作者：Michael Urban

1. 基本要素

我们出生，不断体验游戏，然后死亡，从有关青春的童年游戏到有关经济和武装战争的全球游戏。所有这些游戏都存在一个共性，那就是遵守某些潜在普遍法则。游戏类型纷繁复杂。那么我们为什么体验游戏？游戏如何形成？合格游戏的最低标准是什么？本文主要关注人类和社交游戏，但这些原则普遍适用于自然界。

游戏不论其名称是什么终究是游戏。有时我们甚至在毫不知觉的情况下体验游戏。游戏总是遵守这些普遍原则，即便玩家毫不知晓。其始终适用各种社交形态的各个族群。这些普遍原则应用至所有游戏，不论其内容是否称得上游戏。

游戏或故意为之或无意形成。自发形成的游戏通常出现在人们（自主体）相互接触（接近）过程中。这些游戏都是人类在有限世界为寻求生存所采取行动的无意识结果。有些游戏具有竞争性，有些具有合作性，但它们都遵循相同原则。

所有生存实体要存活都需消耗（破坏）资源。无论何时有限资源（自然或人造）世界都包含一个以上实体，游戏因人类出于生存本能和私欲采取系列活动而形成。无限资源世界根本就不存在游戏。在现实生活中，我们生活在有限资源世界，所以游戏成为我们生活不可避免的组成部分。

在现实世界中，游戏会按默认法则自发形成。自发形成的游戏包含某些相同默认特点，除非人类进行相关调节。这些默认特性包括：

1. 游戏发生在某领地

2. 玩家采取行动谋生存

3. 默认使用自然法

在缺乏特定规则选择前提下，游戏默认遵循自然法则。举例来说，“适者生存”是最普遍的自然法则。强者诉诸武力，打败所有竞争对手，控制所有领地。所有游戏都默认遵循这些规则（自然法则）除非出现其他优先法则。默认法则将在下文详细描述。

遵照自然法则形成的游戏都是基于动物本能的不合理游戏。这些动物游戏是我们遗产的一部分。他们构成最原始的动物行为法则。若遵照这些自然法则发展，我们将很难突破动物游戏。作为人类，我们有思考能力（认知）（游戏邦注：这是动物所没有的）。我们利用这一技能谋利益，创造个体和集体同时受益的游戏（最佳状态）。若无法做到，人类将面临与其他动物相同的局限性。合理游戏的认知目的是从个人和集体角度推动社会进步。

除自发形成游戏外，我们还有人类出于特定目的刻意（具有认知性）塑造游戏。游戏可以由任何人在任何时候促成。游戏普遍法则适用于任何情况。游戏还有子游戏和超级游戏形式，这些法则仍旧适用。

游戏包含两种截然不同的形式。公平（合理）游戏和不公平（不合理）游戏。任何不遵守公平竞争原则的游戏都是不合理游戏。自发形成游戏由于权利属性鲜少具有公平性。刻意塑造的游戏也会出现不公平现象，但其能转换成合理游戏，只消做出相应调整，遵照公平竞争5大法则：

公平竞争的5大原则是：

1. 设有规则明确说明体验条款和条件

2. 游戏活动发生在指定领域之中

3. 所有玩家知晓、同意和遵守这些规则

4. 玩家只有获得同意才能进入，但可以自由退出

5. 设有独立裁判进行调节和实施规则

游戏不符上述5大原则都是个不公平、不合理的社交游戏。所有原则都具有重要含义，所以深入挖掘以确保意义清晰很重要。随后我们将举例说明这些公平游戏原则如何应用至日常生活和用于调节不合理游戏的简单方案当中。若人类在各种社交互动（游戏邦注：如在政治、宗教、企业、经济和工作领域）中都遵循这些平台竞争普遍原则，个人和社会都将从中受益。

society from haitianartsociety.org

2. 原则 1

公平和合理游戏应给予所有玩家寻求生存目标的途径，不论出于个人还是集体角度。若规则通过损害他人利益给予某些玩家不公平优势，那么游戏就不合理。同样，若规则通过损害他人利益给予某群体不公平优势，也是不合理游戏。公平、合理的游戏会平衡领域内的个人和集体利益。

原则1的基本理念包括：

* 领域界限、领域资源、玩家活动限制和活动后果都由游戏规则决定。

* 合理游戏的规则需经所有成员同意

* 玩家若未发现应遵守规则，游戏就不合理

* 若规则模糊不清或错综复杂，游戏就不合理

3. 原则 2

原则2的基本概念包括：

* 所有游戏都发生在特定领域范围内

* 界限或明确规定，或模糊不清，这取决于游戏环境

* 游戏会随时间、空间改变，这取决于游戏环境

* 游戏形成后，游戏玩家协商领域规则

4. 原则 3

原则3的基本概念包括：

* 只有1个自主体是游戏正当玩家

* 自主权由3个要素构成：

1. 权利

2. 控制

3. 自由

权利或将影响领域。其也是由3个要素组成：

1. 实力

2. 财富

3. 形象

实力通常指“武力”或力量，但任何形式的体力都包含在内。

财富指资源储备，包括资本、资产、金钱及其他形式的财富。

这里的形象指的是公众形象。此形式的权利是基于领域其他成员的认知和大众观念。

控制是权利的有效应用，是实体发挥权利的能力。

控制集中实施时最具效力。

自由指实体追求自我利益所享有的活动范围。

自主体

“权利”概念对公平游戏原则至关重要。所以我们需明确其定义。若人类是世界唯一的自主体，那么生活就会简单得多，但他们不是。另一同我们共同分享相同领域的自主体是“组织”。组织仅是某类游戏。遵循公平竞争原则的组织是合理游戏。自古以来，大部分组织都没有遵守公平游戏原则，因此都是不合理游戏。

那么为什么大多数组织都无法通过公平竞争测试，形成不合理游戏？若我们一次应用一条公平游戏法则，评估其权利架构，决策过程和组织法律形式，就会清楚发现组织不论内在还是外在都是不合理玩家。

和自主体一样，组织通过系列既有渠道谋求生存。作为实体，人类同组织最大的区别在于本质属性。人类具有如下显著属性：

* 美德

* 道德

* 朋友

* 家庭

* 亲属

* 后代

* 精神

* 仁慈

* 同情

* 爱

没有组织包含内在属性（游戏邦注：即便其某些成员具备）。有些组织声称其具备，但这不过是其谋求自我生存的一个工具。说来也怪，很多国家把组织视作“人类”。从本质差别来看，这当然非常荒谬。除此之外，这些法律定义都未规定实体自主权，这是判断是否为“人类”的初级标准。

现有有关组织的实体法律源自灵活法律制作过程，而非通过任何预期过程。组织问题贯穿人类发展史，法律学者仅调节人类相关法律。目前有国际实体法律将组织视作“人类群体”。这种情况还会继续出现，因为有些元素促使法律规则无法获得相关调整，提供合理区分的法律概念。

那么世界上为什么存在这么多组织，它们是否都是不合理游戏？从人类自主权角度看，答案一目了然。人类群体不论何时决定集体成立组织，都必须合作进行。人类之所以这么做是希望个人权利获得净增长。组织是款合作游戏，其促使玩家权利成倍提高，而不是简单相加。然后组织把部分增加权利分给每个玩家。

举个例子，假设我们能够衡量人类权利等级（游戏邦注：1是最低等级，10是最高等级）。若9个拥有10等级权利的个人合作形成组织，那么新成立实体的总权利数是150。无论如何新实体的等级数都会大于90，这是所有成员的等级之和。因此若组织拿出部分增加等级，每人分发12等级，那么所有人都将从中受益。每个人都比独自行动多得2个等级。虽然相比成员投入而言，组织多分给每个成员2个额外权利积分，但其还剩有42个权利积分，供其进一步扩大积分数量。

举个更具体的例子，假设在上述情形中，每个成员的劳动力价值是40小时/周。若9个人合作形成组织，其创造的价值量是500个劳动小时数。然后组织分给每个成员45小时/周对应的收人，那么组织还剩有95个小时数。

从上述两个例子，我们能够清楚发现，组织为何自古以来就如此风靡。组织不过是给个人成员带来更多权利的合作游戏，其收益超过成员独自劳作所能获得报酬。同时，组织促使权利组合实体能够获得更大权利。若取得成功，游戏实体将继续向社会中的9个成员提供权利资源，让其能够参与游戏。

那么什么促使多数这些游戏实体不合理？主要原因在于他们他不是人类，而是人类组成的游戏。其法律上的“人类”身份容易令人产生误解。游戏和人类存在众多本质区别。游戏实体拥有的权利仅来自成员。所有成员都把权利奉献给组织，然后通过组织谋求个人利益。没有成员，组织就没有权利。而成员也得依靠游戏实体获得生存。

从最普遍组织游戏来看，权利要素汇至中心，而控制要素则从中心向外扩散。这就是为什么所有组织最终都会逐步发展成等级结构，最顶部只有一个位置，其他人员都处在这之下（外围）。等级制度仿佛是棵只有单个树干的树，树干分出众多分支，而分支则又分成更多更小树枝。虽然这看起像棵树，但准确来说是具有中央集权的等级制度，此中心点（游戏邦注：这就是控制中心）扩散出众多分支机构。

等级制度呈现此形式的原因是这样能够有效把外围权利汇至中央，把中央权利分配给外部成员。很多人尝试创造不同游戏实体结构，但事实上等级制度仍旧是最有效的合作游戏。其促使人类能够放大权利，协调控制大型复杂游戏。

此处存在一个风险。需铭记于心的是人类的社交领域包括个人实体和游戏实体，所以这两个元素常处在竞争状态中。因为多数游戏实体比个人实体存在更大总体权利，因此组织获胜机率更大，除非存在差异（不公平）补偿规则。同样问题也存在于同大型游戏实体竞争的小型游戏实体。

人类实体和游戏实体存在的最显著区别及其如何影响我们的日常生活将在随后部分深入探讨。

5. 原则 4

原则4的基本理念是：

* 实体都能够随时决定退出游戏，不受其他因素限制

* 游戏规则应限制人类移除领域内的游戏资源，但实体的离开自由不应受限。

* 强迫实体参与游戏属于不合理行为。

6. 原则 5

原则5的基本概念包括：

* 不合理游戏普遍缺乏的元素是裁判员

* 裁判员能够公平和充分判断游戏活动

* 独立裁判员不应参与游戏，不因游戏活动结果受益或蒙受损失

7. 欺骗

我最近听到一个谚语“骗者无胜”。这是个荒谬概念，因为显然骗者常常获利，这也是他们进行欺骗的原因。只有当骗者被捕时，他们才无法获得胜利（游戏邦注：但这很少出现在复杂游戏中）。在赌场游戏之类的简单游戏中，我们只消通过简单方式便能捕获骗者，但这在人类社会的复杂游戏中就困难得多。

欺骗有很多种方式，但多数都是基于说谎（欺诈）。另一欺骗的主要方式是通过不合理使用权利，但最普遍的还是说谎。骗者说谎是为了得到不公平优势，同时又表现说他们未享有利条件。若有人知道骗者抢占优势，那么其伎俩就无法得逞。没有人会获悉自己处在不利地位还继续游戏。所有欺骗行为都希望其不合理优势能够隐藏起来。

所有骗者都使用同样基本伎俩：

* 绕开规则

* 利用规则漏洞

* 破坏规则精神

* 利用规则缺陷

* 利用不合理规则

* 利用不合理游戏

* 伪装身份

* 伪装权利

显然此合理游戏原则列表还不足以确保所有玩家获得公平待遇。骗者会想尽各种办法从合理和不合理游戏中谋求个人利益。

多数骗者都是男性。这是由于男性存在潜在竞争、获胜和统治欲望。女性在某些情况下也会进行欺骗行为，但男性更多是出于原始控制欲。这点能从男性罪犯和女性罪犯的相对数量中得到体现。在各历史发展阶段、文化形态和犯罪类型中，男性总是比女性更常打破社会规则（欺骗）。只有通过自我控制，男性才会克服此本能欲望。（本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译，如需转载请联系：游戏邦）

Social Game Theory: The Game of Games

By Michael Urban

I. The Basics

We’re born, we play games, and then we die. From the childhood games of youth, to the global games of economic and armed warfare. All of these games have one thing in common, they’re all subject to the universal principles underlying all games. There are as many different types of Games as there are people. So why do we play games? How are they formed? What are the minimum requirements for a fair Game? The focus of this book is on human beings and social games, but these principles apply throughout nature.

A game by any other name would still be a game. At times we even play Games without realizing it. Games always conform to these universal principles, even if the players aren’t all aware of it. They apply to all people, in all societies, at all times. These universal principles apply to any Game, whether it is formally recognized as a Gzame or not.

Games can be formed either intentionally or unintentionally (spontaneously). Spontaneously formed Games occur whenever people (Autonomous Entities) come in close contact (proximity) with each other. These Games are the automatic result of actions taken by people in their lifelong quest for survival in a finite world. Some Games are competitive, and some Games are collaborative, and yet they still conform to the same principles.

All living entities must consume (destroy) resources to stay alive. Whenever there is more than one entity in a world of finite resources (natural or man-made), Games spontaneously form because of the activities arising from the instinctive quest for survival and self-gain. In a world of infinite resources, Games might never even exist. In reality, we live in a world of finite resources so Games are an unavoidable part of life.

In the real world, Games can form spontaneously, and will assume default principles. Spontaneously formed Games will incur the same default characteristics, unless players take action to legitimize the Game, The defaults are:

1. Occurs in an Arena

2. Players take actions to survive

3. The default Rules of nature apply

Games default to the Rules (Laws) of nature in the absence of specified alternative Rules. As an example, “survival of the fittest”, is one of the most common. If the most powerful Actor resorts to using force, they will defeat all competitors and take control of the Arena. All Games default to these Rules (natural law) unless some other Rules that take precedence have been established. Default Rules will be explored in more detail in the chapters that follow.

Games that are formed under the laws of nature are illegitimate games based on animal instincts. These Animal Games, are a part of our heritage. They form the most primitive set of Rules that animals act under. If we conform to the laws of nature will will never advance beyond the level of Animal Games. As humans, we have the ability to think (cognitive), which animals don’t have. We can utilize that skill to our advantage and create Games that are both individually, and collectively beneficial (optimum). If we don’t, we surrender the fate of our species to the same limitations of other animals. Legitimate Games require cognitive intent to advance society both individually and collectively.

In addition to spontaneously formed Games, there are intentionally (cognitively) formed Games that people create for specific purposes. A Game may be formed at any time, by any number of people. In all cases, the universal principles of Game play still apply. Games may also be formed as sub-games, or super-games, of other Games and the principles still apply.

There are two fundamentally different types of games, a fair (just, legitimate) game and an unfair (illegitimate) game. Any game that doesn’t comply with the principles of fair play is an illegitimate game. Spontaneously formed Games are rarely fair due to the nature of autonomy. Intentionally formed Games can also be unfair, but could be converted into legitimate Games by making the changes needed to comply with the five principles of fair Game play.

The five principles of fair (just, legitimate) Game play are:

1. A set of Rules clearly defines the terms and conditions of play.

2. Game activities take place within a designated Arena.

3. All Players know, consent to, and comply with the Rules.

4. Players Enter by consent only, and Exit is unlimited.

5. An independent Referee moderates and applies Rules.

Any game that doesn’t comply with all of these principles is an unfair and illegitimate social game. Each of these principles has significant implications, so its important to explore each of them in depth to ensure the meanings are clear. The following chapters provide common examples showing how these fair Game principles apply to everyday life and the simple solutions for correcting illegitimate Games. We can all benefit both individually and collectively as a society if mankind adopts these universal principles of fair Game play in all areas of social interaction (politics, religion, corporations, economics, jobs, etc.).

II. Principle 1

To be fair and legitimate, a Game must provide the means for all Players to achieve their goal of survival, both individually and collectively. If the Rules create unfair advantages for some individuals at the expense of other Players, the Game is illegitimate. By the same token, if the Rules create unfair advantages for the collective population at the expense of individual Players, the Game is also illegitimate. A fair and legitimate Game provides a balance between opportunities for individual gain and for collective gain within the Arena.

The basic concepts of Principle 1 are:

* The boundaries of the Arena, the resources of the Arena, the limits on Actors activities, and the consequences of activities are all determined by the Rule set of the Game.

* Unanimous consent to all Rules by all Actors is required for a Game to be legitimate.

* If Players are unaware of Rules that apply to them, the Game is illegitimate.

* If the Rules are ambiguous, or complex, the Game is illegitimate.

III. Principle 2

The basic concepts of Principle 2 are:

* All games take place within a bounded Arena.

* The boundary may be specific, or fuzzy, depending on the Game circumstances.

* A Game may vary over time and space, depending on the circumstances.

* The Actors in a Game negotiate the Arena Rules when the Game is formed.

IV. Principle 3

The basic concepts of Principle 3 are:

* Only an autonomous entity are legitimate Players in a Game.

* Autonomy is comprised of three components:

1. Power

2. Control

3. Freedom

Power is the potential to affect the Arena. It is also comprised of three components:

1. Force

2. Wealth

3. Image

Force is often referred to as “force of arms” or strength, but all forms of physical force are included.

Wealth is the storage of resources and includes capital, assets, money, and other forms of wealth.

Image in this case refers to public Image. This form of power is based upon perceptions of others in the Arena and in the general public.

Control is the efficient and effective application of Power, and the skill of an entity in applying power.

Control is most efficient when centrally coordinated in a unified manner.

Freedom refers to the unlimited spectrum of action options available to an Entity in the pursuit of self-gain.

Autonomous Entities

The concept of “autonomy” is central to the principles of fair game play, and so we must be very specific in its definition. If People were the only autonomous entities in the world then life would be much simpler, but they’re not. The other type of autonomous entities that share the same Arena with us are known as “organizations”. Organizations are simply a specific category of Games. Organizations that comply with the principles of fair play are legitimate Games. The vast majority of organizations throughout history have not conformed to fair Game principles, and are therefore illegitimate.

So why do most organizations fail the fair play test, which constitutes an illegitimate Game? If we apply the fair Game principles one at a time and evaluate the power structure, decision-making, and legal form of an organization it will become apparent that there are many ways in which organizations are internally and externally illegitimate Players.

Like all self-directed entities, organizations are motivated for survival through any means available. As entities, the biggest difference between people and organizations is based upon their intrinsic attributes. People can have the following distinct attributes:

* Morality

* Ethics

* Friends

* Family

* Kin

* Heirs

* Spirituality

* Kindness

* Compassion

* Love

No organization intrinsically possesses these attributes, even though some members (players) do. Some organizations will claim they do, but only as a tool for their own survival. Strangely enough, an organization is automatically considered a “person” under the laws of many countries. This is of course absurd, in light of the fundamental differences. Aside from that, these legal definitions don’t even address the autonomy of the entity, which is the primary test of a “person”.

The existing body of law pertaining to organizations is the result of reactive law making processes, not through any anticipatory process. As organizational issues arose throughout history, legal scholars simply adapted the laws pertaining to people. What we have today is an international body of law that treats organizations as if they are “persons”. It appears that this situation (legal fiction) continues because of some factors that prevent existing legal canons from being updated to provide properly segregated legal constructs.

So why are there so many organizations in the world if it’s true that they are mostly illegitimate Games? The explanation becomes apparent when viewed from the perspective of individual autonomy. Whenever a group of people decides collectively to form an organization, they must collaborate to do so. People will do this in order to achieve a net increase in their own autonomy. An organization is collaborative Game that provides a way (means) to multiply autonomy beyond the aggregate sum of the individual player’s autonomy. The organization then distributes some portion of the value of the increased autonomy to each of the players.

As an example, imagine that we can measure an individual’s autonomy level, with 1 being the lowest and 10 being the highest. If 9 people with an autonomy level of 10 collaborate to form an organization (Game) the total autonomy of the newly created entity (game-entity) might 150. In any case, the autonomy level would be greater than 90, which is the combined autonomy of the members. Therefore if the organization were to use its autonomy for self gain (net), and then distributed an autonomy level of 12 to each player, everyone benefits. Each player gets 2 more autonomy points than they would have been able to achieve if they acted alone. And although the organization distributes 2 additional autonomy points to each member beyond what they each contribute, it retains the remaining 42 autonomy points for use in furthering it’s own autonomy.

As a more specific example, imagine that the labor value of an individual in the above scenario is 40 hours per week. If the 9 people collaborate to form an organization, it might produce value equivalent to 500 labor hours. The organization could then distribute 45 hours per week of labor value in money to each member, and still retain the remaining 95 labor hours of value.

From these two examples it’s easy to see why organizations are so prevalent throughout history. An organization is simply a collaborative Game that results in more autonomy (net) for the individual members (players) that exceeds what they each could have achieved by working on their own. At the same time, it provides the means for a fabricated autonomous entity (game-entity) to achieve greater autonomy for itself. If successful in this activity, the game-entity can then continue to provide a source of autonomy for any 9 people in society that have an opportunity to play in that game.

So what makes most of these game-entities illegitimate? The primary cause is due to the fact that they aren’t really people at all, but rather Games formed by people. The fact that they are legally viewed as a “person”, creates a misleading picture. A Game is fundamentally different from a person in many ways (real and conceptually). A game-entity only possesses the autonomy it acquires from members (Players). Each member surrenders their autonomy to the organization, which then utilizes it to achieve it own self gains. Without the members, an organization has no autonomy of it’s own. And yet the members are also totally dependent upon the game-entity for their survival.

Based on the most common organizational Games, it’s clear that the power component of autonomy flows towards the center, but the control component flows outward from the center. This is why all organizations eventually evolve into hierarchical structures as they grow, with a single position at the top (center) and everyone else below (peripheral to) that focal point. A hierarchy looks like a tree with a single trunk, with branches growing out of it, and then even smaller branches growing out of those branches, and so on. Although it resembles a tree, it’s more accurate to view a hierarchy as a centralized structure, with branches propagating out from that center point. This is the center of control.

The reason that hierarchies form in this way is to efficiently aggregate power from the periphery to the center, and to allocate control from the center to the periphery. Many attempts have been made to create different game-entity structures, but in practice the hierarchy continues to emerge as the most efficient structure for collaborative Games. It provides the means to magnify power and coordinate control of large and complex Games.

There is one danger for people that arises from this situation. Its important to keep in mind that the social Arena of mankind includes both person-entities and game-entities, and so the two are often involved in competitive Games with each other. Since most game-entities have greater aggregate autonomy than most person-entities, organizations have a much greater chance of winning any competition, unless there are Rules to compensate for the difference (inequity). This same issue also applies to small (low level autonomy) game-entities that are in competition with large game-entities.

The distinct difference between person-entities and game-entities, and how it affects our everyday lives will be explored in more depth in the following chapters.

V. Principle 4

The basic concepts of Principle 4 are:

* Entities must be free to Exit a Game at any time, at their own self-discretion, without any limitations on their Exit.

* Removing Game resources from the Arena could be limited by the Game Rules, but the Entity’s freedom to leave a Game must not be limited.

* It’s illegitimate to force an Entity to participate in a Game through any means other than their own consent.

VI. Principle 5

The basic concepts of Principle 5 are:

* The component most commonly missing in illegitimate Games is a Referee.

* A Referee provides an impartial and competent perspective on Game activities.

* An independent Referee must not participate in the Game, and must not benefit, or lose, due to the outcome of Game activities.

VII. Cheating

I recently heard the saying that “Cheaters never win”. This is an absurd idea, because its apparent that Cheaters very often win, that’s the reason they do it. The only time a Cheater doesn’t win is when they’re caught, but that rarely happens in complex Games. In simple Games like casino games, Cheaters can be caught through simple means, but in the complex Games of human society it becomes extremely difficult.

There are many ways to cheat, but most of them are based on lying (fraud). Another common way to cheat is through the illegitimate use of power (force), but the most common way is by lying. Cheaters lie to gain an unfair advantage over others, while making appear that they don’t have an advantage. It would be useless for a fraud Cheater if anyone knew they had an unfair advantage. No one would play in a Game if they knew they were going to have an unavoidable disadvantage. All Cheats want their illegitimate advantage to be hidden.

All Cheaters generally use the same basic techniques:

* Circumvent the Rules

* Exploit holes in the Rule set

* Violate the spirit of the Rules

* Exploit flaws in the Rules

* Exploit illegitimate Rules

* Exploit illegitimate Games

* Disguise their identity

* Disguise their autonomy

Its clear from this list that the formation of a legitimate Game isn’t sufficient to ensure equality for all players. Cheaters will seek out ways to achieve self-gain from both legitimate and illegitimate Games.

The vast majority of Cheaters are males. This is due to the instinctive male desire to compete, win, and dominate. Females will also Cheat under some circumstances, but males are driven by a primitive desire for dominance. This can easily be seen in the relative numbers of male criminals compared to the number of female criminals. Throughout all history, cultures, and types of crimes, males break the laws of society (cheat) far more than females. Only through self-control are males able to overcome this instinctive drive.（Source：michaelurban3）