Principlev1
Certain drives should have constitutional veto power over
Certain drives should have constitutional veto power over specific classes of decisions, removing those outcomes from negotiation entirely rather than subjecting them to majority rule among drives.
Why This Is a Principle
This principle derives from loss aversion (Losses loom larger than equivalent gains in human) and hyperbolic discounting (Humans discount future rewards hyperbolically rather than). Because humans systematically underweight future catastrophic losses and overweight immediate gains, certain protective drives need veto power to prevent decisions with irreversible negative consequences. This is prescriptive governance design grounded in axioms about cognitive bias.