The Need and Feasibility of the UN to Lead the Human Community in Creating a Digital Planet(008)
— An Open Letter to UN Secretary-General Guterres and Global Sages
“Supreme above, not knowing it exists.
Next, revered and praised.
Next, feared.
Below, despised.
Not enough trust, and disbelief in the facts.
Less valuable words, please.
Mission accomplished
The people all say, ‘It happened naturally.’”
— — Tao Te Ching, Chapter 17
For those who have a perfect understanding (and are united with) the “Dao,” they do not even recognize that there is such a thing as the “Dao.”
For those who have some understanding of the “Dao,” they feel close to it and praise it.
For those who only have a partial understanding of the “Dao,” they may not fully understand it, but they still have a sense of awe and respect for it.
For those who have no understanding of the “Dao,” they often disdain and trample on it.
When a person lacks faith, even if the truth is right in front of them, they will still not believe it.
Therefore, it is useless to discuss the theory of the “Dao” (since no one will believe it anyway).
As long as you can (use the “Dao”) to succeed in doing something, everyone will think: “It was supposed to be like that.”
— — Translation of Topal
Middle: Cognition (theory)
Through the Tao Te Ching, Laozi’s profound ideas have deeply influenced human society. However, despite the book’s relatively short length, its content has yet to reach a consensus among scholars for over 2,000 years. The difficulty in understanding Laozi’s philosophy does not necessarily lie in the text itself, but rather in the different perspectives and biases that people bring to its interpretation. If even the ideas of Laozi can be so difficult to grasp, what about the ideas put forward by ordinary people? Despite their wisdom, Laozi’s ideas are often not widely accepted, let alone those of others.
No matter how sound our analysis may be, when it comes to concrete solutions, especially those involving blockchain, digital currency, and digital assets, people tend to dismiss or scoff at them. They think they are completely infeasible and not even worth discussing. This is because at least two cognitive traps are currently imprisoning people’s understanding.
This is obviously a static way of thinking. Not to mention whether digital currencies represented by Bitcoin and Ethereum can ultimately succeed, it is too early to draw conclusions now. What is more important is that they are not the only choice for decentralized digital currencies. If we don’t explore, how do we know that there are no more and better choices? For example, the Share Scoret — YL proposed in my plan is a new choice. Developing countries should not curb digital currencies, but should explore and develop them.
When the cognitive gap between the two sides is so large, it is meaningless and impossible to discuss. What should we do? This is the problem that our Middle — cognitive section needs to solve.
How to solve this problem? Should we unify everyone’s understanding in Topal’s cognitive system?
Absolutely not. Even if it were Lao Tzu, people have been trying to unify their understanding within his cognitive framework for over 2,000 years and have not succeeded. Moreover, today’s people are more restless and fragmented, with everyone having their own unique and independent views in this special era. The solution is for us to explore and seek a methodology together, a methodology for establishing “trust-based cognition”. This methodology is not uniform, but is established according to each person’s will, habits, and preferences. However, it has a unified criterion for measurement, which is witnessing.
This witnessing lies in whether this methodology can establish “trust-based cognition”. This is like what Lao Tzu said: “Mission accomplished,The people all say, ‘It happened naturally.’” “Mission accomplished” is witnessing. It was originally achieved naturally according to your own will, so it seems ordinary. But how did you “Mission accomplished”? It’s because you were in sync with the “Tao” during the process, and you unknowingly followed the “Tao”. Therefore, you can “Mission accomplished”, otherwise it is impossible.
What is “trust-based cognition”? It refers to a kind of cognition that can make oneself completely believe. It is difficult for people to believe in any new cognition completely, and “trust-based cognition” is the kind of cognition that can make people believe completely and wholeheartedly. If one only has three, five, eight or nine parts of belief, or even a slight doubt, it is not enough trust. Laozi’s quote is extremely insightful: “Not enough trust, and disbelief in the facts.” If one does not truly believe, when faced with the facts, they will still doubt. One’s cognition is not true knowledge, and without true knowledge, one cannot truly act or accomplish anything. This is the same principle as the “unity of knowledge and action” discussed by the Chinese Ming Dynasty thinker Wang Yangming. Without true knowledge, it is impossible to achieve the “unity of knowledge and action”.
Continuing on with the topic of cognition, you could consider what I’m saying to be storytelling or the “Tao”. However, it’s only my “Tao”, not yours, and certainly not the universal “Tao” of the world.
The Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu is also about the “Tao”, but it’s his own “Tao”. That’s why Lao Tzu is reluctant to talk about his own “Tao”. What’s the point of it? “The Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao.” Each person can only comprehend their own “Tao”, and each person’s “Tao” is different from others. But Lao Tzu is also open-minded and says, “It doesn’t matter, if you want me to write, I’ll write.” In the end, everyone’s comprehension of the “Tao” needs to be supported by “success in work and endeavor”. Once this witness is obtained, everyone will find that “all roads lead to Rome,” and all “Tao” are the same.
Most people approach Lao Tzu’s “Tao” with a learning attitude, seeking to comprehend their own “Tao”. For the “Tao” I discuss in this essay, you can approach it critically to explore your own “Tao”. But even if you criticize it, you should understand what I mean. Therefore, it’s okay to refute and question, but there’s no need to despise or insult it.
Most people approach Laozi’s “Dao” with a learning attitude, seeking to understand their own “Dao” within it. However, for the “Dao” discussed in this article, one can also approach it with a critical attitude to explore their own “Dao”. Even with criticism, it is important to understand the meaning behind what I am saying. Therefore, it is acceptable to refute or question, but there is no need to disdain or insult it. This open letter is ostensibly addressed to the Secretary-General and global sages, but in reality it is written for all people with a connection to it. If you are still able to continue reading this cognitive section, there is a strong possibility that you may find your own methodology within it, establish your own belief, and eventually reach the other side of the Dao.
That’s enough of the digression, let’s get back to the topic at hand.
(to be continued)
The English translation is mainly done by AI and is inevitably not accurate enough. Please refer to the original Chinese text below for a more accurate understanding.
联合国引领人类社会打造数字地球的必要性和可行性（008）
— — 致联合国秘书长古特雷斯及全球贤达的公开信
“太上，不知有之；
其次，亲而誉之；
其次，畏之；
其次，侮之。
信不足焉，有不信焉。
悠兮其贵言。
功成事遂，百姓皆谓我自然”。
— — 《道德经》17章
“对“道”认知圆满（与“道”一体）的人，根本不知还有什么“道”。
对“道”有一定认知的人。他们对“道”是亲近和赞美的。
对“道”一知半解的人。他们对“道”虽不明白，但有敬畏之心。
对“道”完全没有认知的人。他们对“道”往往会轻蔑之、践踏之。
当一个人信不足的时候，就算你告诉他的是一个事实，他也依然不会相信。
所以，“道”的理论多说无益（说了也没人信啊）。
只要你能（运用“道”）把事情做成功。
大家都会认为：本来就是这样啊。 ”
— — Topal译释
中篇：认知（理论）
通过《道德经》这本小册子，老子的思想深刻地影响了人类社会。但是，对于其中内容的认知，2000多年来也没有达成共识。是这5000多字的文言文内容，真的那么难以理解吗？当然不是，是不同人有不同角度、不同立场。对老子的思想尚且如此，更何况一般人讲出来的东西呢。
无论我们前面的分析多么头头是道，一涉及到解决问题的具体方案，尤其这个方案还是涉及到区块链、涉及到数字货币和数字资产，人们往往是不屑一顾，或嗤之以鼻。认为完全没有可行性，连探讨的意义都没有。因为，现阶段至少有两大思维陷阱禁锢着人们的认知。
一是中心化思维。联合国体系并不是没有关注到区块链和数字货币。联合国开发计划署2018年就在探讨数字货币的融资作用，联合国下属的国际电联也发布过“数字货币全球倡议”。但是，这些探讨都是在中心化思维下进行的，根本跳不出传统金融的固有窠臼。注定没有出路。
二是静态化思维。一说去中心化数字货币，人们立即就联想到比特币、以太坊。虽说它们曾经也确实达到过数万亿美元的市值，但毕竟都是市场炒作起来的，极不稳定，更没有任何保障。用这样的模式解决联合国资金问题，当然看不到多少可行性。也正因为如此，2022年8月，联合国贸易和发展会议还阐明了联合国要遏制发展中国家加密货币的立场。
这显然是一种静态思维。且不说以比特币、以太坊为代表的这一类数字货币最终能否成功，现在下结论还为时过早。更重要的是，它们并不是去中心化数字货币的唯一选择，我们不去探讨，怎么知道没有更多、更好的选择呢。比如我这个方案中提出的数字权分 — YL，就是一种新的选择。发展中国家不是要遏制数字货币，而是要抓紧探索、抓紧发展数字货币。
当双方的认知差距这么大时，探讨就没意义了，根本没可能进行。怎么办？这就是我们这个中篇 — 认知篇，要解决的问题。
怎么解决？让大家的认知都统一在Topal的认知体系里吗。
绝对不是。就算是老子，大家很想把自己的认知，统一在他的认知范畴内，2000多年了也没做到。何况是今天这个人心更浮躁、人文更碎片，人人都有自己独特主见的特殊时代。解决的办法，是我们一起来寻找、或探求一种方法论，一种建立“信的认知”的方法论。这个方法论也不是统一的，而是根据每个人的意愿、习性、喜好而自行建立的。但它有个统一的衡量标准，那就是见证。这个见证在于：能否用这种方法论建立起“信的认知”。这就像老子说的：功成事遂，百姓皆谓我自然。“功成事遂”，这就是见证。本来就是按照自己的意愿，自然而然得到的见证，很平常啊。可是，你是如何“功成事遂”的呢？因为你在这个过程中与“道”同频了，你在不知不觉中依“道”而行了。所以，你能“功成事遂”，否则，是不可能的。
什么叫“信的认知”呢。无论什么样的新认知，要让一个人信是很难的。信的认知，就是这种认知能让人信。而且是完全相信，十分相信，信得足。如果你只有三分信、五分信，甚至八分信、九分信，哪怕还有一点点怀疑，都属于信不足。老子这句话极其精辟：“信不足焉，有不信焉”。你只要不是十分信，只要还有一点点怀疑，那就不可能是真信。不是真信，事实摆在面前你都还会怀疑。你的认知就不是真知，不是真知你就不可能真行、真干。没有真行、真干，哪来的“功成事遂”。还有中国明朝思想家王阳明的“知行合一”，讲的都是同一个道理。没有真知，是不可能“知行合一”的。
接下来的认知篇，你可以认为我是在讲故事，也可以认为我是在讲“道”。但是，那只是我的“道”，不是你的“道”，更不是这个世界上的普遍之“道”。
老子的道德经，也是在讲“道”，讲的也是老子自己的“道”。所以，老子很不情愿讲他自己这个“道”。有什么意义呢，讲了也白讲。“道可道，非恒道”，每个人都只能认知自己的“道”，每个人所认知自己的“道”，又与他人不同。但老子也很豁达，没关系，你要我写就写。最终每个人悟的“道”，不都要有“功成事遂”来见证吗。一旦能够得到了这个见证，大家又会发现，“条条大路通罗马”，所有的“道”又都是同一个“道”了。
对老子的“道”，绝大多数人是以学习的态度，在其中去悟自己的“道”。而对我本篇所论之“道”，大家完全可以以批判的态度，去发掘自己的“道”。但即使是批判，你也要明白我说的是什么意思吧。所以，可以批驳、可以质疑，但没必要蔑视、更没必要去侮辱它。这封公开信，明面上是写给秘书长和全球贤达，实质上是写给全球所有有缘人。只要这个认知篇你还看得下去，就极有可能在里面找到自己的方法论，建立起自己信的认知，从而抵达道的彼岸。
闲话说得很多了，下面言归正传。
（未完待续）
