Presents a model promoting active human wellbeing in AI systems, suggesting a shift from constraints to flourishing.
Current approaches to AI ethics are primarily constraint-based. They define what AI systems must not do but provide limited guidance on what AI systems should actively pursue in service of human wellbeing. This paper argues that a working model of human wellbeing — one that is measurable, predictive, and actionable — is the missing foundation for genuine AI alignment. The 2D State of Being model, together with its companion frameworks (the Law of Flourishing, the anger and fear magnitude calculations, and the Excellent Communication Protocol), provides that foundation. Together these components constitute an integrated ethics engine that moves AI alignment from prohibition toward orientation — from avoiding harm toward actively pursuing human flourishing. This paper describes what the framework provides, how AI systems would use it, what it cannot do, and why the distinction between constraint-based and flourishing-based ethics matters for the long-term human-AI relationship.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
John Ryan (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: