2026/01/27 星期二

Methodology of Charity Economicism A Life-Centered Framework for Civilizational Economic Governance （Case Study of NATS, the World's First Civilization Coin BTC 2.0）

管理100

日期:2026/01/15   IAE 

Methodology of Charity Economicism

A Life-Centered Framework for Civilizational Economic Governance

Author:
Frank Chen
Founder, Global Charity Economicism   （2007-2018）
GCWPA | IAE Global

《慈善經濟主義》方法論章——完整英文正式译文，定位为 Academic / UN Policy / Think Tank Official English Edition。

  • ✔ Complete, faithful, and unabridged

  • ✔ Suitable for academic, UN, and think-tank use

  • ✔ Terminology aligned with global governance discourse

  • ✔ Fully consistent with the original Chinese methodology chapter

1. Methodological Positioning

Charity Economicism is not an ideological manifesto, nor a moral appeal.
It is a governance-ready methodological framework designed to resolve a foundational contradiction of modern civilization:

How can economic rationality be reconciled with the preservation of life, rather than standing in opposition to it?

Accordingly, the methodology of Charity Economicism is constructed to be:

  • Operational, not rhetorical

  • Measurable, not abstract

  • Governable, not utopian

It functions simultaneously across three inseparable levels:

  • Civilizational

  • Policy

  • Economic

2. Foundational Methodological Assumptions

Charity Economicism rests on five core assumptions:

Assumption 1: Life Value Is Economically Measurable

Life, survival, health, mental well-being, and intergenerational continuity are not merely ethical concepts; they are quantifiable costs and utilities that can be incorporated into governance systems.

Assumption 2: Price Is Not a Final Variable

Price is a tool of allocation, not a source of civilizational legitimacy.
Efficiency alone does not justify outcomes that erode life.

Assumption 3: Social and Life Costs Must Be Internalized

All externalized life and social costs eventually reappear as public fiscal burdens and civilizational risks.

Assumption 4: AI Makes Precision Accounting Possible

The historical exclusion of life costs is no longer due to technical limitations.
With AI and big data, exclusion becomes a policy choice, not a necessity.

Assumption 5: Civilization Must Be Subject to Failure Criteria

Any system that allows life to be delayed, degraded, or sacrificed due to price or efficiency considerations must be regarded as civilizationally deficient.

3. The Trinity Methodological Framework

Charity Economicism adopts a non-decomposable trinity structure:

Civilization (Purpose)→Policy (Institutionalization)→Economy (Instruments)\textbf{Civilization (Purpose)} \rightarrow \textbf{Policy (Institutionalization)} \rightarrow \textbf{Economy (Instruments)}

Methodological Implications:

  • Civilization defines normative legitimacy

  • Policy translates values into collective responsibility

  • Economy provides efficient allocation tools

Any attempt to reform only one layer inevitably fails.

4. Life Value as the Core Variable

Traditional Price-Centered Model

 

 

Q=F(P),P=AR=MR=MCQ = F(P), \quad P = AR = MR = MC

This model is efficient and calculable, yet systematically excludes life costs.

Life-Centered Model of Charity Economicism

 

 

Q=F(P,LV,SC)Q = F(P, LV, SC)

Where:

  • LV (Life Value): life-preserving utility

  • SC (Social Cost): environmental, health, and societal costs

The methodological shift is decisive:

Life moves from an externality to a core independent variable.

5. Operational Tools of Life Value Economics

Charity Economicism employs the following analytical tools:

(1) Life Value Function

Measures the net impact of economic activity on life conditions.

(2) Life Value Utility

Evaluates how incremental consumption or policy change affects life quality.

(3) Marginal Utility of Life Value

  • Self-interest-driven consumption → diminishing marginal life utility

  • Altruistic, preventive, and life-centered activities → increasing marginal life utility

(4) Life Value Time-Delay Analysis

Quantifies life loss caused by price- or system-induced delays in access.

6. Policy Methodology: From Remediation to Prevention

At the policy level, Charity Economicism adopts:

  • Prevention-First Principle

  • Internalization of Life Responsibility

  • Intergenerational Weighting

Policy instruments include:

  • Green environmental taxes

  • Health quota taxes

  • Intergenerational life protection taxes

  • AI-based life cost assessment systems

7. Economic Methodology: Markets with Life Boundaries

Charity Economicism is not anti-market.

Markets, profits, competition, and innovation remain essential.
However:

Profit is legitimate only after life and social costs are fully deducted.

Markets operate within life-preserving boundary conditions, rather than overriding them.

8. AI as a Methodological Enabler

AI plays three essential roles:

  1. Evaluator: quantifies life, health, and environmental impacts

  2. Simulator: forecasts medium- and long-term life outcomes of policy choices

  3. Adjuster: dynamically recalibrates institutional parameters

AI does not replace ethical judgment,
but renders ethical neglect impossible.

9. Verification Criterion

Charity Economicism applies a single, decisive verification test:

After a system operates, is life being protected earlier—or postponed further?

  • Earlier protection → governance success

  • Delayed protection → institutional failure requiring correction

10. Methodological Boundaries and Self-Restraint

This framework explicitly acknowledges:

  • Not all life value can be fully quantified

  • AI cannot replace human moral responsibility

  • Governance must remain transparent and democratically accountable

The objective is not to control life,
but to prevent institutionalized neglect of life.

11. Concluding Methodological Statement

The ultimate methodological contribution of Charity Economicism is this:

For the first time, civilization itself becomes
a system that can be measured, corrected, and governed—
with life as its highest constraint.