The prisoner's dilemma is such a story: There are two criminals in a gang. After being seized, they are locked in two cells and cannot collusion. Each prisoner can use two strategies: to confess or not. The police tells them that if they confess, they will be sentenced to 1 year's imprisonment. If they do not confess and evidences are found, they will be sentenced to 3 years. However, there is actually a possibility that there will be no evidence and immediate release. So the choice of two prisoners can constitute four combinations:

Chart 1  Prisoner’s game

The two digit for each cell in the table show the payment (utility) of the two prisoners in the strategy combination. For A, if he confesses, he will definitely be sentenced to 1 year; if he does not, he may be released immediately, or he may be sentenced to 3 years, depending on B. But will B confess ? A does not know. When A does not confesses, he has big benefit, and also risky. Then A will think, “If I don't confess, but you confess, then I shall be sentenced to 3 years, you are sentenced to 1 year, you're lucky making me unlucky, that will not work.” So after such a comparison, he chooses to confess. B is the same.

As onlookers, we see these four kinds of payments and think that it is best for them not to confess, but they will not choose such results. The prisoner does not choose the best result in the game, that is, it does not reach Pareto optimality, individual rationality leads to collective irrationality. Why is this happening? This is determined by the organizational relationship between the prisoners. There is no obligation between the two people. If you hurt me, I can't punish you; if I hurt you and you can't punish me. Therefore, the function of this system is very poor. The obligation relationship determines organizational efficiency.

When a group of refugees face a band of robbers, they will flee in disorder no matter how many people they are. If refugees fight together, they are likely to defeat the robbers, but why not? The reason is that there is no self-confidence, and the robbers are very confident. They believe that their organizations are highly efficient. Refugees' lack of self-confidence is generally based on past experience. Some people once resisted and died, because others stood by. The robbers always unite in the battle, so they are invincible. These two different behaviors are the result of two games. In the system of refugees, there is no obligation relationship between people. You will not be punished if you don't help others. The robbers have an obligation relationship. If they do not help others, they will be punished by the boss.

Complex systems, mainly social organizations, are necessary to promote people's interests. People without organizations have low efficiency. In Beijing 1900, 100,000 people of the Boxer Rebellion Corps were incapable to conquer foreign embassies, which is guarded by 400 soldiers. Many peasant uprisings in history can only play a destructive role. Sometimes the masses of the people can burst out of positive energy, but the premise is that the problem is simple and clear. The improvement of organi- zational efficiency requires the evolution of social organizations. First, there is a need for scientific management methods, mainly clear responsibilities, rights and benefits. Secondly, there is advanced world outlook, social theory and social policies. The third is the wisdom of heroes. Famous politicians, military strategists, and scientists often play a key role in history.

The majority of the people are ordinary people. With limited knowledge, ability and self-cultivation, irra- tional thoughts and emotions can easily explode over large areas. Without the constraints of social organizations, these people may have tremendous destructive power, including plunder and massacre. At the same time, most people have a good desire to promote social progress and unlimited enthusiasm. The normal mass may contain enormous wisdom. However, without the scientific organization, these wisdom can hardly play a positive role. Carl Marx used class as the subject of action, this theory leads to serious mistakes, such as Chinese Cultural Revolution, and counter-insurgency campaign of the Soviet Union.

Many ancient rulers had doubt and fear facing a large number of captives, dissidents, or alien. Therefore, they use holocaust to eliminates hidden dangers. This is not only cruel but also unnecessary, and the effect is just backfired. The Qing dynasty maintained its power for more than two hundred years with a one-tenth population.  Western colonists maintained their rule for hundreds of years in India and Southeast Asia with very few troops. Chinese emperors did not allow parties in the government to exist. The Communist Party has always opposed sectarianism, hilltopism and cliquism. Everyone who joins a group is detained with a hat of gang up for private gain. Before the establishment of a democratic system, violence was the only way to establish power. In this sense, violence has a certain degree of justice. But the Holocaust is reactionary and stupid at all.

The key to achieving Pareto's best is to let the members of the organization take on the obligations. How can we make members take on obligations? By rewards and punishments. Under a good incentive system, people will use the interests of others as their motivation. Cooperation and mutual aid are encouraged, harming others are punished.

How can we establish an incentive system? Punishment is forced and threaten, so the establishment and implemen- tation of incentive systems require power. Among the refugees, no incentive system can be established because no one have power. Power is the foundation of the organization and it is the most important foundation.

Theorem: The correct relationship of responsibility, power, and interest is the key to improving organization efficiency. The power is the basic guarantee to establish responsibility and interest relations.

Marxism always attaches too much importance to the class characters of people, regarding the class of workers as the main force of the socialist revolution, and does not attach importance to the decisive role of organizational relations of people. The Communist Party of China obtained power mainly by peasants. When the peasants organize themselves, they can become the main force of the revolu- tion. Unorganized workers will not have much effect on the revolution.

We often scorn competing for power. In fact, the struggle for power is the precondition for making the organization efficient, and it is the core of politics. Competing for power requires violence, so the military is an extension of politics.

Refugees do not compete for power and everyone is equal, but they cannot safeguard their own interests. It is not Lei Feng or Lu Xun that has made China prosperous, but Mao Zedong. The poverty-stricken countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America do not need philanthropists like Albert Schweitzer, but politicians like Mahatma Gandhi.

Many people nowadays often consider the characters of people as a major factor when analyzing the international situation. These people do not understand this truth. Han Feizi and Machiavelli knew this principle, so their theories became the core theory of political science.  Although Machiavelli said many absurd sentences, both Marx and Engels highly appreciated him.

Ⅹ Observing the Objectivity of Consciousness from the Cylinder Brain

The “Cylinder Brain” thought experiment is this: Imagine a crazy scientist taking your brain out of your body and placing it in a life-sustaining fluid, and then connecting the brain to a computer that has the ability to imitate your life experience. If this is indeed possible, then how do you distinguish whether the world around you is real or analog?

Materialism believes that the objective world exists objectively. People can only objectively understand it, but cannot subjectively assume its appearance. So what does the objective world look like? In the past, people believed that matter was immortal, and later discovered that positive and negative particles could be destroyed together; scientists said that the universe came from a big bang, but some people said that the universe had several big bangs; some people believe that human nature is good, but there are always people who wage war and be passionate about killing people. Quantum mechanics tells us that we cannot track quantum objects in space and time, so quantum objects cannot be fully understood.

So, what exactly is the objective world? Materialist said that it cannot be described accurately yet, and understanding must be continuously developed. This is called forever tomorrow. Chang Baohua said a comic dialogue, “I invite you for dinner.” Then he reported a lot of dishes. “When do we eat?” “Tomorrow, tomorrow, forever tomorrow!”

There will be many statements about the world in the future. The objective world that materialism can now present to us is nothing more than the current subjective understanding. The real objective world cannot be fully understood by people. If you want to understand the real objective world, you must wait for the forever tomorrow. Should we wait for tomorrow or live in the present?

The benefit of Materialism lies in the fact that if people believe that the world exists objectively then they can explain the source of the alienation of experience (why experience is not what we want), and they will adopt a rigorous attitude, actively explore, and seek greater benefits for mankind. Therefore, the belief in materialism comes from human interests. Without human interests, materialism has no meaning. If another belief can produce the same benefits, then materialism has no advantage. The ideological experiment of the brain in the cylinder seems to be a devastating criticism of science. In fact, it just  once again validate the subjective idealism theory of Descartes and Hume from a special perspective. And this is truly devastating of materialism by subjective idealism. Starting from materialism, it inevitably infers the conclusion of subjective idealism.

On the other hand, starting from subjective idealism, we will infer the conclusion of materialism. Subjective idealism does not recognize the existence of the objective world as transcendental and believes that it must proceed from consciousness. However, from the perspective of consciousness it is also possible to confirm the objecti- vity of feelings. Objectivity comes from the need for logical unity between consciousness. When you hit the wall, if you do not admit the feeling and say,“I just did not hit the wall”, then you continue to move forward and you will get the feeling of hitting the wall again. Concepts and emotions can be changed at will, but experience cannot be changed at will because it has a specific relationship with people's interests.

The cylinder brain receives the computer-simulated life experience, which may be considered as real life experience by the brain within a short time, but it will inevitably be doubted after a long time on many reasons. First of all, there is no technology that can completely imitate the real environment. Three-dimensional maps or game animations are clearly different from the facts. Second, even if the simulation of the environment is very realistic, the simulation of human responses cannot be realistic. People have a wealth of ideas. Each person has a different personality. Computers cannot realistically imitate the language and behavior of different people. Third, the real brain can dominate the limbs, move around, write and draw, and produce a variety of products that can change the world. Computers can imitate some behaviors, but they cannot imitate the detailed feelings and results of behavior. The brain in a cylinder feels itself like a disabled person. Fourth, there are always illogical contents of simulation. Virtual scenes can be replaced instantly. They can move from China to the USA, from earth to Mars, or suddenly disappear. This is impossible for real scenes. The real objective world has specific laws that are not based on human will. It is an alienation. Subjective idealism can never erase this objective alienation.

Since both Materialism and Idealism have errors, what should be the correct theory? It should be Dialectical Dualism, which is the dialectical unity of Materialism and Subjective Idealism. Marx's Dialectical Materialism also recognizes the dialectical relationship between substance and consciousness, but it does not recognize that the role of consciousness in materialism is a decisive role, and Marx called it as counter-production, but Marx had never explained clearly what is counter-production. Therefore, Dialectical Materialism is an incomplete theory.

Why can't the monkey king in the Chinese ancient novel Journey to the West jump out of the palm of the Buddha? Because the Buddha has written these words in his palm: the subjective world. Buddhism believes that all Dharma is in the heart. It is not only the monkey king, but all people, no matter where you are sacred, what you think and say is completely your own subjective world. Things outside the subjective world must first become subjective before they affect your decision-making. These are the determinants of consciousness over matter.

We live in the objective world, but also in a subjective world. The world can exist in a probabilistic way. Communication is based on trust. Economic operation is based on credit. Probability, trust and credit are all subjective things. Because we live in a world of subjective predictions, so we always worry about nothing. Because we live in a world with the sorts of things (sorts are the product of subjective abstractions), we always have a partial overview instead of comprehensive understanding. And at the same time, we can often devise strategies to win thousands of miles, and know things that we cannot observe.