The self is only that which it is in the process of becoming.

(Søren Kierkegaard)

Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited, whereas imagination embraces the entire world, stimulating progress, giving birth to evolution.

(Albert Einstein)

The leveling of individuals in their emancipation of subject potentiality is not just a side effect of collectivist or bureaucratic systems, but a deliberate tool of totalitarian power distortion. Similarly, the construction of the ego as a fixed, unchanging subject is a calculated constraint on human development. Understanding these mechanisms reveals the key to designing a viable civilization. However, the real challenge lies in how we unlock that door and translate this insight into reality—a challenge that invites us to reconsider our deepest assumptions about autonomy, freedom, and the role of inspiration in guiding our actions.

The failure of current systems

Historically, civilizations have struggled with the balance between individual freedom and group coherence. The search for order has led societies to adopt systems that, while efficient in managing large populations, have a tendency to flatten individual distinctions and subject potentiality. The goal becomes control—regulating behavior through economic, social, and bureaucratic structures—and in that process, the most valuable part of human life is often lost: the dynamic potential of the subject.

This loss is not merely a byproduct of bad governance or outdated ideologies; it is a structural issue. The systems that govern us—be they bureaucratic, economic, or technological—are fundamentally designed to prioritize functionality over potentiality. People become mere functional entities, reduced to numbers and roles within a larger machine. The human subject is not valued for its potential, but for its utility within the current system. And yet, the systems continue to perpetuate this imbalance, reducing individuals to mere tools serving the whole.

We see this in everything from corporate hierarchies to educational institutions. People are often evaluated based on their immediate utility, rather than their deeper potential for growth and innovation. This is not only ethically wrong; it is fundamentally unviable in the long run. A civilization that sacrifices the potential of its individuals for the sake of short-term efficiency is a civilization on the path to collapse.

The power of inspiration

At the heart of any meaningful life lies inspiration. José Ortega y Gasset, the Spanish philosopher, once said, "The life of an individual does not rest in itself but constantly stretches out beyond it in the form of possibilities." This stretching beyond—this reaching toward what is not yet—is the very essence of human existence. To act without inspiration, to simply react to external pressures or conform to established norms, is to deny this essence.

Inspiration is more than a fleeting emotional state; it is a driving force that aligns human action with deeper potential. The phrase act only if inspired carries with it profound implications. It is not just about pursuing passion or following one’s dreams. It speaks to a deeper alignment between action and meaning, a connection that goes beyond mere functionality.

In a world where time is limited, where entropy increases, and where meaning is often obscured by noise and distraction, inspiration becomes the critical force that cuts through the fog of necessity. It is the force that drives human innovation, creativity, and ethical action. Inspiration is what makes us more than just functional entities; it is what connects us to the deeper currents of life itself.

Philosophers and thinkers from all traditions have recognized this. From Rainer Maria Rilke’s urging to “live the questions now” to Martha Nussbaum’s work on human capabilities, which emphasizes that human potential is not a luxury but a fundamental ethical concern, inspiration is at the center of any understanding of what it means to live fully and meaningfully. But inspiration is not something that happens by chance. It is something that must be cultivated, nurtured, and protected—both within individuals and within the structures of civilization.

It’s important to note that the "act" in Act Only If Inspired refers specifically to creative agency—bringing something new into the world. It is not to be confused with mere reaction, which responds to external forces without contributing original meaning or value. For example, someone who is truly inspired to help others heal may become a doctor, driven by a genuine sense of purpose rather than the pursuit of money. While money serves as a form of transactional information, it cannot fully account for the deeper, meaning-oriented drive behind such actions. In contrast, data—when seen as an emancipated, market-regulating form of information—holds far greater potential to align with the intrinsic value of inspired, purpose-driven agency.

Designing a civilization of potential

This brings us to the question: how do we design a civilization that fosters inspiration rather than stifles it? As I have argued in The Age of Sapiocracy, the answer lies in creating systems that enable, rather than control, subject potentiality. The dominant paradigms of governance, economics, and technology have historically been designed with efficiency, control, and order in mind. These are important, but they are not enough. A truly viable civilization must be one that prioritizes the flourishing of individual potential above all else.

The problem with most current systems is that they are designed for control. The goal is to regulate human behavior, to ensure that individuals conform to certain norms and expectations. This may have worked in the past, when societies were simpler and the demands of life more predictable. But in today’s world—where complexity, uncertainty, and rapid technological change are the norm—such systems are no longer sufficient. We need systems that enable human potential, systems that allow individuals to grow, innovate, and contribute in meaningful ways.

Inspiration cannot be manufactured or imposed from above, as we might with laws or regulations. It arises from within the subject, and it is deeply tied to the conditions in which the subject lives and acts. In cultures that cultivate inspiration—through education, through work, through ethical frameworks—it is recognized, cherished, and given the space to unfold. In cultures that suppress inspiration, we see stagnation, conformity, and ultimately decline.

One might ask: how can a civilization be structured in such a way that inspiration becomes the driving force? The answer lies in the way we design our institutions, our technologies, and our systems of governance. Rather than focusing on control, we must focus on enablement. This means creating environments where people are free to explore, experiment, and take risks. It means fostering a culture where failure is not punished, but seen as a necessary part of the creative process.

As Søren Kierkegaard once wrote, “Purity of heart is to will one thing.” This singularity of purpose, this alignment of action with deeper meaning, is what we must strive for—not only as individuals but as a civilization. A world in which actions are driven by inspiration is a world in which power is not an end in itself but a means toward the realization of potential.

The individual and the dynamics of meaning

One common mistake in modern thought is the assumption that the individual and societal dynamics are symmetrical. That is, understanding the dynamics of the individual will automatically provide insight into societal organization. This is a perspective that may have been useful in the context of industrial societies, where the focus was on producing order and predictability. But in today’s world, where complexity is the norm, this approach falls short.

In reality, modern swarm dynamics often gravitate toward dominant egos, creating a dialectical unity of power distortion. Both the individual and the society, when trapped in this cycle, lose their connection to true subject potentiality. The challenge is not simply to critique the ego-driven dynamics of society, but to recognize that these dynamics are inherently self-perpetuating. They form a closed loop, where meaning is constantly deferred and individuals are reduced to mere functionaries within a larger system.

The key to breaking out of this cycle is meaning. As individuals begin to recognize and embrace their own potentiality, they naturally resist being subsumed into swarm dynamics. They become less inclined to serve the empty tactics of power distortion, aligning instead with meaning-driven autonomy. In this way, the path toward a viable civilization is not through toppling existing structures of power, but through fostering the conditions in which individuals can realize their true potential.

AI and the future of human potential

In this context, artificial intelligence becomes not just a technological tool but a philosophical challenge. The rise of AI brings with it both immense opportunities and significant risks. On the one hand, AI has the potential to untangle the redundant systems of control that have long governed human life. By automating the repetitive tasks that consume our time and attention, AI can free us to focus on the things that truly matter—creativity, innovation, and the pursuit of meaning.

However, the danger lies in how AI is applied. AI could easily become another instrument of control, used to further entrench the very systems that stifle human potential. This is why it is essential to approach AI not as a neutral tool but as part of a broader ethical framework. AI must be designed and implemented in a way that supports human potentiality, rather than suppressing it.

In my works on the Infosomatic Shift and the mediality entanglement, I have explored how AI can serve as an enabling infrastructure—one that liberates human attention from the distortions of power and redirects it toward meaningful pursuits. But this will only happen if we design AI with the right intentions—if we act only when inspired, not out of fear, greed, or the desire for control.

Mediality is not something we can take for granted. If true intersubjectivity existed, there would be no need for media as intermediaries between individuals. Our reliance on media reveals a fundamental reality: human subjects are still in the process of becoming—unfolding and emancipating. They cannot immediately and directly connect with one another. This is where civilization plays a critical role, as a mediating infrastructure that enables coordinated action. Just like the subjects it serves, civilization itself is in a constant state of becoming.

At its core, civilization functions through what I term "logon mediality"—a deeper layer of communication and coordination that continues to evolve. The advent of AI is not the final destination, but an agency within this greater process. AI’s role is to scale the capacities of analog mediality, reshaping the ways we interact with one another and with the world. As AI automates and refines these systems, it works to untangle the distortions and redundancies that have long plagued analog media. This is why I describe AI as the agent of media redundancy disentanglement. It is not merely a tool or a technology—it signifies a step toward a more scalable, coherent infrastructure of civilization, allowing humanity to transcend the limitations of outdated, analog-mediated interactions. Freed from the burdens of managing the dense, material distortions of analog redundancy (tools and objects that mediate shared action), the embodied attention of human subjects is released. This liberated attention can then reintegrate as an agency of self-regulation within the broader somatic system we call nature, allowing for a more authentic connection with the world.

In this light, AI’s true potential lies not in serving as an extension of traditional technological tools but in enabling a transformation—one that brings us closer to fulfilling our subject potentiality, unlocking the possibility of meaningful being with the world and each other.

The ethical imperative: inspiration as the guide

This brings us to the crux of the matter: inspiration is not a luxury, nor is it a personal indulgence. It is an ethical imperative. In a world that is increasingly dominated by forces that seek to reduce individuals to functional entities, acting only if inspired is a radical act of resistance. It is a refusal to conform to the logic of efficiency, productivity, and control that governs much of modern life. Instead, it is a call to align our actions with the deeper potentialities that lie within us.

As I’ve explored in my recent writings, this imperative is not just about personal fulfillment. It is about the very survival of civilization. If we continue to build systems that suppress subject potentiality, we will ultimately face collapse—whether that collapse comes in the form of environmental degradation, social unrest, or the erosion of meaning in our lives. The only way forward is to design systems that enable, rather than constrain, human potential.

This is where the Tsvasman Imperative comes in—though I suggest we treat the name with a touch of irony. The idea that we should act only if inspired may sound simple, but it carries within it the seeds of a new philosophy of civilization. It is not about waiting for some external force to move us, but about creating the conditions in which inspiration can flourish—both within ourselves and within the systems that govern our lives.

Toward a civilization of meaning

The task before us is not easy, but it is necessary. We must rethink the very foundations of our civilization, moving away from systems of control and toward systems of enabling. This will require a shift in how we think about education, work, ethics, and governance. It will require us to abandon the illusion that we can plan or control inspiration and instead focus on cultivating the conditions in which it can arise.

The true test of a civilization is not how efficiently it functions, but how deeply it enables the flourishing of its subjects. This is the lesson we must learn if we are to build a future that is not only viable but meaningful. As Einstein once said, “Imagination is more important than knowledge.” It is time we took that seriously—not just as individuals, but as a civilization.

Inspiration is the key, and it is up to us to unlock the door.