AI狂飚之下，如何避免多元冲突、生态战争？

Under the Surge of AI:How to Avoid Multicultural Conflict and Ecological Wars?

Archer Hong Qian

2026年3月28日晨于Vancouver

Francis Bacon发现：“Habit, if wisely and skillfully formed, becomes truly a second nature.”（习惯如果被明智而巧妙地塑造，就真的会成为第二本性）。

就是说，习惯具有极强的韧性和统治力，一旦形成，便是一种极难被外力摧毁的“无形势力”。

曾几何时，习惯了只讲多元（差异、生态），却不讲或有意无意丢弃多元主义的交互主体共生（Intersubjective Symbiosis）出发点和终极目标，在政治上必然走向碎片化冲突，结果就是：政治家在任何重大事情的处理上无所适从，只好一遍一遍地以政治正确话术哗众取宠，耍滑头，以保全自己的既得利益。这就是欧洲和北美的问题！

川普及其团队，赋有“生命（LIFE）-智能（AI）-组织信托（TRUST）”交互共生的时代使命，是唯一坚定试图解决“多元（生态）冲突”造成政客们无所事事问题根源的政治例外，他真的可能做成一些事情（20个选举承诺一年内全部兑现），甚至成为解决一些世界肿瘤式的老大难问题的商人、军人和政治家，但也必然会遍体鳞伤！

诚然，高贵的灵魂会记住这一切。

我说“习惯了只讲多元（差异、生态），却不讲或有意无意丢弃多元主义的交互主体共生（Intersubjective Symbiosis）出发点和终极目的”，意思非常清楚：多元，可以讲，差异（边界、生态），必须讲，但多元、差异、生态不是目的，不是为了多元而多元、为了差异而差异、为了生态而生态的多元主义、生态主义，讲多元、讲差异、讲生态的出发点和终极目标，就缺了点规范，也可以说缺了点灵魂。

这个灵魂，就是：为了生且共生，生生不息（Live and let live），不再以任何历史的、道德的、政治正确为理由，片面肯定或否定某个人、某个族群作为交互主体（Intesubjectivey）共生权（Symbiotiright，人权、事权、物权三位一体）的本体存在。

如果人类偏离了这样的生活出发点和终极目的，讲多元、讲差异、讲生态，必然造成某些人、某些族群利用其特殊话语权产生特权利益（如所谓“白命贵”、“黑命贵”）——以主体（Subject）自居而视他者为客体（Object）加以支配、操纵、榨取，从而成为冲突、分裂、对抗之源！

所以，历史一再证明，讲一元、讲统一、讲大同、讲共产不可取，但由此就反过来，讲多元主义、讲差异、讲生態主义，也不一定文明、共生，恰恰相反，多元、生態才可能冲突，轴心时代以来，世间发生的所有战争，都可以称之为消灭差异或纵容差异导致的“生态战争”——不共生，就可能同归于尽！

那么今天，AI狂飚，人类已经处于“生命形态（LIFE）-智能形态（AI）-组织形态（TRUST）”交互耦合共生时代的入门口，如何避免“生态战争”？如何避免“多元文化冲突”？是当今时代再也不能回避的大问题！

2024年，参加BC省政府“多元文化与反种族主义奖”颁奖典礼，在会后餐点上，艾美宝议员走向复旦大学校友钱宏（Archer Hong Qian），热情地说：“I love your uniform and hat”。钱宏也对颁奖典礼取得圆满成功，向艾美宝议员表示祝贺，并请一位UBC的学生做翻译，向她表达了一个观点： 如果能在Multiculturalism（多元主义）概念里，注入Symbiosis（共生）的意涵，明确北美蓝天白云下的各族裔“Live and let live”的规定性，叫Multi-Symbiosism（多元共生），或Intersubjective Symbiosism（交互主体共生），意义会更加明确而积极。因为Multi-Symbiosism，就包涵了“多元”这一现象描述和“共生”这一本质规定，因而给“多元文化”赋予了哲学灵魂，不仅是一种新认知，而且是一种价值取向，反种族主义（Anti-Racism）自然是题中应有之义。

这样，多元共生（Multi-Symbiosism）就成为一种新的生活方式——加拿大BC省完全可以成为一个充满愛之智慧（Amorsophia）的多元共生的国度和省份！艾美宝议员听后，微笑着主动伸出手来和钱宏握手，并合影留念。

顺便说一句，在当今人类正处于“生命形态（LIFE）-智能形态（AI）-组织形态（TRUST）”交互耦合共生时代意义上，我赞成《人类简史》的作者赫拉利提出的一个观点。赫拉利认为：在AI等颠覆性技术出现的时候，要保持4个C，第一个C，是critical thinking，批判性思考；第二个C，是communication，沟通和交流；第三个C，是collaboration，合作，第四个C，是creativity，创造性。就是留出自己独立思考的时间，空杯自己，不受信息爆炸的随机影响，沦为技术——如智能手机控的奴隶。

第一，需要特别安排有限的时间内很好地了解到我们自己生命的弱点（如心理咨询、独自出行、参观艺术展览作品、户外活动；第二，程序员要有基本的道德和准则；第三，机器人杀手是非常危险的技术，全球各个国家政府应该达成规则协议，需要在国际层面来达成协议，避免出现数据殖民、殖官主义或者数据帝国主义，否则，AI-数据军备竞赛和生物工程比拼的结果是没有胜利者，控制者操纵者最后也会反坐自己。

今天，AI和生物工程有巨大的能量，却没有与这能量所匹配的智慧——愛之智慧（Amorsophia），笛卡尔之前的世代，智慧之愛（Philosophy）的神性和逻各斯（整体统一），压倒了人性、理性，之后至今，理性（系统、工程）又压倒了神性，以至于近一个半世纪以来模拟预告未来的工作，从哲学家转到工程师、政客和野心家手中，而人性始终在随波逐流，方向不明，善恶难辨。如今，当AI+生物工程由外在生活，进入到人体、进入到人心内在，直接影响人类生存生活方式，工程与哲学需要携手共进，语言大模型、脑机接口编程，必须获得哲学的支撑与融合，对未来的时代达成富有愛之智慧的共识，并制定富有愛之智慧的决策和公约，让AI成就爱，让人性、理性、神性成为交互主体共生的关系过程，方能避免自然生态（包括人体内在）危机与社会生态危机引发毁灭的生态战争——地球生灵的第六次大灭绝，为大家带来福祉！

为此，我们提出了“如何使智能（AI），重新嵌入生命（LIFE）与信任（TRUST）之中？”的命题。

这就是在互联网（NET）解决“信息连接”、物联网（IoT）实现“万物感应”之后，人类正逼近创建第三层基础设施的门槛——AM（Amorsophia MindsField/Network，愛之智慧孞態场 / 网） 愛之智慧孞態场 / 网(AM)，不再是一种更理想的技术升级，而成为在 LIFE—AI—TRUST 三重症候不断加剧之下，一种基于生命自组织连接动態平衡的交互主体共生之约的必然要求。

Under the Surge of AI: How to Avoid Multicultural Conflict and Ecological Wars?

Archer Hong Qian
Morning, March 28, 2026 · Vancouver

Francis Bacon once observed:

“Habit, if wisely and skillfully formed, becomes truly a second nature.”

That is to say, habit possesses immense resilience and governing power. Once formed, it becomes an almost indestructible “invisible force.”

At some point, people became accustomed to speaking only of diversity (difference, ecology), while neglecting—or even unconsciously abandoning—the starting point and ultimate purpose of Intersubjective Symbiosis within pluralism. Politically, this inevitably leads to fragmented conflict. The result is that politicians become at a loss when dealing with major issues, resorting again and again to politically correct rhetoric to appease audiences, evade responsibility, and preserve vested interests. This is precisely the problem in Europe and North America.

Donald Trump and his team, bearing the historical mission of LIFE–AI–TRUST intersubjective symbiosis, stand as a rare political exception attempting to address the root cause of “multicultural (ecological) conflict” that renders politicians ineffective. He may indeed accomplish certain things (such as fulfilling 20 campaign promises within a year), and even emerge as a businessman, soldier, and statesman capable of tackling long-standing global “tumor-like” problems—though he will inevitably bear heavy costs.

A noble soul will remember all of this.

When I say that people have “become accustomed to speaking only of diversity while neglecting or abandoning the intersubjective symbiotic foundation and ultimate purpose of pluralism,” the meaning is clear:

Diversity can and should be discussed. Differences (boundaries, ecology) must be acknowledged. But diversity, difference, and ecology are not ends in themselves. A pluralism or ecologism that exists merely for the sake of diversity, difference, or ecology lacks normative grounding—one might say, it lacks a soul.

This soul is:
Live and let live—toward symbiosis and continuous co-flourishing.

It means no longer using historical, moral, or politically correct justifications to unilaterally affirm or deny any individual or group as a subject possessing Symbiotiright (a unity of human rights, agency rights, and property rights) within intersubjective existence.

If humanity departs from this foundational orientation and ultimate purpose, then advocating diversity, difference, and ecology will inevitably lead certain individuals or groups—through privileged discourse power—to generate special interests (such as “White Lives Matter” or “Black Lives Matter”), positioning themselves as Subjects while treating others as Objects to dominate, manipulate, and exploit. This becomes the source of conflict, division, and confrontation.

History repeatedly shows that monism, enforced unity, utopian sameness, and communism are untenable. Yet the opposite does not automatically hold true: pluralism, difference, and ecologism are not inherently civilized or symbiotic. On the contrary, diversity and ecology can themselves generate conflict. Since the Axial Age, nearly all wars can be understood as either attempts to eliminate difference or the consequences of unchecked difference—forms of what may be called “ecological wars.”

Without symbiosis, mutual destruction becomes possible.

AI Era: The Question Humanity Can No Longer Avoid

Today, as AI surges forward, humanity stands at the threshold of an era defined by the inter-coupled symbiosis of:

• LIFE (biological existence)
• AI (intelligent form)
• TRUST (organizational form)

How do we avoid ecological wars?
How do we avoid multicultural conflict?

These are questions that can no longer be avoided.

In 2024, at the British Columbia Multiculturalism and Anti-Racism Awards ceremony, after the event, MLA Amiee (艾美宝) approached Archer Hong Qian and warmly said:

“I love your uniform and hat.”

After congratulating her on the success of the event, Archer expressed—through a UBC student interpreter—a simple idea:

If the concept of Multiculturalism could be infused with Symbiosis, clarifying under the blue sky of North America that all ethnic groups share the norm of Live and let live, then a new concept could emerge:

• Multi-Symbiosism
• or Intersubjective Symbiosism

Because Multi-Symbiosism contains both the descriptive dimension of diversity and the essential norm of symbiosis, it gives multiculturalism a philosophical soul. It becomes not only a new cognition but also a value orientation. Anti-racism naturally follows as an inherent implication.

In this way, Multi-Symbiosism becomes a new way of life. British Columbia could become a province—and Canada a nation—filled with Amorsophia (the Wisdom of Love) and genuine symbiotic diversity.

The MLA listened, smiled, and warmly shook hands, followed by a photo together.

Harari’s Four Cs and the Human Response

In this era of LIFE–AI–TRUST symbiosis, I also agree with a key insight from Yuval Noah Harari:

In the face of disruptive technologies like AI, humanity must retain four capabilities:

• Critical thinking
• Communication
• Collaboration
• Creativity

This means preserving time for independent thought, emptying oneself from informational overload, and avoiding becoming a passive servant of technology.

Specifically:

1. Allocate time to understand one’s own vulnerabilities (through counseling, travel, art, nature).
2. Ensure that programmers uphold ethical standards.
3. Recognize the extreme danger of autonomous lethal technologies; global agreements are necessary to prevent data colonialism, bureaucratic domination, or data imperialism.

Otherwise, an arms race in AI data and bioengineering will produce no winners. Those who seek control will ultimately be controlled themselves.

From Philosophy to Amorsophia

Today, AI and bioengineering possess enormous power—but lack the wisdom proportionate to that power: Amorsophia (the Wisdom of Love).

Before René Descartes, Philosophy (love of wisdom) emphasized divine unity and Logos. Since then, rationality (systems, engineering) has overshadowed the divine dimension. Over the past century and a half, the task of imagining the future has shifted from philosophers to engineers, politicians, and ambitious actors—while human nature drifts, uncertain of direction and unable to distinguish good from evil.

Now, as AI and bioengineering move from external tools into the human body and mind, directly reshaping human existence, engineering and philosophy must reunite.

Large language models and brain–computer interfaces must be grounded in philosophy. Humanity must reach a shared consensus infused with Amorsophia, and establish decisions and conventions guided by it.

Only then can:

• AI become a force for love
• Human nature, rationality, and divinity re-enter a symbiotic relationship

—and only then can we avoid ecological crises (both natural and internal to the human body) and social ecological collapse leading to destructive ecological wars—even a sixth mass extinction.

Toward AM: The Next Civilizational Infrastructure

Thus, we raise a fundamental question:

How can AI be re-embedded into LIFE and TRUST?

After:

• the Internet (NET) solved information connectivity,
• the Internet of Things (IoT) enabled universal sensing,

humanity now approaches the threshold of building a third layer of infrastructure:

AM (Amorsophia MindsField / MindsNetwork)

AM is no longer merely an ideal technological upgrade.
It is a necessary response to the intensifying triple crisis of LIFE–AI–TRUST.

It represents a system grounded in:

• self-organizing life connectivity
• dynamic equilibrium
• intersubjective symbiosis

AM is, fundamentally, a civilizational covenant of symbiosis.

参考：《愛：Love、Amor、Amorsophia及AM》http://symbiosism.com.cn/11850.html