从周有光的提醒到“黄宗羲陷阱”与“洛克难题”的现代再释
民生六要素与交互主体共生新思维
Six Essentials of Livelihood and the New Thinking of Intersubjective Symbiosism
——从周有光的提醒到“黄宗羲陷阱”与“洛克难题”的现代再释
— From Zhou Youguang’s Reminder to the Modern Re-interpretation of the “Huang Zongxi Trap” and the “Lockean Dilemma”
钱 宏（Archer Hong Qian）
我曾于2009、2014年两次有幸拜访世纪智者周有光先生。先生当时104岁，对他刚出版的《朝闻道集》被叫停再发行并不在意，却又对美国电影《阿凡达》饶有兴趣！
先生曾亲口对我说，过去讲国民生活四个字：衣、食、住、行，其实远远不够，应该是六个字：衣、食、住、行、性、信（孞），才把国民生命、生产、生态的物质、精神讲透了！而且，从世界看（中国），不是从中国看（世界），国民衣、食、住、行、性和信，都是社会自组织连接平衡与再平衡的行为（self-organizing balance of life），政府越少干预越好。
就此出发，我的理解是：从社会、政治、经济、文化各部门的情况看，政府（Government）只是由同样需要衣、食、住、行、性、信（孞）的人组成的一种组织形态（organizational form），万万不可夸大其词。它不是国家（State）的化身，更不是凌驾于国民之上的“超主体（super-subject）”。历史上，一旦有人假国家之名，行特权之实（in the name of the State, in essence exercising privilege），便开启了特洛伊木马式的制度滑坡：
黄宗羲陷阱（Huang Zongxi Trap）：所谓“替天行道”（acting on behalf of Heaven），常沦为“以天下奉君”。
洛克难题（Lockean Dilemma）：权力不可私有（power cannot be privatized），财产不可公有（property cannot be collectivized）——两端一失衡，必致专断与掠夺。
一、民生六要素的再阐释（含英文注释）
衣（Clothing）：生存防护与体面表达。
食（Food）：营养供给与分配秩序。
住（Housing）：安全空间与家庭延续。
行（Mobility）：出行与社会流动。
性（Sex / Reproduction）：生产的本义就是生孩子（production in its root means reproduction），关系到人口更新与代际接续。
信（孞，Trust / Faith / Information / Belief）：信息、信仰、信任、信念的统摄性结构，是社会互信与意义秩序的枢纽。
民生六要素不是由政府赐予，而是国民生命自组织（self-organization of life）自然生成的秩序；政府的正当性，只能来源于对这种自组织的尊重、护持与激励，而非替代与凌驾。
二、哲学转型的基座：从“轴心时代二元论”到“交互主体共生”
理想国（The Republic）、乌托邦（Utopia）、天下为公（all-under-Heaven as common）、替天行道（acting on behalf of Heaven）、大同世界（Great Unity）、共产小康（communal well-being）——无论描绘得多么精致漂亮，其共同本质都是：为一部分人以主体（Subject）自居，把“自己人”之外的异己者、他者当作客体（Object）加以支配、操纵、劫掠，预留了榨取性制度—文化空间。
这套思维出自轴心时代（Axial Age）的主客二元对立统一（subject–object duality），在现代频频化身为各种“宏大叙事”。
今天，我们处在一个根本不同的时代：
人（生命 / Life）：六要素的自组织主体；
AI（理性工具 / rational tool）：延展人类感知与行动的工具性智能，而非道德主体；
TRUST（组织形态 / trust-based institutional forms）：以信为核心的制度与契约结构，支撑交互秩序。
三者构成交互主体共生（Intersubjective Symbiosism）的新范式：主体与主体在多层网络中以信任、契约、信息与规则耦合，不再以“主体—客体”的统治模式运转。其最高圭臬（touchstone）只有一个：
呵护—发挥—激励生命自组织的连接、平衡与再平衡(protect–unleash–incentivize the self-organizing balance of life)。
三、Symbionomics 的实践指向
这正是共生经济学（Symbionomics）的立场——“生产回归生活，生活呈现生态，生态激励生命，一切为着人的身心灵健康”（2015.3于密歇根大学）：
生产回归生活（production returns to life）：经济活动以满足衣食住行性信为目的，而非以规模与指标（如GDP）自我循环；
生活呈现生态（life becomes ecological）：生活实践内嵌生态约束与反馈，形成自我修复与再平衡（GDE价值参量）；
生态激励生命（ecology incentivizes life）：制度与技术设计，对生命自组织给出正向激励而非替代；
人的身心灵健康（holistic well-being）：评判一切政策—技术—制度的最高准绳。
四、现代战争与政治：三大支柱与六要素的张力
作为政治的延续，现代战争打的无非是三大支柱的优劣比较：
化石能源（fossil energy），
人口资源（population resources），
经济支撑/支援（economic support）。
它们与衣食住行性信存在内在张力：若国家机器为追逐三支柱的优势而越界，以“安全”之名侵入并改造六要素，就会落回“假国家之名、行特权之实”的帝国老路，触发“黄宗羲陷阱”“洛克难题”。相反，若在人–AI–TRUST交互主体共生框架下，配置制度与技术，使三支柱的竞争服从于六要素的自组织，回落到共生经济学范式的国际格局与“全球化重组”，就能让“任何统治世界的帝国政治企图成为事实上的不可能”，从而压缩战争逻辑，开辟可持续的和平。
小结
民生六要素确立了国民生产的第一性；
区分政府与主权在民的国家形态，守住权力边界；
对轴心时代二元论的超越，奠定交互主体共生的哲学转型；
Symbionomics 把转型落到可度量、可实践的“身心灵健康”上；
在此基础上，制止现代战争与建构和平秩序，才能真正回到以生命自组织为圭臬的正道。
孞烎
2025年8月22日晨 于 Richmond
Six Essentials of Livelihood and the New Thinking of Intersubjective Symbiosism
— From Zhou Youguang’s Reminder to the Modern Re-interpretation of the “Huang Zongxi Trap” and the “Lockean Dilemma”
By Archer Hong Qian
I had the good fortune to visit the centenarian sage Zhou Youguang twice, in 2009 and 2014. At that time he was 104 years old. He showed little concern when the re-issuance of his newly published book Morning Path to the Way was halted, but he was nonetheless fascinated by the American film Avatar.
Mr. Zhou once told me personally: in the past, people described the essentials of a citizen’s life with four words—clothing, food, housing, mobility. But that is far from sufficient. Instead, it should be six words: clothing, food, housing, mobility, sex, and trust (孞). Only with these six can the material and spiritual dimensions of people’s life, production, and ecology be fully articulated. Moreover, one must view China from the world, not the world from China. The six essentials are all behaviors of self-organizing balance of life; the less government interference, the better.
From this starting point, my understanding is: across society, politics, economy, and culture, government is merely an organizational form composed of people who themselves need clothing, food, housing, mobility, sex, and trust. Its role must never be exaggerated. It is not the embodiment of the State, nor is it a “super-subject” standing above citizens. Historically, whenever someone acted in the name of the State, in essence exercising privilege, a Trojan-horse style institutional slide began:
Huang Zongxi Trap: the claim of “acting on behalf of Heaven” often degenerates into “all under Heaven serving the ruler.”
Lockean Dilemma: power cannot be privatized, property cannot be collectivized—once either side loses balance, tyranny and plunder inevitably follow.
I. Reinterpreting the Six Essentials of Livelihood
Clothing: survival protection and dignified expression.
Food: nutritional supply and distributive order.
Housing: secure space and familial continuity.
Mobility: movement and social circulation.
Sex / Reproduction: at its root, production means reproduction—concerned with population renewal and intergenerational continuity.
Trust (孞): the encompassing structure of information, faith, trust, and belief; the pivot of social confidence and meaningful order.
These six essentials are not bestowed by government, but naturally generated through the self-organization of life. Government’s legitimacy can only come from respecting, safeguarding, and incentivizing such self-organization, never from replacing or dominating it.
II. The Philosophical Basis of Transformation: From Axial-Age Dualism to Intersubjective Symbiosism
The Republic, Utopia, All-under-Heaven as common, Acting on behalf of Heaven, Great Unity, Communal well-being—however beautifully portrayed, they share the same essence: enabling some to claim the position of Subject, while reducing others—the outsiders and “others”—to Objects to be dominated, manipulated, and exploited, leaving behind extractive spaces within institutions and culture.
This mindset originates from the Axial Age paradigm of subject–object duality, which in modern times repeatedly re-emerges as various forms of “grand narratives.”
Today, however, we inhabit a fundamentally different era:
Human beings (Life): self-organizing subjects of the six essentials.
AI (Rational tools): instrumental intelligence extending human perception and action, not a moral subject.
TRUST (Trust-based institutional forms): contractual and institutional structures with trust at the core, sustaining interactive order.
Together they constitute the new paradigm of Intersubjective Symbiosism: multiple subjects interacting within layered networks, coupled through trust, contracts, information, and rules, no longer operating in the “subject–object” logic of domination. Its sole touchstone is this:
Protect – Unleash – Incentivize the self-organizing balance of life.
III. The Practical Direction of Symbionomics
This is precisely the stance of Symbionomics:
“Production returns to life, life becomes ecological, ecology incentivizes life—all for the holistic well-being of human body, mind, and spirit.” (University of Michigan, March 2015)
Production returns to life: economic activity aims to fulfill clothing, food, housing, mobility, sex, and trust—not merely to perpetuate self-referential scales and indicators such as GDP.
Life becomes ecological: everyday practices embed ecological constraints and feedback, forming cycles of self-repair and rebalancing (cf. GDE value parameters).
Ecology incentivizes life: institutions and technologies provide positive incentives for life’s self-organization, rather than replacing it.
Holistic well-being: the ultimate criterion for evaluating policies, technologies, and institutions.
IV. Modern War and Politics: The Tension between the Three Pillars and the Six Essentials
As the continuation of politics, modern war is fought over the comparative strength of three pillars:
Fossil energy
Population resources
Economic support
These inherently clash with the six essentials of livelihood. If the state apparatus, in pursuit of superiority over these three, transgresses boundaries—invading and reshaping the six essentials in the name of “security”—it regresses onto the imperial path of “in the name of the State, in essence exercising privilege,” triggering once again the Huang Zongxi Trap and the Lockean Dilemma.
Conversely, if institutional and technological arrangements are made under the framework of human–AI–TRUST intersubjective symbiosism, subordinating competition over the three pillars to the self-organization of the six essentials, then an international order based on the Symbionomics paradigm—a “restructuring of globalization”—can emerge. In such a world, “any imperial political ambition to rule the globe becomes factually impossible.” War logic is compressed, and sustainable peace is made attainable.
Conclusion
The six essentials of livelihood establish the primacy of national production.
Distinguishing government from the people’s sovereignty preserves the boundaries of power.
Transcending Axial-Age dualism lays the philosophical foundation of intersubjective symbiosism.
Symbionomics translates this transformation into measurable, practicable holistic well-being.
On this basis, only by restraining modern warfare and constructing peace can humanity return to the proper path, with the self-organization of life as the touchstone.
孞烎
Morning of August 22, 2025
Richmond