It’s not until the very end that I give something concrete. Almost everything comes from observing the world and how it behaves, with only a very underdeveloped and superficial academic background. However, this framework works well to describe reality. The biggest problem with this philosophy, in fact, is its generality, because to deal with each specific case, one must analyze more deeply, not just use this framework.
I'll be honest. This is barely some schematics that are very much subject to change and in DIRE need of expansion. Still, I've been slacking on this too much. So now, you get subjected to my stupidity. You're welcome, in advance.
Reality sends signals to the body, which transforms them into perceptions, and these perceptions become ideas that influence other related ideas. With this information, the observer performs a mental calculation to decide which path to take. They make a decision and act upon it, leading to effects that manifest in reality, which then sends corresponding signals, forming an input/output cycle.
The human is an organic animal characterized by the ability to abstract and assign signals from the environment to others in order to create concepts, to create new concepts from existing ones, and to use these concepts as information to make decisions and act upon them. There are two parts to the human being:
It is a special idea that forms in each observer almost at the beginning of their life, starting by distinguishing the environment from oneself, and from there becoming more complex.
Characteristics:
It is an event and its psychic consequence within an observer, usually generated by a lack, an aggression, or a mix of both. It changes an individual’s behavior. We’ll see how later.
The human being is an economic–political–ethical creature, and all of their reasoning follows a model commonly associated with economics (see Mises and the Austrian School of Economics). But it isn’t economic reasoning, it’s praxeological, meaning every decision involves a rational calculation based on the information available to the observer, and from that decision comes an action. Let’s see how this calculation works:
The fact that this calculation applies simultaneously to ethics, politics, and economics implies three things:
A dogma is an idea entrenched within the self (thanks to the process of self-definition of the self), which holds validity for the observer through self-validation, and validity for others through aggressive imposition. Characteristics:
Dogma behaves in a specific way, which allows us to detect it when it emerges in a person and to understand how it reproduces. When it enters the world through an observer, it inevitably comes into conflict with the external dimension, due to its static nature in contrast to life’s fluidity. This provokes aggression in the observer against anything that threatens the dogma, as they perceive it as an attack on their self. This aggression generates violence, of any kind (physical, emotional, symbolic, passive, etc.), with the goal of reproducing, imposing, and spreading the dogma.
Dogma creates cognitive biases that reaffirm it or deny external reality. This leads to false information in the praxeological calculation, producing systematic errors in action. Furthermore, dogma rejects anything that contradicts it, filtering information and breaking relationships that would otherwise exist naturally.
Dogma reproduces itself through the violence it generates, and it can continue to manifest even when that violence is no longer present. The infected person usually rejects facts in favor of the dogma and sacrifices themselves and others in its name.
Dogma generates violence of any kind, and that violence or aggression causes trauma in another person, creating a void in their self that must be filled, leading them to create their own dogma. That dogma, in turn, generates more violence as they try to fill the void, solve the problem, or simply spread the idea.
Humans organize themselves into structures, where two or more people arrange themselves, each with certain rights and duties, acting toward a single goal. These structures form through a written or unwritten agreement understood by all parties. Usually, the person with the most power imposes their will on the others, making the structure follow their will preferentially, acting like an individual. But as it grows, it becomes more abstract and impersonal, until that will becomes universal and the idea hegemonic.
When a structure has a power imbalance, and the person with the most power imposes their will, their dogma, aggressively upon the others, the aggressor’s will becomes the dogma of the organization. This causes the same dogmatic behaviors in individuals who belong to that infected structure, and it can even create complicit or reactive dogmas.
Since structures act like individuals, dogmatic structures behave just like dogmatic individuals, aggressive, defensive, and protective of their dogma at all costs. But beyond that, they transmit their dogma to the individuals within them, leading to an epidemic of dogma. This makes dogmatic structures extremely dangerous, capable of generating generations upon generations of dogma. And these structures can even institutionalize it, which means the dogma becomes part of the structure’s “self.” Dogmatic structures perpetuate the illusion of meaning at the cost of the freedom of the observers within them.
Moreover, these dogmas damage the way the structure acts and makes decisions, providing false information for the individual calculations of its members, and therefore, for any process or result that passes through that structure.
Society is a network of interconnected people who share information, exchange knowledge, belong to the same culture, and follow clear behavioral patterns. Society functions like a web of interconnected nodes, with each node representing an individual. Within the network, countless ideas are transmitted and shared, sometimes individually and sometimes collectively. Structures can also form within this network, further facilitating the transmission of ideas and the allocation of resources. These structures serve as amplifiers of ideas and as large chains of shared resources.
A society without dogmas functions voluntarily, guided by a praxeological calculation that provides incentives for goodness and cooperation, without violence. Such societies are tolerant and fluid among all their members, allowing long-term ethical investment (being kind). In a society free of dogmas, what unites people is their need for external resources, the efficiency of specialization, territorial proximity, and the human need for socialization.
When a dogma is introduced into a society, individuals become aggressive, spreading this to the rest of the network. The effect slowly extends to everyone close to “patient zero,” who then pass it on to others, creating a domino effect. The dogma incites everyone to act aggressively, leading the internal calculation to favor aggressive options even when they’re not the most beneficial. People begin acting in aggressively selfish ways. The system rewards distrust and punishes cooperation, breaking relationships that would otherwise be beneficial and distorting the information that enters future praxeological calculations. When the dogma reaches structures, it becomes institutionalized, worsening its spread. Examples of dogmatic attitudes include the exclusion of minorities from society or the imposition of moral hierarchies, both of which distort actions and relationships.
Because of the very nature of praxeological calculation and the limitations of human knowledge, the only economic system that can truly function in the real world, the most just, moral, and efficient in practice, is capitalism, a system in which individuals voluntarily exchange private goods with subjective value. This system works perfectly, but the outcome depends on the individuals and structures using it. As with mathematics or physics, any error is human error, not a flaw in the formula. Capitalism is a Swiss precision machine, a pure praxeological calculation, a perfect mirror of the individuals who participate in the market.
Knowing that dogma is born within individuals and structures, the biased and filtered information it produces leads to behavioral changes in those infected by it. When this distortion enters the system, it produces different results. For example, if the goal is to follow a dogma of maximizing profits, the wellbeing of workers, prices, and product quality are sacrificed. All so-called “market failures” are simply dogmatic human actions which, when introduced into capitalism, yield exact and predictable results. Examples of extreme dogmatic capitalisms include Asian capitalisms such as the Japanese obsession with work, South Korea’s high suicide rates, or China’s labor exploitation and the disappearance of clean air in its cities. However, those are consequences of focusing on productivity, and clearly, it has worked to increase both productivity and wealth.
Since power has existed, history has been characterized by being directed by those who control that power. And that power is usually used according to the person’s dogma, to impose a hegemonic idea through violence. Therefore, to understand history, we must understand who controls violence (since they will impose their dogma), what their dogma is, and how they impose their will on society. Thus, we find three universal actors present throughout human history:
All historical conflicts are characterized by having two sides with different core ideas, and within each side, the same three groups. However, following the Iron Law of Oligarchy, power within structures tends to concentrate in a small elite of directors of violence. This means any change to the hegemonic idea happens through conflict and only in three possible ways:
The state (referring to the institution, not the government) is the ultimate dogmatic structure, since its defining characteristic is possessing the monopoly on "legitimate" violence. However, by observing any action of the state, such as its aggressiveness, rigidity, and stability, we can detect the dogmatic patterns within it. This leads to the theory of the dogma-state.
The Dogma-State: A state that has institutionalized a dogma and uses that dogma as justification for its existence. These justifications are circular, meaning the dogma is true because the state must protect it, and this causes the state to become unquestionable. Whoever wishes to control the state must create a compatible dogma that aligns with the institutional narrative. The dogma is what gives the state its legitimacy; as long as society believes in the dogma, the state will retain the legitimacy to impose its will. The most common form of the dogma-state is the nation-state.
In fact, its foundation reveals the true reason the state exists. Originally, the first modern states were monarchies, and the goal of their rulers was none other than to spread their will and beliefs throughout all the territory their armies controlled, as seen with Louis XIV and his famous phrase "I am the state."
The dogma-state (which I will refer to simply as the state, since all states after 1870 are dogma-states) appears in a dogmatized and violent society as a means to restore peace by imposing the dogma as the main rule of play. Thus, the state monopolizes violent power and incorporates more and more dogmas into its institutional identity (either to restore coherence to society or out of pure convenience), creating even more violence and more dogmas.
The state is unnecessary in a society without dogmas and cannot exist in it, and in a society that does have dogmas, it is ineffective, since it exists to preserve the dogma, not to satisfy anyone. The state exists to maintain the cycle of violence that it supposedly came to stop.
Regarding democracy, what happens is that through institutional structures, those who occupy positions of power change, but there is always a hegemonic dogma to which they connect and around which they build their own compatible dogmas. The institutional dogma manifests according to the will of the leader, and with enough power and a strong enough shift, whoever controls the institution can change the hegemony (usually by creating a new constitution). Democracy merely distributes the control of the dogma somewhat more broadly, but it does not destroy it; in fact, democracy itself becomes a dogma.
Now, every state can be classified on a scale according to how much it uses violence to impose its will, that is, how intense its dogma is. This scale runs from extreme totalitarianism, where the dogma controls every aspect of life, to absolute de-dogmatization, meaning the point at which the state is no longer necessary and anarchy can be achieved. The only thing that differentiates ideologies from one another is the dogma that justifies the state and the way it acts.
Lastly, it is important to note that state violence includes absorbing or suppressing any model that could threaten the total monopoly of the state over individual freedom. This is what historically led to the emergence of the welfare state, since the state sought to control and domesticate society, taking control of health, education, and resources, thereby ensuring that the population could not escape state control. The state may justify this through ad lazarum fallacies, appealing to the idea of helping the poor, the defenseless, and the vulnerable, and indeed, that was its original intention. However, the ultimate goal and result is the control of society and the maintenance of the illusion of morality.
The reasons people obey the state, generally and simultaneously, are:
This obedience is not only social but also psychological, since it reinforces the sense of belonging and prevents existential emptiness.
I know all this sounds very pamphleteering, but I am trying as much as possible to leave opinions aside. Still, it is necessary, very necessary, to understand the state if we want to imagine a world in which we no longer need it.
Human beings are trapped within our own understanding, bound by cognitive limitations. But beyond that, we’re trapped within layers of dogmas that suffocate society, millennia of trauma piled on our collective shoulders. As a species, we’ve spent centuries hurting and killing each other just to preserve the illusion of the self, to escape the external void, to mask our shortcomings, building structures and molding society and culture to become more efficient at aggression and imposition.
And if humanity continues down this path, it will lead to an inevitable scenario: mutual destruction, self-extinction, the suicide of our species.
Understanding this is only the first step toward healing.
We know we are trapped in this world. We cannot start over, leave everything behind, or refuse to act. Therefore, we must find a way to live. But there is no single way to live or to be happy. So, I am going to recommend what may work based on the conclusions of my framework.
The first thing you must begin to do is to de-dogmatize yourself, meaning to start tolerating and adapting to ideas you once considered crazy, or to question the ideas you already have established. But not only that. You must also dismantle your self, question it, purge it, and make it fluid, capable of tolerating others and itself. Accept that you hold ideas that limit you and stop giving them so much importance. Do not let them define you. Yes, this is very general, but remember that I do not have a magical formula for de-dogmatization. To completely de-dogmatize yourself, you must deal with your personal, familial, social, and all other traumas so that you can accept others and yourself. And by the way, let me be clear: the best thing you can do is ask for help. Do not try to do this alone. The only successful example of de-dogmatization I have seen is Kendrick Lamar’s album Mr. Morale & The Big Steppers. But that is a work of art, not an empirical process, so it only serves as an example, but a great one, because it faces trauma head-on and questions everything. In the end, only you can make your own path toward de-dogmatization.
De-dogmatization is not just about thinking, criticizing yourself, and healing from your traumas. It is the equivalent of Nietzsche’s Übermensch, but not in the way you might imagine. It is the equivalent of becoming the child Nietzsche spoke of, meaning to play with life, to understand everything as fiction, to stop getting upset over everything, to smile, to see life with that curiosity and wonder that people call childish but is actually human nature before being damaged by society. It is being healthy from the dogmatic virus. It is living with happiness, generosity, and kindness without losing critical thinking or maturity.
If this de-dogmatization were to become collective, little by little we could eliminate the need for a state or any form of aggression and violence, making everything function in the most efficient, just, and logical way possible, instead of the world rotted by dogmas that we live in today. A de-dogmatized society would not be perfect, but it would be free. Free from the illusions that rule us today.
Although it is true that there is no absolute truth, we can still establish broad, peaceful, and adaptable principles so that we can act daily in a non-dogmatic way.
These principles are not meant to be followed to the letter, but breaking them and believing you are justified in doing so is a clear sign of dogma, since dogmas break each and every one of these principles. Using these principles as conscious guidance is active de-dogmatization.
One of the most important things you must do is accept that ideas are fictions, and therefore there are no absolute truths or truths more valid than others just because. Although it is true that I have proposed a logical criterion of truth, no matter how much we follow this or any other truth criterion, ideas will never be able to represent external reality.
Life is empty of any ideas, rules, meaning, or purpose, and therefore, all of that is controlled by us. It is desolate, but at the same time liberating. You do not have to think about that emptiness all the time, just accept it and use it when you begin to think that life does not change, that everything is out of your control, that you can do nothing to improve or help others. That is false. Life is constant change, it flows like a river, and even if it is not perfect, it is yours, you control it, no one else does.
When you think the world is rotten, that you can do nothing but resign yourself and obey, that the structures are infected and there is nothing you can do about it, when you think the universe is against you, remember that this is what your brain tells you to maintain stability, born from the fear it carries, the fear created by trauma. YOU hold the key to move the world. Your life is immensely valuable, it has infinite potential, and you have the ability to make this world a better place. It does not matter if only a few receive the good you offer, that alone is enough. Use this freedom to act according to the vital principles and to build your life and surroundings consciously. Help someone without expecting anything in return, give a smile, offer a shoulder to cry on, listen, question, create. You are the only one who can redirect your life and make this a better world. And that is beautiful.
WARNING: This section may cause existential distress. If you do not feel emotionally stable, do not read it right now. It is not a spiritual or therapeutic exercise; it is a radical philosophical exploration. If you feel strong emotions while reading this and cannot handle them, stop and breathe. If you need help, call someone you trust.
Below Reality.