Ideology is a set of principles and fundamental concepts—a framework of guiding ideas. It is a constitution, a collection of maxims, akin to the legends and myths of Ancient Greece that sought to explain the nature of the world. In our case, ideology defines not just how the world is but how it should be—how to create intelligence and the intelligent.

Architecture is closely tied to ideology. However, while ideology defines the foundational principles, architecture is the structured framework for implementing them. It is the scaffolding upon which ideology takes form.

Some aspects of ideology come with explicit justifications—reasoned explanations for why things are designed in a certain way. Others, however, remain unexplained, taken either on faith or as working assumptions.

• This is why, in a certain sense, belief lies at the core of everything.
• We construct theories and architectures based on assumptions that we may not be able to fully explain or prove.
• It is akin to erecting a grand building on unstable ground: the structure may be strong, tall, and aesthetically refined, but if it rests on shifting soil, it risks tilting or even collapsing entirely.

Architecture emerges from ideology. It is a concrete, high-level blueprint detailing what must be done. It is a structured set of decisions and constraints that must be followed rigorously to ensure the integrity of the system.

• Without adherence to architecture, the creation risks becoming an incoherent patchwork rather than a unified and stable whole.

A critical principle for both ideology and architecture is consistency.

• To be consistent means that if you establish premise A, then, according to the ideological and architectural framework, B must necessarily follow, and you must adhere to B.
• Otherwise, what you have is no longer a coherent system but an improvised patchwork—a selective application of rules tailored to each situation rather than a structured methodology.

Of course, one could argue that such flexibility is itself an ideology and an architecture. However, in my view, true ideology and architecture form a lattice of interdependent rules and decisions—a crystalline structure upon which higher layers and branches can be constructed.

Alternatively, one might build not upon a crystalline lattice but upon glass—an ever-expanding patchwork.

• This approach is flexible, but it may lack the necessary rigidity to support grand, multi-layered structures.
• On such a foundation, any construction risks sinking, shifting, and settling, much like a building without a frame.
• Perhaps, using this approach, one can create something vast and expansive, but not something tall and multi-tiered.