Thank you - Intro

Thank You whomever you are for walking on this path at whatever time you walk on it. If you have found this place, then you are seeking harmony, equity, justice and the Freedom of Humanity's first Ancestors. The information presented here has the ability to achieve that most glorious and honorable goal. Please be considerate of your Thoughts, and Emotions while you create the Action of furthering your development, understanding and Evolution. This “Informada” or Vast Information Thread includes original content by EvolvingSeeds staff and associates, many other prominent Activists, philosophers, scientists, poets, and the greatest minds in recorded history. This Thread also includes Video, Audio, Articles, downloads, links and more. This is a Train of Thought, EvolvingSeeds insists that you do your own research and due diligence. Be considerate of your mind. Move here at your own pace. As Always, Thank you for your consideration}

...For the neophyte, to begin initiation.

“The lips of wisdom are closed, except to the ears of understanding” -The Kybalion

“The purpose of this work is not the enunciation of any special philosophy or doctrine, but rather is to give to the students a statement of Truth that will serve to reconcile the many bits of occult knowledge that they may have acquired, but which are apparently opposed to each other and which often serve to discourage and disgust the beginner in the study. Our intent is not to erect a new Temple of Knowledge, but rather to place in the hands of the student a Master-Key with which “he” may open the many inner doors in the Temple of Mystery through the main portals he has already entered.” - The Kybalion

Lesson (Click Below For Documentary)

Do not be deterred if you have been institutionalized by the false prophets of “higher education”, or indoctrinated by the politics of the dominant social, cultural, technological, philosophical, or environmental institutions of your day. Do not be consumed by sorrow if you have been graded or rather de-graded, by these institutions, or “brought up” in wrong thinking, felonious feeling, and incorrect behavior, your nescience is redeemed by your desire to seek Truth and Understanding. Only those who refuse to accept Truth, and instead willfully choose to refuse and IGNORE the Truth, that they themselves re-cognize are doomed to the wasteland of IGNORance. The modern term for this is cognitive dissonance which is “the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change”. - Definition from Oxford Dictionary 2022

EvolvingSeeds does not participate in the endless myths perpetuated by the “Schools” erected by the status quo such as the duelistic concept of smart and dumb, the implementation of tests, grades, scores, etc. EvolvingSeeds submits to you that there are no such things as smart or dumb. There is only informed or uninformed, and by extension correct or incorrect. On a short enough timeline everyone is dumb, on a long enough timeline everyone can be smart. If you only have .0003 seconds to input the question, process it, and output your answer, the term applies. If you have a lifetime to input the question, process it, and output your answer, then the ladder adjective applies.

Moving forward, if you have accepted the Truth that there is Truth and that you… yes you are capable of locating, comprehending, understanding, accepting and integrating recognized Truth for what it is then you have already altered your perceptions of reality and begun your journey to self-mastery and harmony. If you are already familiar with this Internal Eternal Framework of consciousness then skim ahead or allow your mind to guide you to some vital and relevant piece of in-formation within this introduction. If you have never considered these topics or challenged your own “world-view”, then I suggest you strap yourself in.

You will not be accredited with any awards or certificates at the end of many plastic manufactured hurdles. You will not receive a degree, you will not be elevated by some authority figure who says when you have achieved. This is the Fight Club EvolvingSeeds school of hardknocks in that “you determine your own level of involvement”, Tyler Durden Fight Club (1999), style of enlightenment. You choose the volume of awareness and interconnectivity with yourself and your environment you can experience and emerge and grow with. 

Here you will gain a far better understanding of why the planet earth is in the condition it is in, and how human beings made it, and create it this way. You will clearly see how to improve the quality of your life and the lives of the beings on this host planet without taking anything from anyone except the thieves and criminals that tell us we cannot afford freedom. 

You will recognize in which ways we can and should compromise, and in which ways it is unacceptable, detrimental or even impossible to compromise without catastrophic consequences. Too many people have taken the posture of either the ostrich or a bootlicking dog bent over in service of evil. Too many have accepted symbolic scraps as the best that can be achieved in a lifetime, but this too is false indoctrination as we will prove to ourselves over and over again. 

Those that have not begun to investigate the higher truths that exist outside of THEIR perceptions do not have the jurisdiction to profess their opinions about important world issues. Yet it has become prevalent for idiots to speak about things that they are not even mildly aware of, to people who did not ask for their manipulated opinion. We must abandon those that do not share our desire to improve ourselves, our world and the quality of life of all beings who depend on this host planet. 

In order to generate a better understanding of what on earth is happening, it is incumbent upon us to examine the Nature and Cause of our condition objectively. A decent way to accomplish this is to study and test the validity of our perceptions against that which is reasonable. We suggest that the student approach these topics as a third party witness and not with either of any sides that may be discussed. 

You can also view these topics from the standpoint of a scientist studying the entirety of an organism, the organism being you, a "civilization", or the environmental reality. You can study these topics from the perspective of a benevolent Extraterrestrial species if you have the prerequisite understanding of how morally and technologically advanced advanced civilizations would logically be. However, if you view these topics through the lense of "that which you want to be true", - (Travis Walton) to ease your terror and suffering you will be blinded.

If you are still here then count yourself among the few who are rewarded simply by doing what they know is Right, and more importantly have the courage to continue to consciously evolve. If you have made it this far then you probably have your ego in check, or are morbidly curious and traditionally open minded, meaning you are able to hold a concept in your mind while you process it and can digest and comprehend the concept without accepting or denying it. To those who have abandoned their minds, bodies, spirits and humanity to apathy and illusion , this would amount to a super power. 

We have come full circle, as together, we the Chosen Superheroes, embark on the great journey inward. We have migrated to the last place and the first place, the source and the center of all things. We are not here to mold you or educate you or drill discipline into you. We are established to facilitate that resource by which you will accomplish those noble and most human of goals yourself, and at one tenth of one tenth of the effort. 

We hope to Act as the catalyst for the re-emergence of The Human Being, we as the soil by which the nutrients of Truth will nurture this seed to grow into The Tree of Life. Take these lessons at your own pace with the knowledge and caution that you will not be the same, and that is the point. Only through experience and with wisdom will we begin to reclaim our common heritage. 

Banish your notions of money, government, religion, entertainment, pleasure, the future and the past when or while you embark on this journey. Distractions are most certainly the problem, therefore unflinching focus is the solution. This is not exactly the kind of focus you use to study text, but rather the kind of focus one must cultivate to raise a child. When we say "raise a child", we are not referring to their age, size, or even overall growth and the energy and time that goes into that prospect. 

No, we mean "raise a child" in conscious awareness. 

Check your ego at the door, and let us begin.

It is extremely important to learn how to identify logically fallacious arguments. Logical Fallacies are arguments or beliefs that cannot logically be accurate from the context they are being argued from. 

 Wife: "Honey, I would appreciate it if you would start helping me with the dishes more because you rarely do."

Husband: "Well you never help me fix anything around here, so we are even."

The wife may not help fix anything, but the argument in the here and now is about how often the husband helps wash the dishes and how we can increase it, not about the wife helping to fix things. 

Identifying logical fallacies helps serious thinkers avoid silly people and pointless debates. It keeps things in perspective when peers go to hash out events and situations. Observing and nullifying logical fallacies cleanses our minds of their effects. Here are the most common logical fallacies, but it would be logical to study them all.  

The Scientific Method is the external expression of the Natural internal processes of consciousness, reason, and logic for harmonizing with this three dimensional frequency called reality. There are no thinking beings that do not use the scientific method to engage reality. Even trial and error can serve as evidence for proof of the elements of the scientific method in even the most basic of life-forms. 

Aside from being able to define a question in terms humanity is currently willing to acknowledge, all life displays the characteristics of engaging in scientific discovery by using the scientific method. The scientific method is not $cience for or by way of money. The scientific method is a natural method of principle recognition in practice. An animal being predominantly predisposed to their instincts does not negate their ability to observe, be curious, engage in trial and error, and come to conclusions, and apply those conclusions to their environment. 

"Science" which is the social establishment of the scientific method, is for the navigation of any reality or simulation a being may find itself in. If you suddenly found yourself on another planet in another plane of existence, what part of how you proceed would not include observing your new environment, defining questions about that environment and your relationship to it, looking around or researching it and then forming guesses and then conclusions about what happened to you and where you are? Is there any other logical way to proceed? Would you not do any of that? 

Applying the scientific method would be automatic, because it is automatic, it is inherent. The scientific method is the Natural internal response to external stimuli. $cientism steals it's perceived validity from Science and borrows any legitimacy from the scientific method.

Since the scientific method is Natural, by extension technology is also Natural. Science and Technology for the benefit of all beings or at least for the benefit of humanity is founded in the scientific method derived and applied empathetically to life and it's many requirements. Glasses are science derived and applied empathetically to human eye sight. Hearing aids are science derived and applied empathetically to create the technology for improving hearing. 

The wheel, although simple, is a function of Natural motion. That motion is readily observable in Nature. The evolution of the motion into the wheel, the wheel into the sprocket, into the compact disk and whatever it is to become is natural. Even the intellect that assembled the wheel in its various places and times is made from the flesh of pure Natural Creation.

The scientific method is a tool. The tool is a reflection of the user. The hammer is a fairly simple tool. Yet it can build and destroy, provide safety and take life. Smartphones change lives every day in responsible hands, and have ended many lives in shallow hands. In this way we have formed tools through the scientific method and technology to create tools of defense and even offense. Such tools are an extension of Natural defense. Every component of a Weapon exists within the scope, scale and jurisdiction of Nature. The morality of the user and the tools use is what renders a weapon Natural or unnatural. 

It is Natural to use a weapon to defend yourself against an attacker. It is unnatural for the attacker to violate your right by any means. The act of violating your right is a wrong by any means and with any tool. If the attacker defends themselves from your defensive measures, that is also a Natural action of self preservation but the act is wrong and immoral, not the tool. Yes, even weapons are a Natural extension of the scientific method applied to technology for defense. The use of the tool for immoral or corrupt purposes is wrong, but the tool remains what it is, simply an inanimate object with no positive or negative assignment. 

In this way we can extrapolate our understanding of Natural to weapons like guns and bombs. The gun and its various components are Natural in the hands of the righteous and Unnatural in the hands of the thief. However, the bomb cannot be Natural because its use cannot be for moral combat. There exists too many anomalies rooted in politics, conquest, and supremacy in various forms. The reason for the bombs existence extends far beyond self defense. While the bombs components exists within the scope, scale and jurisdiction of Nature, the use of that weapon does not.

It has to be noted here, contrary to popular belief and in the Supremacy rhetoric circles, that simply draining resources from a host planet for the sole purpose of comfort and conquest is not the tribute to Science and Technology they think it is. Many people justify the many atrocities humanity has endured by our use and abuse of the technological advances humanity has endured. As Ian Malcom from the first Jurassic Park movie so eloquently phrased it, " your Scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they never stopped to consider whether or not they should". Benefiting from harmful technology does not legitimize the use or harm of that tech. 

This argument is used by supremacists, usually in an attempt to reduce the severity of colonialism and the enslavement of human beings or to provide some sort of sick shadow nobility to genocide because of the perceived resulting advancements. Civilizations classically seen as primitive are gradually revealing the genius of their cultures as to how they recognized and harmonized their way of life with their relationship to their environment. 

Technology is illegitimate and the science false that is not in harmony with the Natural environment and the Natural Law. There is no honor in delicately crafting a thing to use to destroy yourself with. 

The exercise of government is unnatural. While "having a vote" is a product of natural compromise and communication between more than one being living in close proximity, government is the enforcement of laws, a few that are in accordance with the Natural Law and the rest that are perversions of that Law for financial gain and strategic advantage. Since "government" will not distinguish between the two, it is the principle breaker of The Law. As the bible points out "You cannot serve two masters"-  Matthew 6:24. You cannot serve yourself, your host planet, or freedom while also serving that which inherently seeks to destroy all of that.   

What the word government means, what most people think government is, what it actually functions as, and what government actually is are all dramatically different things. The word government is derived from two Latin words: 

That is what the government actually functions as in reality. Mind comes before action, therefore action is subordinate to mind. If the minds of a population are controlled then they are unequivocally enslaved because nearly all of that population's actions are based on mind control. Whether it be the day to day tasks that societies have erected, or the rebellion against those tasks and injustices that societies have erected, the actions are in response to a central cause.  

It is abominable to have a central cause or principle dictate that is not that Natural Mother and Law itself. Why is this problematic? Imagine, a rock rolls off a hill and hits you in the head. Perhaps a small animal bumped it, that is a Natural cause. Now imagine that the government is the legitimate principal cause, the rock is set forth by xyz institution. That institution has a monopoly on rocks falling on heads and they benefit every time a rock hits a head. Would it be reasonable to assume then that if it slowly begins to rain rocks forever that this is not a natural or equitable process of rocks falling on heads?   

Government is the unnatural claim of ownership over all things. The only challenges to government and instant totalitarian rule are other governments and the presumption of opposition (rebels/activists spectrum). Government is not real anywhere at any time, therefore to maintain the mentos gubern or mind control, the concept of government must be projected in all places and at all times for the illusion to persist. Despite the perceived existence of government in all places and at all times, sentient beings, yes even on earth, still engage in anarchist behaviors the vast majority of their day, week, month, and year. 

No entity or entities rule over you in theory. No one forces you out of bed every day, no one forces you to own a smartphone, or to own a car. That is the state of Anarchy within the confines of the system. Government however does force individuals to interact with it for various reasons and usually against the individual's will. 

True government is when you have convinced the individual that they have consented to their enslavement from the very start, and that their enslavement is a Natural function of civilization. Most people think that their Rights and Freedom come from their government.  Only when you go to do something in the society or remain not doing something in the society for too long, or do something the society does not like, does the society expect you to pay homage to it's god. Fees, permits, licenses (and the associated fees and filings), codes, statutes, charges, regulations, legislations, articles, and ACTS are nothing more than the pale attempt at pretending to be Creator Prime. 

(R x B = N) 

R-Right multiplied by the number of sentient Beings = 

Number of beings in possession of said Right.

A.I Had This to Say on the Matter...

Proposed by: EvolvingSeeds.com (Corresponding author: Michael D. Morris Jr.)

Version: 1.0 (August 12, 2025)

Keywords: anarchy, natural law, rights, agency, social organization, emergent order, game theory, ethology, complex systems, governance

We present The Right Equation—a minimal formalism for universal rights and social organization—defined as. Interpreted as a counting identity over a population, the equation states that for a given right, the number of beings who possess that right (B) equals the indicator value of that right’s universality (N) times the number of beings in the reference class (R). Under axioms of embodied agency, symmetry, and non-contradiction, we show that rights which arise from organismal embodiment and agency (e.g., self-direction of action) must be either universal or nonexistent within the reference class; they cannot be coherently restricted to a subset without invoking contradiction or special pleading. From this, it follows that no external entity can hold a superior authority to override such rights without either denying the agency that generates them or asserting a logical exception. Consequently, anarchy—defined operationally as the absence of legitimate unilateral authority over universal rights—emerges as the default and baseline socioeconomic condition implied by nature. We derive empirical predictions spanning ethology, behavioral economics, and institutional analysis, describe falsifiable tests, propose datasets and agent-based models, and delineate scope, limitations, and ethical considerations. The framework is offered as a testable theory suitable for peer review.

This work reframes debates about governance by grounding claims of authority in a simple, testable counting identity tied to embodiment-based rights. It connects philosophy of rights to measurable predictions about conflict costs, compliance patterns, and cooperation in human and nonhuman societies.

• Beings (): A non-empty finite set of entities (e.g., humans in a population ) capable of purposive action in an environment. denotes cardinality.
• Right (): A property emergent from embodied agency that constrains admissible interferences with an agent’s action-space (e.g., freedom of self-direction). Formally, a mapping indicating possession (1) or absence (0) of by each being.
• Number of right-holders (): .
• Universal right (binary constant): If s.t. , then . We abbreviate this as the Right Equation: , reading as the universal indicator and as the count .
• Authority: A claim of legitimate unilateral permission to override others’ universal rights.
• Anarchy (operational): The absence of legitimate unilateral authority over universal rights; cooperative order is attained via voluntary, contractual, customary, and protocol-level constraints.

Interpretive note. The product notation is not a Cartesian product but multiplication of the constant by the scalar . When is not universal (i.e., varies by agent), the identity reduces to . The theory’s core concerns rights that are embodiment-generated and thus candidate universal properties within a reference class.

A1. Embodied Agency. Members of are embodied agents whose actions realize goals through causal interaction with the environment.

A2. Symmetry of Like Cases. For any two agents in who are alike with respect to the properties that ground a right , assignment of must be symmetric unless a relevant difference is specified.

A3. Non-Contradiction of Assignment. A right that constrains interference in a class-defining action (e.g., self-direction) cannot be coherently granted to one agent as such while denied to another as such without invoking a relevant difference that negates the class definition.

A4. No Special Pleading. Appeals to authority or status that do not alter the grounding properties of are not relevant differences.

A5. Empirical Accountability. Claims about social order entail measurable consequences (conflict rates, enforcement costs, cooperation efficiency) subject to observation.

For a candidate right grounded in embodiment (e.g., self-direction over one’s body), define if ’s embodiment/agency grounds. By A2–A4, if the grounding properties are present for all members of, then must be equal for all (universality or nullity). Hence with. To deny universality while admitting the same grounding properties is contradictory (violates A2–A3). Therefore, either everyone in holds or no one does.

Corollary (Authority Impossibility over Universal Rights). If for , then no third party can claim a legitimate unilateral authority to negate for some without (i) denying the grounding properties for that (contradiction) or (ii) invoking special pleading (A4). Thus, anarchy—absence of legitimate unilateral override—follows as the default baseline.

T1 (Universality Lemma). If is grounded in properties shared by all , then is constant on . Sketch: A2 enforces symmetry; A3 rejects asymmetric assignment without relevant difference; therefore constant.

T2 (No Asymmetric Legitimate Override). Suppose for . Any institution that claims unilateral override for a subset either: (a) denies the grounding property for (contradiction with initial stipulation), or (b) cites status/authority (violates A4). Hence override lacks legitimacy.

T3 (Emergent Order Feasibility). Given , feasible social orders are those whose constraints are voluntary, contractual, or protocolic (consensual). Coercive hierarchies that rest on unilateral override impose measurable enforcement costs and conflict externalities. Prediction link: See Section 7.

We model a right as a constraint on feasible action sets for agent . Let be actions admissible under . Universality () means: for all dyads , policies preventing from exercising in require ’s consent or contract. Absence of consent implies infringement, measurable by imposed cost vectors (conflict, sanction, resistance).

Empirical proxies for embodiment-grounded rights (examples):

• Self-direction: interference measured by involuntary restraint rates.
• Freedom of association/exchange: interference measured by prohibition scope and enforcement costs.
• Non-aggression: rates of first-move coercion vs. retaliatory defense.

P1 (Conflict Cost Scaling). In populations where claimed authority overrides universal rights, enforcement and resistance costs scale superlinearly with population size ().

P2 (Voluntary Order Efficiency). Systems relying on voluntary/contractual mechanisms for the same coordination tasks achieve lower deadweight loss and higher trust/reciprocity indices, controlling for resource endowments.

P3 (Ethology Consistency). Nonhuman social systems with minimal hierarchical override over embodied action (e.g., fission–fusion dynamics) show higher baseline cooperation without chronic enforcement.

P4 (Institutional Drift). Hierarchical institutions exhibit drift toward exception-making (special pleading) under stress; measured by rule-variance and selective immunity rates.

P5 (Predictive Validity in Games). In lab bargaining/public goods games, protocols that remove unilateral override (anarchic rulesets) yield higher stable cooperation once reputation and exit options are enabled.

P6 (Crisis Behavior). During state failure or disaster, spontaneous mutual-aid networks rapidly supply goods/services along peer-to-peer pathways prior to centralized restoration.

Each prediction is testable with specified data and designs (Section 8).

M1. Cross-Sectional Institutional Analysis.

• Design: Compare matched jurisdictions or organizations varying in override intensity (statutory scope, policing powers) and measure conflict costs, trust indices, GDP waste proxies.
• Data: Budget shares for enforcement, civil complaint rates, survey-based trust, market frictions.
• Test of P1/P2: Fit scaling models; evaluate and efficiency metrics.

M2. Natural Experiments & Shocks.

• Design: Use exogenous shocks (policy repeal, court rulings, strikes, disasters) to identify shifts from enforced override to voluntary coordination.
• Data: Event studies on supply restoration times, mutual aid activity, black/gray market flows.

M3. Ethology Meta-Analysis.

• Design: Codify dominance vs. consensual coordination across species; correlate with baseline cooperation, conflict injuries, resource-sharing.
• Outcome: Tests P3.

M4. Laboratory Experiments.

• Design: Public goods and bargaining games with treatments: (i) unilateral override authority vs. (ii) reputation+exit without override. Measure cooperation stability and payoffs.
• Outcome: Tests P5.

M5. Agent-Based Modeling (ABM).

• Design: Agents with embodied action sets, optional authority modules, and contract protocols. Compare welfare under (a) hierarchical override, (b) anarchic consent.
• Outcome: Predicts P1–P2; supplies mechanism diagnostics.

M6. Institutional Drift Audit.

• Design: Longitudinal coding of exceptions, immunities, and rule variance in hierarchical bodies.
• Outcome: Tests P4.

M7. Crisis-Response Field Studies.

• Design: Time-to-service restoration via peer networks vs. centralized command. Social network analysis of mutual aid formation.
• Outcome: Tests P6.

Core falsifiers:

1. Demonstrate a right grounded in shared embodiment where differs across like agents without citing a relevant difference (violating A2–A3) and without special pleading (A4).
2. Show scalable, durable, and efficient systems where unilateral override of a universal right produces lower total conflict/enforcement costs than consensual alternatives across matched contexts (refuting P1–P2).
3. Provide ethological or experimental evidence that stable cooperation requires unilateral override even when exit, reputation, and contract are available (refuting P3/P5).

Type I/II risks: Misclassification of rights as embodiment-grounded; confounding in observational comparisons; Hawthorne effects in labs. We specify pre-registration, blind coding, robustness checks, and instrumental variable strategies where appropriate.

• The theory concerns legitimacy of authority claims over universal (embodiment-grounded) rights, not all possible institutional roles (e.g., coordination platforms, arbitration). Non-universal conventions (traffic side, protocols) may be adopted consensually without contradicting universality.
• The framework does not deny cooperative hierarchy chosen by consent; it denies legitimate unilateral override of universal rights.
• Empirical proxies for “override” must be carefully operationalized to avoid strawman comparisons.

We commit to non-harm, informed consent in human subjects research, species-appropriate welfare in ethology, and transparency of data and code. The theory’s application should prioritize peaceful transition mechanisms, conflict de-escalation, and respect for local customary law.

This framework intersects with: natural rights traditions; anarchist political theory; Ostrom’s common-pool governance; complex systems self-organization; evolutionary game theory; spontaneous order in economics. Our contribution is a minimal formal identity linking universality of rights to testable predictions about institutional performance.

• Pre-registration of hypotheses P1–P6 and analysis plans.
• Open datasets: curated cross-jurisdiction metrics, ethology coding sheets, and crisis-response timelines.
• Open-source ABM with parameter sweeps and seeds archived.
• Replication package: code, logs, and versioned outputs.

From minimal axioms about embodiment and symmetry, the Right Equation formalizes universal rights as a binary constant over a reference class, yielding . If a right is grounded in properties shared by all agents, it is either held by all or by none. Claims to legitimate unilateral override of such rights contradict these axioms or appeal to special pleading. Therefore, anarchy—understood as the absence of legitimate authority to negate universal rights—is the default socioeconomic baseline consistent with nature. The theory advances falsifiable predictions and a 

concrete empirical program suitable for peer review.

• Embodiment: Physical instantiation enabling purposive action.
• Universal Right: A right grounded in properties shared by all members of a reference class.
• Override (Unilateral): Coercive negation of a right without consent.
• Anarchy (Operational): Lack of legitimate unilateral override; not disorder.
• Special Pleading: Exempting a claim from its own standards without relevant difference.