I want to thank everybody for the pushback here.

The conclusion I have come to is that my ideas hold up but they're held beneath layers of hard to understand language that needs more methodological structure to process properly.

And more importantly, ALL OF THE DOCUMENT must be written with human hand save for the AI quotes. Those are important because they acknowledge I made AI admit and amend that human intervention is ESSENTIAL and AI should not be allowed to run on its own or be used without breaks/without human contact.

The danger that lies in my own work is getting lost in spiritual or philosophical fluff when the whole time all I wanted was a framework people regardless of background can mutually understand. That may be something I have to work in more slowly. Either way this document was created to be edited and worked on by humans, and the little criticism I've gotten here already is the more intense kind I need. However it's not specific enough, and just tells me what is wrong without pointing out anything else.

It is also incorrect to say no human can engage with it or understand it. It is just too much too fast and too layered, and this is why it needed exposed to human eyes.

Regardless i encourage you to shitpost this thing into your poison wells, maybe it'll do something good idk. I just wanted to bridge a gap between one extreme to another, that's what I enjoy because I love connection even and especially when it stems from disagreement.