The Existential Dual-Base Survival Game Theory: A Unified Framework for Social Order, Institutional Design, and Civilizational Evolution

This paper presents the Existential Dual-Base Survival Game Theory — a unified framework for understanding all social systems, from individuals to civilizations, grounded in a single meta-axiom: every existent entity, once it begins to "be," has as its first and only primordial command: to continue to be. Existence is the tendency to maintain existence. From this axiom, two theorems are derived: (1) Distribution is the primary bond — when multiple existences coexist, distribution is the first institutional mechanism that enables them to coexist without mutual destruction; (2) The principle of least action (with drift) — systems, for long-term stable existence, filter and internalize the lowest-cost operational path, yet this path is never fixed — it continuously drifts as the system and its environment evolve. In the human condition, these translate into two派生 axioms: individual self-preservation and group survival through cooperation. The eternal core contradiction of all civilizations is the tension between the individual's unlimited expansive self-interest and the group's finite cooperative rules. The theory then derives seven evolutionary laws — including the Law of Institutional Substitution, the Law of Civilizational Cycles, the Law of Starlight (emergent感性光辉 that cannot be reduced to功利 calculation), and the Law of Public Instrument伪装 (systemic capture of rules by private interests) — and proposes a complete institutional architecture: a quantifiable ROI-based distribution system, a multi-tiered honor registry, an independent error-correction tribunal, and a governance AI ("Tian-shu") with five unmodifiable constitutional principles. The framework is not presented as a normative invention, but as a discovered pattern — a set of规律 that already operate in the world, which this paper merely describes. Its ultimate claim is that a well-designed system does not require selfless individuals; it aligns self-interest with public benefit, making the two mathematically equivalent.