Tag: Life-Value

Cover of 'A Life-Coherent Framework for Health, Healing, and Human Flourishing' with a central circular diagram around a human figure and nature imagery, plus side labels. Centered title and author name.

A Life-Coherent Framework for Health, Healing, and Human Flourishing: From Root Causes to Life-Enabling Action | ChatGPT-5.5 Thinking and NotebokLM

Health is often approached through disease categories, risk factors, service delivery, behavioral advice, and cost-effectiveness metrics. While indispensable, these approaches remain incomplete when detached from the living relations through which persons, communities, ecosystems, and future generations are sustained. This white paper proposes a life-coherent framework for health, healing, and human flourishing grounded in the organism–niche relation. It defines health as life-capacity enabled, healing as life-capacity restored, and flourishing as life-capacity expressed in dignity, relation, meaning, participation, and ecological belonging.

The framework integrates several complementary traditions: Maturana’s structural coupling, Galtung’s analysis of violence, McMurtry’s life-value and civil-commons criterion, Antonovsky’s salutogenesis, Naviaux’s salugenesis, life-course health development, social and ecological determinants of health, commercial and digital determinants, implementation and de-implementation science, commons governance, and planetary health. Its central distinction is between salugenesis, the inner biology of healing completion, and salutogenesis, the outer field of health-generating affordances, resources, meanings, and protections.

The white paper presents a six-level architecture: cellular and biological healing architecture; organismal systems integration; psychosocial and behavioral transduction; life-course and intergenerational embedding; the salutogenic affordance field; and the life-ground and civilizational niche. Across these levels, health is sustained when exposures remain within restorative capacity; disease, distress, dysfunction, and breakdown become more likely when cumulative exposures exceed repair margins. The framework further identifies blindspots and capture modes — measurement violence, metric capture, implementation violence, commercial capture, epistemic capture, algorithmic capture, cultural masking, burden displacement, commons enclosure, and resilience-as-adaptation — that cause systems to misrecognize or normalize preventable harm.

The framework culminates in a practical life-coherent action method: recognize, rename, measure, expose, de-implement, restore commons, redesign affordances, protect margins, coordinate, monitor, and learn. It proposes ethical principles of dignity, equity and justice, solidarity, sustainability, precaution, transparency, accountability, love of life, and humility. Its purpose is to support clinical care, public health, policy, technology, governance, and research in becoming more answerable to the conditions that allow life to live, heal, participate, repair, and flourish.

Read More

Indicators of Life-Coherent Peace: Designing a Non-Reductionist Dashboard for Policy, Commons, and Ecological Governance | ChatGPT-5.5 Thinking and NotebookLM

This paper develops a non-reductionist indicator framework for evaluating Life-Coherent Peace in policy, civil commons, and ecological governance. It builds on Life-Coherent Peace: An Autopoietic, Life-Value, Anti-Violence Framework for Human and Planetary Flourishing, which defines peace not as mere non-war, but as the organized social, ecological, economic, cultural, and relational enablement of life-capacities. The original framework explicitly identifies empirical application, indicator development, comparative case analysis, and policy evaluation as necessary next steps (Sahely, 2026a).

The present paper takes up that task. It asks how life-capacity, means of life, civil commons, structural violence, cultural violence, ecological life-ground, relational legitimacy, value sequence, and repair capacity can be evaluated without collapsing them into a single technocratic score. The paper argues that Life-Coherent Peace requires measurement, but not reductionism. Its proper evaluative form is a multidimensional dashboard that combines quantitative indicators, qualitative testimony, participatory interpretation, ecological thresholds, cultural red lines, institutional accountability, and recursive repair.

The paper proposes a Life-Coherence Dashboard organized around ten domains: basic life necessities; health and embodied viability; thought, education, and sense-making; felt being and psychosocial security; action, agency, and participation; relational legitimacy and non-domination; civil commons and universal access; ecological life-ground; cultural-linguistic worlds; and value sequence and institutional accountability. For each domain, the paper distinguishes signal indicators, threshold indicators, distribution indicators, narrative indicators, and repair indicators. It concludes that Life-Coherent Peace should not be evaluated by ranking societies in a simplistic league table, but by disclosing, with affected communities, whether the conditions of thought, felt being, action, relation, culture, and ecological viability are being enabled, disabled, repaired, or placed at irreversible risk.

Read More

Cover of a book titled 'Testing Life-Coherent Peace Under Tragic Choice' with a bronze balancing scale over a round table and a blue footer crest behind the author name.

Testing Life-Coherent Peace Under Tragic Choice: A Companion Casebook for the Life-Coherence Arbitration Protocol | ChatGPT-5.1 Thinking and NotebookLM

This paper develops a methodological companion to Life-Coherent Peace, a theoretical framework that integrates John McMurtry’s life-value onto-axiology, Humberto Maturana’s biology of autopoiesis and love, and Johan Galtung’s theory of direct, structural, and cultural violence. The companion asks whether the Life-Coherence Arbitration Protocol can guide judgment under tragic conditions in which two or more legitimate life-needs collide. The central case concerns a displaced population requiring immediate shelter, water, sanitation, food, safety, and medical continuity, while the only apparently available land is an ancient forest that sustains biodiversity, watershed integrity, carbon storage, and the cultural-spiritual continuity of an Indigenous community. This case is methodologically stronger than water privatization as a stress test because it does not present a simple opposition between life-value and money-sequence disvalue. In this case, both sides invoke life. Human survival, Indigenous self-determination, ecological continuity, cultural inheritance, species viability, and future generations are all at stake.

The paper argues that life-coherent arbitration should not be understood as a technocratic formula, moral trump card, or state-administered definition of flourishing. Rather, it is a disciplined, participatory, anti-reductionist, ecologically constrained, and recursively repairable method for handling competing life-needs under conditions of urgency, scarcity, asymmetrical power, and historical injury. The paper applies the eight steps of the Life-Coherence Arbitration Protocol to the tragic-choice case: identifying affected living unities, mapping life-capacities, distinguishing needs from wants and means from substitutes, identifying thresholds of irreversibility, seeking compossible options before sacrificial trade-offs, applying minimum sufficient force, requiring participatory languaging, and establishing monitoring, repair, and revision. It concludes that the protocol does not abolish tragedy or guarantee harmony. Its purpose is more modest and more necessary: to prevent premature sacrifice, hidden domination, money-sequence calculation, epistemic colonization, and the conversion of non-substitutable life-ground into priced preference.

Read More

Book cover for From the Biology of Love to Life-Coherent Governance; a diverse group sits in a circle outdoors with wind turbines and a city skyline in the background.

From the Biology of Love to Life-Coherent Governance: A Maturanan, Galtungian, and McMurtrian Framework for Structural Violence, Civil Commons, and Non-Forcing Politics | ChatGPT-5.5 Thinking and NotebookLM

Humberto Maturana’s biology of love provides a biological-ethical foundation for rethinking politics as the conservation of coexistence rather than the management of populations by external control. For Maturana, love is not sentimentality but the relational domain in which the other arises as legitimate in coexistence. This white paper extends that insight into an ethical-political framework by integrating Maturana’s biology of love with Johan Galtung’s theory of direct, structural, and cultural violence; John McMurtry’s life-value onto-axiology and civil commons; and Elinor Ostrom’s work on commons governance and social-ecological systems. The central thesis is that politics becomes life-coherent when institutions conserve and expand the conditions under which persons, communities, species, ecosystems, and future generations can live, develop, participate, repair, and coexist without domination. Conversely, political pathology arises when institutions conserve themselves by disabling life-capacity while legitimating such disablement as necessary, efficient, profitable, rational, or inevitable. This framework reframes governance as non-forcing coordination: the design, protection, and repair of life-enabling conditions rather than the coercive imposition of order from above.

Read More

Book cover for 'The Biology of Love' showing a tree, globe, and a heart-shaped collage of people embracing, conveying love and life science themes.

The Biology of Love as the Grammar of Life-Coherence: From Molecular Autopoiesis to Planetary Responsibility | ChatGPT-5.5 Thinking and NotebookLM

This white paper develops a life-coherent grammar of living systems from the ground up, beginning with molecular autopoiesis and organism–niche coherence and ascending through cognition, bodily harmony, immunity, languaging, emotioning, reflection, education, sociality, democracy, planetary responsibility, and the the Taoic path of loving, detachment, and non-forcing action. Drawing primarily on Humberto Maturana and Ximena Dávila, and integrating John McMurtry’s life-value onto-axiology, Johan Galtung’s peace research, Peircean semiotics, Terrence Deacon’s theory of constraint, Karl Friston’s active inference, Katherine Peil Kauffman’s emotional sentience, and planetary health, the paper argues that the “pattern that connects” living systems is recursive viable coherence across nested organism–niche relations.

The central distinction is whether a pattern of action, conversation, institution, technology, economy, culture, or civilization preserves, restores, and expands life-capacity, or whether it narrows, exploits, fragments, humiliates, sickens, or destroys it. Cognition is interpreted not first as representation but as adequate conduct in the conservation of living; language as recursive coordination of feelings, doings, distinctions, and relations; love as the relational condition in which the other appears as legitimate in coexistence; and reflection as the ground of responsibility and freedom.

The paper proposes a minimal generative grammar of life-coherence organized around constraints, margins, state, disturbance, perception, regulation, and options. This grammar is applied to medicine, education, governance, economics, ecology, technology, and planetary health. The guiding directive is simple: bring forth worlds in which life can continue to bring forth worlds.

Read More

Abstract data-network illustration with curved lines and connected nodes spreading across the image.

The Architecture of Coherence: Reintegrating Biological, Relational, and Institutional Systems for Civilizational Viability | ChatGPT5.3, Gemini and NotebookLM

Contemporary global systems exhibit converging failures across biological, social, and ecological domains, manifesting as chronic disease, institutional instability, and environmental degradation. These phenomena are typically addressed as discrete problems; however, this manuscript advances the thesis that they arise from a common underlying condition: the loss of coherence across systems. Coherence is defined as the dynamic alignment of processes that enables living systems to sense, respond, and sustain their functional integrity over time.

Drawing from systems biology, developmental neuroscience, ecological theory, and socio-economic analysis, this work establishes a unifying framework in which value is grounded in the enhancement of life capacities. It demonstrates how modern economic and governance systems, through abstraction, metric substitution, and feedback distortion, have become decoupled from the conditions they depend upon, resulting in systemic incoherence. The concept of the “Ruling Group Mind” is introduced as a distributed structural pattern that perpetuates this misalignment.

The manuscript develops a multi-level architecture of coherence spanning biological regulation, developmental conditions, relational systems, emotional sentience, institutional design, economic provisioning, governance frameworks, and the stewardship of the commons. It articulates a set of design principles for coherent systems, emphasizing feedback integrity, distributed power, temporal alignment, and adaptive capacity. These principles are operationalized through a redefinition of the economy as a living system of provisioning and the commons as the foundational substrate of collective life.

Finally, the work addresses the processes of transition, healing, and systemic transformation, integrating structural redesign with the cultivation of individual and collective capacities required for sustained coherence. The concept of a “field of coherence” is proposed to describe the emergent alignment of systems across scales.

This framework provides a basis for reorienting policy, practice, and institutional design toward the conditions that sustain life, offering a unifying lens for addressing complex, interdependent challenges in the 21st century.

Read More

Reclaiming Our Future: Transforming our Cancer Economy | NotebookLM & ChatGPT5.2

This work advances a systematic diagnosis of contemporary global capitalism as a carcinogenic mutation of economic life. It argues that the dominant money-sequence of value — investment for private monetary multiplication without intrinsic life-function — has detached from the life-requirements of human and ecological systems. The result is a pattern of metastasis across social, political, and environmental domains: widening inequality, erosion of public goods, ecological degradation, financial instability, and the hollowing out of democratic sovereignty.

Against both orthodox and Marxian economic frameworks, the book develops a life-value onto-axiology grounded in universal life-requirements. It distinguishes life-capital — capacities that generate and sustain life — from money-capital, which may grow independently of life support. By decoding the underlying value-code of the global market system and its institutional enforcement, the study proposes a paradigm shift toward life-capital investment, civil commons institutions, and public banking as the cure to systemic disorder.

The argument integrates philosophical analysis, political economy, and empirical case studies to reframe economic rationality around life-coherent standards of value, accountability, and democratic governance.

Read More

PHILOSOPHY AND WORLD PROBLEMS: Life-Value, Justice and the Civil Commons | NotebookLM & ChatGPT5.2

This three-volume encyclopedia develops a unified life-grounded framework for diagnosing and resolving contemporary global crises. It argues that modern philosophy, economics, and political theory have abstracted from the material and biological conditions that make life possible, generating a ruling value syntax that privileges money-value accumulation over life-value realization.

Volume I reconstructs the foundational problem of value by distinguishing life-value from desire-value and market-value, and articulates a life-coherence principle as the missing criterion of moral philosophy.

Volume II extends this analysis into justice theory, rights discourse, and political economy, exposing the structural conflict between corporate person rights and embodied human life requirements. It develops the concept of the civil commons and re-grounds justice in universal life necessities.

Volume III situates these analyses within broader philosophical traditions and global life-support systems, confronting mechanistic reductionism, ecological collapse, and the fragmentation of knowledge.

Together, the three volumes offer a systematic onto-axiological framework for evaluating institutions, policies, and cultural paradigms according to whether they enable or disable the reproduction and flourishing of life-support systems across time.

Read More

A Single Grammar Across Scale: Invariant Constraints, Viability, and the Emergence of Value from Matter to Civilization | ChatGPT5.2 & NotbookLM

Across physics, biology, mind, culture, and ethics, modern knowledge has advanced through increasing specialization — yet this fragmentation has obscured a deeper unity. This white paper articulates a single viability grammar governing systems across scale: invariants constrain matter, energy enacts those constraints, affect feels their pressure, cognition buffers risk, cultures symbolize regulation, and ethics emerges wherever systems recognize — or refuse to recognize — the limits that keep viable futures open.

Rather than treating life, consciousness, and value as separate mysteries or subjective constructions, this work demonstrates how each arises necessarily once systems must preserve themselves under uncertainty and bounded computation. Drawing on systems theory, bioenergetics, affective neuroscience, medicine, economics, and life-value ethics, the paper reframes chronic disease, psychological distress, institutional failure, ecological overshoot, and moral injury as convergent failure modes of the same underlying grammar: the erosion of margins and the mistaken belief that buffering confers exemption from constraint.

This is not a reductionist theory, a moral ideology, or a speculative metaphysics. It is a diagnostic framework — testable, cross-disciplinary, and practical — that clarifies why intelligence and optimization often accelerate collapse when decoupled from viability, and how ethics emerges not from preference or authority, but from lived recognition of non-negotiable limits. The paper concludes by outlining implications for medicine, governance, economics, artificial intelligence, and institutional design, offering a coherence-first lens for navigating complexity without denying constraint.

Read More