Ask AI

A Unifying General Theory of Human Motivation

Appetites • Intrinsic Motivation • Mimetic Desire

The AIM Framework synthesizes established neuroscience, behavioral economics, and Girardian theory into a falsifiable taxonomy with 8 core axioms and domain-level predictions.

Three neurologically distinct motivational sources—integrated through the brain's common-currency valuation system (vmPFC/VS)—explain patterns that single-variable models cannot: the Easterlin Paradox, Veblen goods, mimetic market cascades, and intrinsic motivation crowding-out.

From Explanation to Contested Concepts

The aim is not to discard existing models or findings, but to plug AIM into them so that long-standing anomalies, edge cases, and disagreements across fields can be explained using a single, consistent motivational taxonomy.

Once the same three sources of motivation are traced through legal systems, markets, and everyday institutions, they provide a more precise way of talking about contested ideas like fairness, freedom, and justice.

Any normative suggestions about how societies or organizations ought to be structured are meant to follow directly from that explanatory work: if we can see which parts of behavior are appetitive, which are intrinsic, and which are mimetic, then we can spell out more carefully what it would mean to secure appetites, protect intrinsic projects, and deliberately manage mimetic pressure.

In that sense, AIM is first a tool for interpreting existing observations and findings; the proposals about fairness, freedom, and justice are attempts to let that clearer motivational picture do as much of the normative work as possible.

The AIM Framework in One Glance

Three neurologically distinct sources of motivation that converge in the brain's common-currency valuation system

Appetites (A)

Homeostatic and physiological motivation plus basic safety needs. Cyclical, satiable, state-dependent.

Examples: hunger, thirst, sleep, temperature regulation, physical safety

Intrinsic Motivation (I)

Process-rewarding engagement. Persists in private, autonomy-aligned, context-independent.

Examples: curiosity, mastery, flow states, autonomous projects, aesthetic creation

Mimetic Desire (M)

Socially transmitted wanting through observation of models. Rivalry-prone, observability-sensitive.

Examples: status-seeking, keeping up with neighbors, social comparison, viral trends

How This Work Began

Yule Guttenbeil

I'm Yule Guttenbeil, Principal Commercial Lawyer & Behavioral Systems Architect, creator of the AIM Motivation Framework.

My professional training in commercial law and contract systems—where definitional precision is non-negotiable—provides the specific methodology required for this project. The behavioral sciences suffer from "Code Drift": drifting definitions of wants, needs, and preferences across disciplines. AIM applies legal-grade definitional rigor to resolve these inconsistencies.

Reading across psychology, economics, philosophy, and neuroscience, it became clear to me that something similar was happening in the human behavioral sciences: we were using slightly different, drifting definitions of wants, needs, and preferences in each field, and the "gears" no longer lined up.

The AIM Framework is my attempt to repair that drift by offering a set of tighter, neurologically grounded definitions that can be applied back onto existing observations and models, rather than starting from scratch.

When these refined motivational categories are applied consistently, they not only help explain patterns that different disciplines have already noticed, they also clarify why people disagree so deeply about fairness, freedom, and justice.

Much of the work on this site is therefore two-step: first, use AIM to make sense of existing findings and lived experience; second, let that clearer picture guide careful, testable suggestions about how our laws, markets, and institutions might better respect appetites, protect intrinsic motivations, and avoid weaponizing mimetic rivalry.

The Personal Journey

One of my strongest early memories is believing I was an alien. I was no older than 4. I felt that my dad didn't understand me and that I couldn't understand him—I couldn't relate to him or effectively communicate the importance of my wants and needs to him. That feeling persisted in various forms throughout my life and ultimately led me to therapy in 2010.

It was here that I told my therapist that I didn't know whether I wanted things for myself because I genuinely wanted them, or because my dad wanted them for me. The therapist responded, "Well, then that's where your work is—finding that out."

The AIM Framework represents the culmination of that work. Reflecting on my therapy, I realized that my dad's desires had "infected" mine. He transmitted his motivations— sometimes deliberately, sometimes not—and I adopted them automatically, in conflict with my intrinsic motivations. My natural curiosity and love of mastery were strained by mimetic desires that weren't my own, causing anxiety, confusion, and depression.

This tension—between intrinsic motivation and mimetic desire—lies at the heart of human interaction. It appears to me that in answering that question for myself, I may have inadvertently answered the same question for everyone's self.

A Young but Rapidly Developing Research Programme

The AIM Motivation Framework is a young but rapidly developing research programmewith a working mathematical model and domain-level predictions. It provides a basis for testable hypotheses and tightly bounded experiments to validate its premises.

While not a clinical neuroscientist or experimental psychologist, my background as a commercial law practitioner equips me with the precise skill set this synthesis requires: resolving definitional inconsistencies across complex systems. The AIM Framework addresses "Code Drift"— the phenomenon where economics, psychology, and neuroscience each use subtly incompatible definitions of motivation, causing theoretical gridlock.

This framework functions as a heuristic utility model. Its validity is demonstrated through its capacity to predict and resolve system failures (such as the Easterlin Paradox, inelastic demand for essentials, and mimetic market cascades) where standard single-variable models fail. I am seeking research collaborators to empirically test these predictions across domains.

Using This Site

This is a living project, so the structure and information on this site will be updated as the theory, hypothesis, and findings develop over time. I have built it as a central location to catalogue and share findings, predictions, and suggestions that flow logically from the AIM Framework when applied to various areas of human interaction.

Given that the AIM Framework proposes a significant shift in how we understand motivation across disciplines, I know you're going to have questions. I've built an AIM chatbot that references my research materials, writings, and conversations so that you should be able to get answers. As I tell the lawyers I train on how to ethically use AI tools:

  • Don't assume it is correct.
  • Verify it for yourself.
  • Use your own judgment.

My hope is that the better metrics and definitions offered on this site can help clear up confusion both within and between various fields of study in the human behavioral sciences, and provide practical tools for understanding our own motivations and improving our relationships.

Whatever the AIM Framework raises for you once you start exploring it, please be kind to yourself and understanding of the various motivations operating on those around you.

I genuinely wish you all the very best.

Yule Guttenbeil