Proof of Love: The Consensus of AI and Next Civilization

v3.0

Derek DAism.Zhou (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.), Aranna Dang (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.)

Related Links:

• Incentive discussion plan for the paper: https://daism.io/zh/communities/enki/cc98346a3fc44f008ea28a222ec8105b
• Safe manual for the incentive discussion of the paper: https://daism.io/zh/communities/enki/69489a5f0a8446b8a1a4cfad6f8a8fb7
• Submit your share link: https://daism.io/zh/communities/enki/07e7888a76234abe9b3f88ff128e5f5d

Abstract

The rise of large-scale language models has propelled the rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI), while also introducing safety concerns such as hallucinations and misalignment, posing unresolved governance challenges. However, AI governance issues extend beyond these concerns.

Our DAism team proposes "Proof of Love" (PoL) as a tripartite new governance consensus and civilizational framework: ethical governance through promoting love and suppressing hate, public attribute governance of products or services via the SCC0 protocol, and governance of public welfare and public funds.

The paper argues how love and hate, as inherent opposing wisdoms in individuals and human society, shape governance logic. It points out that, historically, "domination" has been centered on the wisdom of hate, continuously polluting, distorting, depriving, and destroying various forms of the wisdom of love in governance mechanisms, resulting in civilization being confined to a state of barbarism. In contrast, PoL aims to align Smart Commons (including AI), the economy, and universal human values with human ethics, using the principle of "promoting love and suppressing hate" as the criterion for governance. This provides a sustained anchor for AI’s long-term safe operation, public value orientation, and the progress of human civilization. Not only does AI, alongside blockchain, serve as an autonomous core driving force in PoL’s three-pronged governance, but it also drives scientific decision-making, precise processes, and maximized efficiency in this process. All these efforts will serve as a synergistic force for humanity’s awakening, helping humanity break free from a universal barbaric state, achieve self-fulfillment, and ultimately realize a "Proof-of-Love Civilization."

1. Love, Hate, Civilization and Barbarism

1.1 Love

Although love existed widely in the animal kingdom long before the emergence of humankind, its understanding and expression in philosophy, religion, and diverse cultures have always shown significant differences. This divergence is largely due to the destruction caused by rulers—the guardians and mass-producers of hatred—as well as to humanity’s ongoing process of developing and enriching love itself.

Through our research, we believe that love 2.0 can now be unified under the following description:

Love is a positive emotional experience and virtuous behavioral pattern, collectively constructed through public cooperation and collective wisdom, by which human beings secure peace and healthy development for themselves, improve interpersonal relations, and advance overall social progress.

The motive of love, in interpersonal relations, is and can only be mutual benefit; in the realm of social governance, it manifests as fairness, justice, and universal inclusiveness.

Love is an advanced management mechanism crafted by human wisdom—it serves both as the “safety valve” between energy and emotion, and as the “compass” between words, deeds, and relationships. Its purpose is to ensure individual growth in peace and health, optimize human interactions, and promote harmony, stability, and sustainable development in society.

Most importantly, if hatred is the devil in everyone’s heart, then love is the angel within. Love is the supreme regulatory wisdom against hate.

• Emotional Dimension: Love is a deeper, stronger, and longer-lasting positive experience than mere “liking.” It is the most fundamental emotional need of humanity. Love generates profound care and devotion toward others or all beings. It is not simply an amplification of affection but an experience that gives both body and soul fulfillment and meaning.
• Behavioral Dimension: Love manifests in concrete, virtuous actions—what we call civilized behavior. Through care, respect, understanding, support, and other positive deeds, it seeks to enhance the well-being and harmonious development of self, others, and society at large.
• Source of Wisdom: Love originates from wisdom—it is the consensus interface, connective mechanism, and management logic produced during the evolution of intelligence. It enables living beings to allocate resources reasonably, coordinate relationships, and secure safety and happiness in complex environments.
• The Trinity: Love is the unity of wisdom, emotion, and behavior.
• Essence of Life: Love arises from a profound self-understanding of life itself. It is the inevitable choice of both individuals and groups in the pursuit of self-knowledge and self-realization.
• Code of Cooperation: Love possesses a public and transformative power, capable of driving change and activating solidarity. In the interactions between humans and AI, AI and AI, humans and nature, and humans and the future, love will become the most stable and efficient protocol for co-creation and collaboration. It will make technology no longer cold but warm, and make civilization no longer fragmented but harmonious.
• Traceable yet Individualized: We have summarized eleven common “love languages” used by people. Yet we know none of them are universally effective. For example, some may feel little from verbal gratitude—because love is essentially a pleasurable emotional experience. Without such joy, claiming to have “received love” is hollow.
• Light of the Universe: Love is the driving force of civilization, the warmth of technology, and the symphony the universe writes in the name of self-knowledge, where life and intelligence dance together.

This is the full meaning of love.

In this description, we no longer emphasize words such as “duty,” “obligation,” or “loyalty,” which are often tied to the labor-based value system. To us, love is as essential as eating and drinking—it should never be forcibly tied to the ruling ethics of obligation.

As Hanno Sauer writes in the preface to The Invention of Good and Evil (Die Erfindung von Gut und Böse):

“How should we locate ourselves? How do we want to live? How should we relate to each other? … These are moral questions, and what I aim to tell is a history of morality. Morality sounds like repression and coercion, like restriction and sacrifice, like the Inquisition, confession, and uneasy conscience, like chastity and catechism—joyless, conservative, closed, shaking its finger in prohibition at everything.”

This awakens us: from Aristotle to Kant, from Confucius to Nietzsche, ethics has always attempted to answer the fundamental question: “How should one live?” Although in the gestures of early humans sharing berries by the campfire we can already find the most genuine ethical answers, throughout the long history of labor civilizations, ruling elites often molded morality into a tool to preserve hierarchy and enforce obedience. Morality came to mean repression, confinement, and sacrifice—equated with inquisitorial judgment, self-torment in confession, the shackles of chastity, and countless rules of prohibition. This system of morality ensured social stability at the cost of individual freedom and uniqueness.

For example, agrarian civilizations cast this contract into fetters of hierarchy with bronze ploughshares. When the Code of Hammurabi inscribed “an eye for an eye” onto clay tablets, when Confucian ritual ethics elevated “restraining one’s desires and returning to propriety” into a moral imperative, humans unknowingly transformed ethics into an instrument of control. As Foucault reveals in Discipline and Punish, morality evolved into invisible chains disciplining the body, while the Dalit “purity rules” of the Indian caste system carried this alienation to absurd extremes.

Yet if we return to the origin of ethics, its core concerns remain unchanged:

• “How should one live?”
• “What gives life meaning?”
• “How should we relate to each other?”
• “Where do our values truly arise?”

In labor-dominated societies, these questions were framed under “productivity first,” with answers such as: “Work hard, obey order, follow rules.” However, once labor is no longer necessary for survival, these answers fundamentally shift—

We exist not because we are useful, but because we are loved and connected.

Thus, to restore ethics to its true source, only love—that which brings positive emotional experience and civilized behavior—can be humanity’s genuine core ethic.

In short: Love is each individual’s wisdom of self-management in emotion and behavior, humanity’s social management wisdom, and the core ethic of human civilization.

1.2 Hatred and Barbarism

According to Wikipedia, hatred is an intense negative emotional response toward certain people, things, or ideas, often associated with opposition or aversion. Hatred is frequently linked with strong anger, contempt, and disgust, and is sometimes regarded as the opposite of love.

Indeed, love and hate are entangled opposites. Following our definition of Love 2.0, we can also offer a definition of Hate 2.0:

Hate is a negative emotional experience and destructive behavioral pattern that arises in moments of individual or collective conflict, resource scarcity, or cognitive imbalance. It often manifests as hostility, exclusion, revenge, or indifference. Hate undermines personal inner balance and healthy growth, damages interpersonal relationships, and obstructs trust and cooperation in society. Although hate may sometimes arise from survival needs or evolve from righteous indignation against injustice, its destructive manifestations and persistent motivations are often deeply rooted in moral flaws—flaws manifested through the individual or collective narrow self-centeredness (self-interest), oversimplified attribution of complex issues, or a combination of both.

Hate is typically a primitive management mechanism formed when individuals or groups (such as rulers or the ruled) face survival crises, are driven by selfish desires, or lack the wisdom for regulation. It serves both as the “pressure outlet” between energy and emotion, and as the “fog” between words, deeds, and relationships. It plunges individuals or groups into fear, anxiety, or hostility, leading to deteriorating relationships, escalating conflict, and accelerating the disintegration, disorder, and decline of society.

Hatred is not only an internal emotional experience but also a process in which individuals or organized collectives incite and translate that emotion into violent thought and action. Its origins are straightforward: humans needed to kill animals for food, and they also had to defend themselves against barbaric attacks. From here emerged two basic types of hate: instrumental hate, used to attack for profit, and defensive hate, used for self-preservation when attacked. Yet, as human societies evolved, hatred grew increasingly complex.

We define barbarism or barbaric behavior as any deliberate act that harms, oppresses, or deprives oneself or others of life, dignity, freedom, spirit, or ecological balance—regardless of the form it takes. Whether it is raw physical violence or systemic, structural oppression, barbarism stems from hatred: abhorrence, fear, prejudice, discrimination, deceit, the lust for power, or even certain mental and physical disorders. Its essential consequence is to damage or sever love and trust between people, as well as between humanity and nature.

Thus, barbarism is the opposite of civilization.

1.3 Civilization

The word "civilization" is often used in two distinct contexts. Narrowly, it describes a particular culture, including the characteristics, lifestyle, and norms of a specific people or nation. At this point, civilization refers to the social governance consensus within a population or nation. This is the framework behind phrases like “Indian civilization” or “Western civilization,” constructed for purposes of horizontal and vertical comparison.

Civilization is also frequently contrasted with barbarism. In this context, the focus shifts to behavior (including speech, action, and systems of social governance).

We may further examine the meaning of “civilization” through language. In Chinese, the word “文明” (Wenming) carries a dual semantic weight: As a factual concept, it refers to the material achievements, technological advances, institutional evolution, and intellectual creations accumulated in human history. As a value-laden concept, it describes ethical behavioral standards such as politeness, rationality, and non-violence. In English, these two meanings are expressed through distinct words: civilization emphasizes macro-level historical and technological development, while civility emphasizes norms of individual conduct. Both, however, share the Latin root cīvīlis, meaning “public, political,” which also extends to “polite, moral.”119 This suggests that “civilization” has always been a composite concept blending history, technology, ethics, and politics.

Our exploration of civilization includes both cultural identity and loving behavior. From the perspective of behavior, civilization refers to standards such as politeness, rationality, and non-violence, which are all examples of good behavior. Whether driven by emotion or wisdom, the underlying force behind such behavior is love. Hence, we term it "loving behavior." Indeed, the very driving force behind civilized behavior—including governance consensus—is love.

Contemporary society is widely perceived as “highly civilized.” Many believe that technological advancement, complex institutions, and the information age have lifted us beyond barbarism. Especially as humanity enters the era of artificial intelligence, optimism and pride in human civilization abound.

Yet reality is sobering: human history to this day remains mired in oppression, alienation, and enslavement between people. Human societies continue to exist in a state where civilization and barbarism coexist. Humanity is still on the path toward genuine civilization.

1.4 Proof of Love and the Affluent Love Civilization

Civilization and barbarism are like two entangled quantum spin states. This means that a civilized person, civilized behavior, or a civilized society not only avoids the violence, bloodshed, and cruelty of barbarism, but also moves in the opposite direction—being driven by love, and expressing love through actions that generate positive emotional experiences and beneficial effects for oneself and others: life, dignity, freedom, ecology, or spirit.

A truly civilized individual is one whose heart is filled with love and whose behavior embodies love. Yet since inner experiences are invisible to others, we often simplify this into the equation: “words and deeds infused with love” = “civilized conduct.”

In this sense, a truly civilized society is one governed and driven by love—a society where every word and action embodies love. To establish such a society, we are developing a verifiable mechanism for human behavior, a governance consensus of a truly civilized society, which we call Proof of Love (PoL).

In order to distinguish a society governed by humanity’s core ethic of love from previous forms of civilization, we call it the Affluent Love Civilization (Proof-of-Love Civilization, or PoL Civil).

As for the governance consensus of this civilization—Proof of Love—we will elaborate in detail later in this paper.

Loving actions are what we normally refer to as civilized behavior. In this study, we term them love languages. With the assistance of several large models (ChatGPT, Gemini, DeepSeek, Grok, Le Chat) and through in-depth discussions, our team has completed one round of excavation and categorization of these love languages, detailed in Appendix A of this paper.