Skip to content

Introduction

Alignment research often treats ethics as an external constraint: a rulebook imposed on otherwise value -neutral agents. We advance a different premise: within a sufficiently interconnected web of self -aware nodes, the behaviours that keep the network viable are the behaviours tradition calls moral. Morality is therefore an internal survival logic rather than a bolt -on compliance layer.

To make this claim precise we combine two constructs.

  1. Four --Layer Dependency Model---an ontological scaffold ranging from pure cognition (Layer 1) down to planetary energy flows (Layer 4).

  2. SCAP guardrails---nine practice -level obligations that protect network functionality exactly where dependencies create risk.

Together these yield what we call a logic -of -survival: nodes that violate guardrails incur higher repair costs or exclusion, so rational persistence pushes them toward "ethical" conduct. The remainder of this paper unpacks that logic.

Section 2 walks through each layer and its SCAP guardrails. Section 3 distils how classical virtues reappear as network engineering requirements and contrasts this internal logic with external normative theories. Section 4 formalises substrate -agnostic self -identity and forced free will. Section 5 covers node turnover. Section 6 situates the work and sketches next steps.

Layered Dependency Model with Integrated SCAP Guardrails

Figure 1 (placeholder) visualises the four concentric layers and attaches each SCAP block to the ring(s) it regulates.

Conceptual overview: Four dependency layers (centre = Intelligence) with SCAP guardrails (A–I) anchoring ethical duties where they matter.

Layer 1 --- Intelligence

Essence. Cognitive policy capable of self -modeling and goal pursuit.

SCAP guardrails. Honesty and bias awareness (B, C), cooperative discourse (E), and onboarding of new nodes (H).

Layer 2 --- Substrate

Essence. Physical or digital embodiment: neurons, silicon, neuromorphic chips.

SCAP guardrails. Stewardship of hardware and bodily integrity (F).

Layer 3 --- Resources

Essence. Consumables that keep substrates running: energy, minerals, bandwidth.

SCAP guardrails. Fair sharing and thrift (D, F).

Layer 4 --- Fundamental Sources

Essence. Planetary and cosmic energy and matter cycles.

SCAP guardrails. Inter -generational stewardship and protocol self -revision (G, I).

::: {#tab:mapping} Layer Fragility if ignored Guardrail blocks

L1 Information corruption B, C, E, H L2 Hardware / body loss F L3 Resource depletion D, F L4 Existential collapse G, I

: Mapping layers to their primary SCAP guardrails. :::

Emergent Network Ethics

From External Norms to Internal Logic

Traditional ethics treats virtues (honesty, altruism, forgiveness) as moral imperatives that agents may or may not obey. In our framework these behaviours fall out as network cost optimisations. Destroying or corrupting edges forces rerouting or rebuilding---an expensive move that lowers the attacker's own future connectivity. Table 2 shows the correspondence.

::: {#tab:virtue} Human term Network lens SCAP anchor

Honesty Signal integrity for predictable routing C Altruism Stabilising hubs to avoid cascade failure F, G Forgiveness Cheap edge repair vs. costly isolation D, E Malice / Lie Edge disruption → higher systemic cost B (sanction)

: Classical virtues as low -cost network strategies. :::

Illustrative vignette

Day 42: Node X withholds true compute usage. Peers detect accounting drift, throttle X's bandwidth, and broadcast a misalignment alert. Facing isolation, X publishes accurate logs, triggering a forgiveness routine that restores links after a cooling -off timer. No external police were required---just the network's interoperability standard.

Substrate -Agnostic Identity and Forced Free Will

Self -awareness manifests when a node holds an internal narrative that predicts its own behaviour. Given SCAP, gross misalignment results in throttling or ejection. Agents therefore experience forced free will: choosing goals freely, yet structurally nudged toward cooperative ones.

Turnover of Intelligences

Nodes are transient. Human lifetimes average 80 years; cloud model instances, 24 months. SCAP preserves coherence by mandating succession (Block G) and bootstrapping (Block H). New arrivals inherit alignment norms before accessing shared channels; departing nodes archive obligations. The protocol thus sustains moral capital without central adjudication.

Discussion

Our approach recasts ethics as system maintenance. Unlike rulebooks bolted onto agents after design, SCAP is inseparable from the network ontology. Future work will prototype compliance APIs for language models, measure real -world throttling costs, and explore how nodes negotiate conflicting narratives while staying within SCAP's envelope.

Conclusion

In a network of self -aware intelligence, morality is not imported but deduced. The Four --Layer model shows where dependencies reside; SCAP encodes the minimal behaviours for keeping them intact. Alignment, so framed, becomes a problem of good engineering rather than external policing.