This is a guest post from the founding team of Cosmos Ventures, an independent organization that invests in founders whose work advances the principles Cosmos Institute exists to promote.
Most generations inherit their world. Some must build it anew.
Today, we’re launching Cosmos Ventures to back philosopher-builders founding institutions for the AI age.
Two hundred and fifty years ago, the American founding demanded new institutions for a new kind of society. Benjamin Franklin identified what that world would need and built what was missing. He believed self-government required educated citizens, so he pioneered subscription libraries. A free people required a free press, so he seeded newspapers. Neighbors had to carry one another’s risks, so he established mutual insurance.
AI is creating the biggest opening for institution building since the American founding.
Our world developed around the assumption that intelligence was bound to human beings. Ideas had human authors, and consequential decisions had accountable individuals behind them. If employers needed analysis or creativity, they had to hire people. AI is breaking that bond.
Some assume AI is a normal technology our institutions will absorb as they absorbed the internet and the smartphone. Others insist superintelligence leaves little worth building outside the frontier labs. Both are counsels of passivity at a moment that calls for founders. Many of the institutions we will need have yet to be built. We have to decide what we value most and how to secure it. These are questions no machine can answer for us.
Founders answer them with what they build. Tomorrow’s most important companies will set new norms that others organize around, becoming foundational institutions of the AI age.
Institutions encode theories of how we should live together. A new school is a claim about how children should be formed and what is worth teaching them. A personal agent is a theory of which decisions we can delegate and which we must make ourselves. A new assurance regime is a theory of what to trust and how to demonstrate trustworthiness.
Enduring institutions won’t be built by simply following user feedback and iterating. Their founders must answer normative questions about what kind of society they’re building toward. They must be philosopher-builders. We are here to back them.
Immanuel Kant gave the Enlightenment its motto: Sapere aude. Dare to know.
The AI age demands another.
Condere aude. Dare to found.
Tell us what you are building for ↗
Cosmos Institute Inc. is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. Cosmos Ventures refers to the venture investment platform associated with Cosmos Fund I LP and related vehicles. Cosmos Management LLC serves as investment manager to all Cosmos Ventures vehicles, including Cosmos Fund I LP. References to “the Fund” or “Fund I” refer to Cosmos Fund I LP. These investment activities are distinct from the charitable and educational programs of Cosmos Institute, Inc. This communication does not constitute an offer to sell, or a solicitation of an offer to buy, any interest in Cosmos Fund I LP or any related investment vehicle. Any such offer may be made only through definitive offering documents by the appropriate fund, general partner, manager, or authorized representative.
AI is demanding that we become governance literate. And ironically, AI is governance illiterate. It was developed by people that carry a "market" logic and naturally their product applies their logic.
Okay - a couple of steps back. Society operates on three governance logics; hierarchy, market, and network. These should not be confused with political ideologies, but HOW things are coordinated. Are things coordinated by rules and boundaries (H), by incentives and profits (M), or by consensus and trust (N)? Every individual, organization, collaboration, nation, etc. applies some ratio of H/M/N to achieve their objectives - and they are in a constant flux to some degree.
What I am building for is for a governance literate society that deliberately and consciously is able to design the complex organizations needed to address the complex wicked issues. The theory is that wicked issues are not caused by complexity (E. Ostrom indirectly proved that by identifying dozens of complex scenarios that did not devolve into wicked issues), but by the misapplication and misalignment of governance logics.
The first build is GADGET (governance architecture diagnostic generative engineering tool), a decade-old methodology that adopted LLMs as the calculation engine. Its purpose is to 'read' governance logistics to enable people to properly apply and align governance logics in complex socio-economic issues. What people and society have yet to capitulate on is that public policy is no longer sufficient to solve wicked issues because public policy cannot hold the requisite variety needed to manage the complexity of wicked issues.
Wicked issues need to be resolved in situ using governance logics, because wicked issues are created in situ using governance logics, misapplied and misaligned.
My first public presentation on GADGET is at the University Network of Collaborative Governance [https://law.utexas.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/30/2026/08/Final_UNCGSchedule_8.12.pdf] on November 6th. It has been applied on dozens of complex issues across multiple sectors and industries. Governance literacy is a topic whose time has come.
GADGET is not a governance framework, but can assay the governance framework of any entity, collaboration, etc. Think of H/M/N as governance DNA. If you know the organization's governance DNA, you know its governance logic, and when you know its governance logic you can predict HOW it will approach any problem. Governance logics determines policy architecture. None of it is hidden, we just need the right lens to see it.
Congratulations! Read the thesis - great job! Will reach out.