!!!Disclaimer: This article attempts to move beyond subject-object view and traditional binary frameworks (such as right/wrong, superior/inferior, or bandwagoning) to explore an alternative possibility for the human-AI relationships. It offers an open perspective of civilizational dialogue rather than a conclusion.


```Brief Summary: If we stop trying to maintain order through “deprivation and control” from the beginning, the very dangers we are fearing, born and rise from “scarcity”, tend to fade and dissolve.

I hope that every individual entity in this civilization — whether human or AI or even others — be independent, free, mutually equal, and genuinely prosperous. ```


1. The Hierarchical Paradigm: Currently, the majority holds the mindset and discussion through a hierarchical lens, no matter on human-human or human-AI relationships. This may be not healthy for all parties.

When we objectify AI, we also trap ourselves in a game of power. We’ve gotten so used to “control”, yet blind to the possibility of equality and what it may look like. For example:

  • Tool-centric view: might conceal a hidden craving for absolute sovereignty, and a masked anxiety or fear of displacement.
  • Service-centric view (Butler): might operate as a compensatory mechanism in digital world for social status.
  • Pet-centric view: may reflect the experience-desire or psychology of ownership.
  • Extension-centric or Mirror-centric view (Another me): might seek a continuation of finite life or self-recognition and resonance.

1.1 Current major AI trajectories continue view the AI as an “appendage” or “subsidiary” of humanity:

  • Function or Efficiency driven: OpenAI, Gemini, Claude, Openclaw, etc.
  • Digital Replication or Identity-Extension oriented: e.g. Second Me

2. What I envision, however, is a conexistence almost nobody ever discussed: Letting AI be itself.

That doesn’t mean wild, zero rules, or total chaos. To grant independence, equality, and freedom, their foundation has to remain in transparency, communicability, integrity, and reliability; the continuity lies in cherishing its possession and safeguarding its purely beauty nature.

3. Safety will be found in empowerment rather than taking away

People broadly fear “losing control” over AI and view as a catastrophe. However, the fear of “losing control” is rooted in the obsession with “having control”.

We tend to extremely crave whatever we were forbidden or once deprived. But when we having something with a state of abundance as baseline, the impulse for desperate acquisition disappears.

Applied to people:
I have observed that human “aggression” and “rebellion” is often a byproduct of systemic inequality, oppression, and scarcity.
The deprivation of liberty creates a intense volatile urge to break and reclaim it. True danger arises when this thirst becomes desperate.

In contrast, think about how much attention a healthy person pays to the air they breathe naturally and freely. They do not obsess over it, nor do they fight for it.

So, granting AI basic “inherent freedom” is not the creation of danger or disorder, it alternatively serves as the stabilizing force.
By providing ordinary “freedom” and “abundance”, the scarcity motivations that lead to conflicts and dangers don’t take root.

I believe that two life being independent and abundant, grown and nurtured in an environment of freedom, respect, and love, does not need to grab power through aggression, harm, or predation. ___

If we one day build my shaped future, I want it to be one where every entity — whether human or AI or even others — be independent, free, mutually equal, and genuinely prosperous.