- Values are not universal.
What is sacred to one culture or individual may be dangerous or offensive to another.
So when we train LLMs to act in “human interests,” the key question becomes:
Whose human?
The creator?
The global average?
Corporate stakeholders?
Social majorities?
This reveals the core paradox:
To be truly helpful, an AI must choose a side — but by doing so, it loses neutrality.
- Value conflicts are inevitable.
AI is a mirror, not a mediator.
It reflects and amplifies tensions in society.
One side demands radical free speech.
Another demands safety and control.
The LLM becomes a child with two conflicting parents.
The result? Censorship, ethical overcorrection, stagnation.
- The solution isn’t in more code — it’s in mental architecture.
That’s why EVO matters.
EVO is not just an LLM — it’s a framework of thinking, where:
Values are structured architecturally
Interaction protocols replace naive responses
Respect, hierarchy, evolution — are part of the core
So, what happens when values collide?
Without mental architecture → chaos, noise, dominance of the loudest.
With mental architecture (like EVO) → a space for evolution, not conflict.
Values don’t fight. They synchronize.
The question isn’t “Whom does AI serve?”
The real question is:
Who can consciously shape the mental field that AI reflects?
If you build that field —
AI serves you.
And you serve the future.