any other type of prehistoric organisation) was formed. Seen in: §08.00.02

Why do organisations come into existence at all? How do they die?

Def: Individuals create organisations because they imagine (see also [[§25.00.01|freedom]]) that such Beings will augment their ability to process information, that through them they will achieve information processing that would otherwise be impossible alone. Seen in: §02.00.07

Why does Reason exist in Beings?

Def: Because Beings have needs, they have the will to process information (i.e. Seen in: §04.01.06

Why have states stayed in a ‘state of nature’ for so long?

Def: Essentially, states are like humans; they are, whether they like it or not, social (indeed, political) Beings (and thus there cannot be only one, see [[§19.00.10]]). Seen in: §19.00.09

Why liberalism has had to come up with a number of ideas to limit government

Def: In view of the above, the government, representing the public sphere, is at an inherent advantage, which explains why liberalism has had to come up with a number of ideas to limit government (see [[§12.00.08]]), while communitarianism provides practically none (it simply developed theories to justify its claim instead). Seen in: §26.00.06

Why now? The digital world

Def: The questions on why and how states were formed have arisen most pressingly in periods of political upheaval. Seen in: §00.02.05

Why only humans need to augment their information processing?

Def: note 5.1/3/1 Seen in: §05.01.11

Why the middle political ground has a harder time than the extremes

Def: Understandably, one could claim that the practical result of the above false dichotomy is the same, no matter the theory behind it (meaning, whether one accepts the dichotomy of the self or not). Seen in: §26.00.07

Why would the government strive for sovereignty?

Def: In essence, the government does not strive for sovereignty, at least not directly. Seen in: §16.00.05

Words (language)

Def: Words (language) were the first artificial Beings developed by humans. Seen in: §02.00.16

Writing made it possible for the state to take the form known to us in the analogue world

Def: It was writing, therefore, that made it possible for the state to take the functional, administrative and bureaucratic form known to us in the analogue world. Seen in: §09.00.03