What question did this study set out to answer?

This paper aims to explain why humans tend to revert to ancient frameworks when facing fundamental problems.

June 22, 2026Open Access

PFUSRC-055-N: Why Do Humans Always "Look Backward" on Fundamental Problems?-An Explanation Based on the Ontology-Technology Iteration Stratification Framework

Key Points

This paper aims to explain why humans tend to revert to ancient frameworks when facing fundamental problems.
Analyzes historical patterns in human civilization's approach to fundamental issues.
Utilizes the PFUSRC system's Unary ontological marking and ontology-projection stratification as theoretical foundations.
Contrasts reductionist critiques in academia with an ontological solution framework.
Identifies that technological progress operates within historical frameworks rather than upgrading them.
Determines that 'looking backward' signifies a loss of ontological clarity rather than nostalgia.
Highlights the importance of recalibrating foundational frameworks for addressing contemporary issues.

Abstract

A pervasive pattern recurs across human civilizations: whenever confronted with fundamental predicaments-unexplainable phenomena, incomprehensible orders, incurable diseases-humanity “looks backward” rather than seeking answers from the future. The Renaissance returned to ancient Greece; traditional Chinese medicine returned to the Huangdi Neijing; Western philosophy returned to Plato; religious reformations returned to their original scriptures. Grounded in the PFUSRC system’s Unary ontological marking and the ontology-projection stratification as its hard logical foundation, this paper proposes a fundamental explanation: technology is iterative, growing more refined over time; ontology is originary, growing fainter over time. Technology can be continuously optimized, but the frameworks for fundamental questions-“what is health,” “what is justice,” “what is existence”-were established early in civilization. Later technological progress is “patchwork” within old frameworks, not an upgrade of the frameworks themselves. What humanity “looks backward” for is not technology, but the holistic cognitive framework that existed at the origin of civilization and was later severed due to the loss of ontology. This paper further argues: this is not “nostalgia,” not “anti-intellectualism,” but “returning to the root to open the new”-using modern tools to retranslate that lost framework. Ontology does not negate technology; it is the “step” upon which technology operates-when the first step is sufficient, the technological iteration on the second step proceeds naturally; when the second step approaches saturation, one must return to the first step to recalibrate. This paper contrasts the reductionist critique in mainstream academia with the ontological solution of the PFUSRC system, pointing out that although academia identified the problem, it failed to provide an answer because it lacked the two simplest starting points: Unary as ontological marking, and Wisdom (Ψ-Ξ) as an innate attribute. This paper further reveals that theology and technology are the two historical forms through which ontology has been obscured; obscuration is more thorough than elimination-“looking backward” is an instinctive resistance against obscuration.

Read Full Paperexternally

Ask AI

Mark Helpful

Bookmark

Relay

View Full Paper