一名中國前高級法官公開致世界AI領軍人物信之一：馬斯克——人類是否忽視而遺漏了支撐文明的底層規律？

One of a Series of Open Letters from a Former Senior Chinese Judge to the World’s AI Leaders: Elon Musk — Has Humanity Overlooked a Foundational Principle That Sustains Civilization?

（Special Note:

The phrase “former Senior Judge” appears in the title only to give this letter a slightly better chance of being noticed. It is not intended to make readers focus on who I am, nor on the particular way in which I express what I wish to say.

I am simply a very ordinary old man. What I truly wish to discuss is also a principle that appears extraordinarily ordinary — so ordinary that no one can do anything without relying on it. Precisely for that reason, it is like air: because human beings are so familiar with it, it has long been overlooked.

What I truly hope all humanity will examine together is this:

Does such an “ordinary” foundational principle in fact determine the success or failure of human behavior, social cooperation, and even the rise and decline of civilizations? Could it be a basic sustaining principle of civilization that humanity has never fully recognized?

Therefore, who is saying it is not important. Whether what is being said is true is what deserves everyone’s attention.

Since 2014, I have continuously written to governments, contacted the media, social organizations, scholars, and people from many different fields, and gradually published the series Letters to Everyone in the World together with related articles. Today, in deciding to make public some of my letters to leading figures in global AI, I still have only one purpose:

to place this question before all humanity for collective examination.

I believe that when a question may concern the direction of human civilization as a whole, governments and international organizations have a responsibility to study it, the media have an obligation to help the public understand it, and every person has the right to participate in judging it.

What humanity faces today is no longer merely a “crossroads” in the conventional historical sense. If the underlying way in which civilization itself operates contains a fundamental problem, then moving forward, backward, left, or right may all amount only to repeating the old pattern — and this time, the repetition may bring humanity closer than ever before to an accelerating path toward its own destruction.

What truly needs to change is an upward transformation. Perhaps the first thing that must be elevated is the human mode of thinking through which we observe the world and judge value.

The core proposition I put forward is:

Procedures form relationships; relationships form structures; structures generate dynamic balance through feedback; and this ultimately appears as the properties and outcomes of a system.

From this, I summarize the most basic practical standard for civilization as:

grasp the procedure, build the pattern, seek the balance.

I believe the greatest difference between this and many grand theories of civilization in the past is that it does not first require people to accept a particular religion, ideology, or concrete value objective. Instead, it attempts to provide a common practical principle that everyone can understand, that can be applied to real action, and that can be tested against reality.

If this direction is wrong, I hope humanity will help prove it wrong.

If it truly touches upon some foundational principle, then humanity may be able to use it to rebuild and strengthen the underlying foundations of social cooperation, allowing civilization gradually to move away from its long-repeated cycles of mutual struggle, mutual harm, and war, and toward stable, harmonious, and sustainable cooperation.

That is the only reason I am making these letters public.

I do not hope the world will focus on the person who wrote these letters. I hope the world will seriously examine the questions these letters are actually asking.

Finally, a note: some websites impose word-count or character limits, so certain versions of these letters found online may be incomplete. If a text appears incomplete, you may search for the full version using the Chinese or English title of the letter, or contact the publicly listed email addresses of AI companies associated with the person to whom the letter is addressed and ask for assistance in locating or forwarding the complete version.

——特別題註：

標題中寫入“前高級法官”，只是為了讓這封信多獲得一點被看見的機會，並不是希望讀者關注我是誰，以及在用什麼方式表述所說之事。

我只是一個極其普通的老人。我真正想講的，也是一條看起來極其普通的規律——普通到任何人做任何事都離不開它，也因此這規律就像空氣一樣，因為人過於熟悉而長期被忽略。

我真正希望全人類共同鑑別的是：

這樣一個“普通”的底層規律，是否事實上決定着人的行為、社會合作乃至文明興衰的成敗？它是否正是人類長期沒有真正認清的文明底層支撐規律？

所以，誰在說並不重要，說的事情是否真實，才值得所有人關注。

自2014年以來，我持續向政府寫信，也不斷聯繫媒體、社會組織、學者和各領域人士，並陸續發表《致全球每一個人的信》及相關文章。今天決定公開部分致世界AI領軍人物的信，仍然只有一個目的：

把這個問題交給全人類共同甄別。

因為我認為，對這樣一個可能關係整個人類文明方向的問題，政府和國際組織有責任研究，媒體有義務幫助公眾了解，每一個人也都有參與判斷的權利。

今天人類面對的，已經不僅是通常歷史意義上的“十字路口選擇”。如果原有文明運行方式本身存在底層問題，那麼前後左右可能都只是舊模式的重複，且這次可能是最接近不斷加速毀滅全人類的一次。

真正需要改變的是向上抬升，也許首先是人類觀察世界和判斷價值的思維模式。

我提出的核心判斷是：

程序形成關係，關係形成結構，結構通過反饋形成動態平衡，並最終表現為系統的性質與結果。

由此，我把文明最基本的做事標準概括為：

抓程序、做模式、求平衡。

我認為，這與過去許多宏大文明理論最大的區別在於：它並不首先要求人們接受某一種宗教、主義或具體價值目標，而試圖提供一個人人都能夠理解、能夠用於具體做事、也能夠接受事實檢驗的共同抓手。

如果這個方向是錯的，希望全人類幫助證明它錯。

如果它確實觸及了某種底層規律，那麼人類也許可以由此重新夯實社會合作結構的基礎，使文明從長期反覆的互斗、互害和戰爭循環中，逐步走向穩定、和諧、可持續的合作。

這也是我公開這些信件的唯一原因。

不是希望全世界關注寫信的人，而是希望全世界認真看看這些信究竟提出了什麼問題。

最後說明：部分網站存在字數或字符限制，因此網上看到的某些信件可能不是全文。如內容不完整，可以按照信件的中文或英文標題搜索全文，也可以通過與致信對象相關AI企業公開郵箱的聯繫方式，請其協助查找或轉交完整版本。）

A Renewed Request Concerning Human Cooperation, Civilization, and the Risks of AGI

Dear Mr. Musk and Members of His Team,

First, I respectfully ask whoever receives this email to forward this letter and its attachments to Mr. Musk if you consider it appropriate. I would be deeply grateful.

My pen name is Jin Guyu. I am an elderly Chinese citizen and formerly served as a Senior Judge in a local court in China.

Because of my long experience in law and judicial work, I have spent many years observing and thinking about the contradictions within Chinese society, institutional operation, and the difficulties of social cooperation.

Over time, these reflections led me to a more fundamental question:

What is the underlying nature of human civilization, and are there foundational laws governing the way civilization develops?

From the perspective of natural philosophy, I have developed a hypothesis that I provisionally call the Law of Procedural Determination.

I want to emphasize that I am not asking anyone to accept this hypothesis now.

On the contrary, I urgently hope to place it before humanity so that it can be examined, criticized, tested, and, if necessary, disproved.

Based on this hypothesis, I have gradually reached a strong conviction:

If humanity can update some of its most fundamental patterns of thought, and redesign human behaviour and social cooperation so that they better accord with the underlying nature and developmental logic of civilization, then human cooperation may no longer have to remain as unstable, conflict-ridden, and repeatedly destructive as it has throughout history. It may instead become more stable, harmonious, and sustainable.

This is why I have written to Mr. Musk repeatedly.

I hope that, if Mr. Musk gains even a preliminary understanding of this question and believes it deserves discussion, he might use his influence on X to help bring it to the attention of a wider public.

The question is:

Does humanity need to reconsider the basic mechanisms that support civilization and human cooperation?

Recently, I wrote two articles:

“An Open Global Challenge to Bill Gates”

and

“A Request for Humanity to Jointly Study and Experiment with Strategic Directions for Upgrading Civilization: Who Can Guarantee That No One Will One Day Use AGI to Launch a ‘9/11’ Against All Humanity?”

I have posted both articles on X and on some Chinese-language websites.

I sincerely hope Mr. Musk will read them.

If he believes the questions they raise deserve discussion, I especially hope he might introduce or recommend them on X so that scientists, entrepreneurs, governments, universities, research institutions, and members of the public can examine and debate them.

The reason I continue to write to Mr. Musk and make this request is that I have long regarded him not only as an entrepreneur advancing technology, but also as someone deeply concerned about the long-term future of humanity and civilization.

In my view, the persistent disorder of human social cooperation has now created three potentially fatal obstacles to the healthy development of technological progress.

First, technological achievements are repeatedly used for competition, conflict, control, and mutual harm.

Whenever humanity gains a new form of power, that power is used not only for creation, but also very quickly for warfare, domination, competition, and destruction.

Therefore, if human cooperative structures do not improve at the same time, then the greater our technological power becomes, the greater its potential capacity to undermine the sustainability of civilization.

Second, conflict and mutual obstruction within human society severely prevent technological achievements from being used effectively.

I believe Mr. Musk, through building companies and participating in public-sector reform and political affairs in the United States, has experienced directly how institutional resistance, conflicts of interest, organizational friction, and social division can consume enormous amounts of energy that might otherwise be used for innovation.

What I am trying to explore, therefore, is also intended to help answer this question:

Can humanity improve the foundational mechanisms of social cooperation so that people who are genuinely trying to advance technology and civilization do not have to spend such enormous energy dealing with conflicts created by humanity itself, but can instead devote more of their efforts to work that genuinely advances civilization?

Third, and most urgently, AGI is entering a human civilization that still operates strongly according to a “jungle-style” logic of competition.

In my view, if the existing structure of human cooperation does not undergo fundamental improvement, the arrival of AGI will not automatically raise the level of civilization.

On the contrary, it may first amplify humanity’s existing capacities for competition, control, deception, warfare, and mutual harm by a hundredfold, a thousandfold, or even more.

This could create a systemic and potentially irreversible danger unlike anything produced by earlier technologies.

That is why, when Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei issued public warnings and proposals concerning frontier AI risks on September 12, 2026, Mr. Musk responded publicly on X:

“Dario is right.”

This made me believe even more strongly that Mr. Musk may understand why I think:

AI safety cannot be studied only by examining AI itself. We must also ask whether the human society using AI already possesses a sufficiently stable, rational, and sustainable structure of cooperation.

For this reason, I very much hope that Mr. Musk might take the time to understand my analysis of why the social-cooperation structures supporting human civilization remain so persistently unstable, and the direction I am proposing for exploration — a direction that, in my view, may help civilization move away from existential danger.

If Mr. Musk believes this direction deserves serious examination, I hope he might not only recommend the question on X, but also consider encouraging an open international discussion, or even helping to promote an international conference around the following research question:

Does the stability of human social-cooperation structures constitute an important precondition for the safe governance of advanced artificial intelligence?

And, beyond that:

Why are the structures of social cooperation created by humanity so persistently difficult to make genuinely stable and sustainable?

To help Mr. Musk better understand why I have continued writing these letters, and to explain my present circumstances, I have attached.......

These documents may help explain:

why I feel such urgency about placing this question before humanity;

why I am trying to find an environment in which I can speak freely and accept open criticism;

and why I believe there is no longer much time to wait.

The two articles mentioned earlier in this email can also be found on X by searching their English titles.

If Mr. Musk wishes to understand my background or ideas in greater detail, I am willing to provide additional materials truthfully by email and to accept any questions, criticism, or rebuttal.

Mr. Musk has had extensive experience dealing with China and has his own observations of Chinese society. He has also previously commented on the importance of personal relationships and relationship-based social structures in China.

For that reason, I believe he may understand my concern......

That is why, while I still have the opportunity, I continue trying again and again to send these ideas outward.

I am not asking Mr. Musk to believe my theory.

I ask only this:

If the question deserves investigation, please help more capable people see it, criticize it, and test it.

If it is wrong, let evidence and research demonstrate that it is wrong.

If it does contain a direction worth exploring, then I hope humanity will not miss the opportunity to examine it seriously simply because the person raising the question is an ordinary elderly Chinese man without institutional backing.

May humanity have less misunderstanding, fear, and mutual harm — and more forms of cooperation that can genuinely endure.

Respectfully,

pen name: Jin Guyu

Former Senior Judge of a Local Court in China
Author of the Letters to Everyone in the World series
Email: ——

Attachments

（This is followed by the original Chinese text of the letter.）

關於人類文明合作機制與AGI風險的再次請求——敬請馬斯克先生關注並推動公開討論

尊敬的馬斯克先生及團隊：

首先，謹請閱讀本郵件的工作人員，在您認為合適的情況下，將本信及附件轉交給馬斯克先生。對此，我深表感謝。

我筆名金穀雨，是一名來自中國的老人。我曾任中國地方法院高級法官。由於長期從事法律和司法工作，我對中國社會長期存在的各種矛盾、制度運行和社會合作問題有較多直接觀察和思考。由此，我逐漸把自己的探索推進到一個更加基礎的問題：

人類文明的本質究竟是什麼？人類文明的演繹是否存在可以共同把握的基礎規律？

在長期思考中，我從自然哲學角度提出了一個假說，我暫時稱之為**“程序定質規律”**。

我希望強調：我並不是要求任何人現在接受這個假說。相反，我急切希望把它交給全人類共同甄別、批評和檢驗。

依據這一假說，我形成了一個越來越堅定的判斷：

如果人類能夠對自身的基礎思維模式進行更新，使人類行為機制和社會合作方式更加符合文明本質及其演繹規律，那麼，人類社會合作就有可能不再像有史以來那樣反覆動盪、失序和崩潰，而逐步走向穩定、和諧和可持續。

這也是我為什麼反覆給馬斯克先生寫信。

我希望，如果馬斯克先生在初步了解以後認為這個問題哪怕有一點值得討論，能夠利用您在X上的影響力，幫助把這個問題推薦給更多人，讓全世界不同領域的人共同關注和檢驗：

人類是否需要重新研究支撐文明運行的基礎合作機制？

最近，我又寫了兩篇文章：

《An Open Global Challenge to Bill Gates》
（《向比爾·蓋茨發出的全球公開挑戰》）

以及：

《A Request for Humanity to Jointly Study and Experiment with Strategic Directions for Upgrading Civilization: Who Can Guarantee That No One Will One Day Use AGI to Launch a “9/11” Against All Humanity?》
（《請求人類共同研究和實驗文明升級的戰略方向：誰敢保證，未來不會有人利用AGI發動一次針對全人類的“9·11”？》）

我已經把這兩篇文章發布在X及部分中文網站上。

我真誠希望馬斯克先生能夠閱讀。如果您認為其中提出的問題確實值得討論，我尤其希望您能夠在X上予以介紹或推薦，讓更多科學家、企業家、政府、大學、研究機構和普通公眾參與甄別和討論。

我之所以總是想到給馬斯克先生寫信，並提出這樣的請求，是因為我一直認為，您不僅是一位推動科技進步的企業家，也是一位長期關注人類未來和文明長期風險的人。

而在人類社會合作長期混亂的現實中，科技進步現在正面對三個我認為已經十分危險的“致命梗阻”。

第一，科技成果經常首先被用於人與人之間的競爭、衝突和相互傷害。

人類每獲得一種新的力量，這種力量往往不僅用於創造，也很快被用於戰爭、控制、競爭和傷害。

因此，科技能力越強，如果人類合作結構本身沒有同步升級，它對文明可持續性的破壞能力也可能越強。

第二，人類社會自身長期存在的互斗互害，又嚴重阻礙科技成果真正發揮作用。

我相信，馬斯克先生在經營企業，以及參與美國政府改革和公共事務的過程中，對制度阻力、利益衝突、組織摩擦和社會分裂給創新造成的巨大消耗，一定有非常直接的體會。

因此，我想做的事情，實質上也是希望探索：

能否改善支撐人類社會合作的基礎機制，使像馬斯克先生這樣推動技術和文明進步的人，不必把如此巨大的精力消耗在人類自身製造的無效衝突之中，而能夠更加順暢地推進真正有益於文明進步的事情。

第三，也是現在最緊迫的一點：AGI正在進入一個仍然具有強烈“叢林式競爭”特徵的人類社會。

在我看來，如果人類現有社會合作結構沒有發生基礎性的改善，那麼AGI的到來並不會自動使文明等級提高。

相反，它首先可能把人類原有的競爭、控制、欺騙、戰爭和互相傷害的能力放大百倍、千倍，甚至更多。

這可能給人類帶來一種過去任何技術都不曾造成過的、甚至不可逆轉的整體性風險。

也正因為如此，當2026年9月12日Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei圍繞前沿人工智能風險提出公開警告和倡議後，馬斯克先生在X上回應：

“Dario is right.”

這使我更加相信，馬斯克先生至少能夠理解我為什麼認為：

AI安全問題不能只研究AI本身，還必須追問——使用AI的人類社會，是否已經擁有足夠穩定、理性和可持續的合作結構？

因此，我很希望馬斯克先生能夠了解我對“為什麼支撐人類文明的社會合作結構總是亂象叢生”的分析，以及我所提出的可能使人類文明“避死向生”的探索方向。

如果您認為這個方向值得認真檢驗，我希望您不僅能夠在X上推薦這個問題，也可以考慮推動一次真正開放的國際討論，甚至促成一個國際會議，讓不同領域的人共同研究：

人類社會合作結構的穩定性，是否構成安全治理高級人工智能的重要前提？

以及進一步追問：

為什麼人類建立的社會合作結構，總是如此難以真正穩定和可持續？

為了使馬斯克先生更加完整地了解我為什麼不斷寫這些信，以及我現在所處的現實情況，我把相關附件附在本郵件中。

這些材料可以幫助您了解：

我為什麼如此急切地希望把這個問題交給全人類討論；

為什麼我一直在尋找能夠自由表達和公開接受批評的環境；

以及為什麼我認為現在已經不能再等待。

本郵件前面提到的兩篇文章，也可以按照文章英文標題在X上查找。

如果馬斯克先生認為需要進一步了解我的情況，我願意通過郵件如實提供更多材料，也願意接受任何質疑、批評和反駁。

馬斯克先生長期與中國有密切接觸，對中國社會現實也有自己的觀察。您過去也曾談到中國社會中“熟人社會”的特點。

因此，我相信您能夠理解我的擔憂......

所以，我才會在還有機會的時候，一次又一次嘗試把這些話送出去。

我並不要求馬斯克先生相信我的理論。

我只希望：

如果這個問題值得研究，請幫助讓更多有能力的人看到它、批評它、驗證它。

如果它是錯誤的，就讓事實和研究證明它錯誤。

如果它確實包含一條值得繼續探索的方向，那麼我希望人類不要因為提出這個問題的人只是一個普通、年老、沒有機構背景的中國人，而錯過對它進行認真檢驗的機會。

願人類少一些誤解、恐懼和相互傷害，多一些真正能夠持續的合作。

謹致敬意！

筆名：金穀雨
曾任中國地方法院高級法官
《致全球每一個人的信》系列作者
Email:——

附件