Modern theories of how life began include the idea that molecules formed autocatalytic networks that evolved to isolate and protect themselves inside a membrane because this enabled them to grow stronger and develop more rapidly. Isolated autocatalytic networks of different types eventually evolved to work together inside a larger membrane to form unicellular organisms. Such organisms evolved to isolate and protect themselves in communities of unicellular organisms. Eventually, communities of different types found synergies and formed meta communities to make organisms with different kinds of tissue. To sum up, evolution appears to have started with very simple stable processes that became isolated and were thus able to optimize their operations. When isolation ceased to be the best strategy to increase fitness, those that tended to open up and join with other types were able to cooperate and began outnumbering those that remained isolated. In some instances, isolation is still the best strategy. Humans and many other incredible creatures, however, are the result of many cycles of isolation and then cooperation. It is a story of the coalescence of small things into larger things with cooperation acting to make the whole more fit than the individual parts.

Humans have started coalescing into corporations, cities, rock bands, etc. Much of the cooperation that appears in such coalescences comes from conscious effort to find and utilize synergies. While the behaviors of molecules are apparently random, so that cooperation inside of a eukaryote is the result of millions of years of random trial and error, behaviors of humans are often guided by aspects of consciousness such as reason and faith. As a result, agreement among individual humans in a group enhances synergistic cooperation. However, disagreement, when used properly, can also enhance synergy, though perhaps not through cooperation but rather by motivating changes for the better. A common method of fostering agreement is information sharing and collection of opinions. For example, E2 encourages people to share information and allows noders to vote on the information shared.

The instinct to find agreement sometimes causes people to defend against controversial information. However, the vast frontal cortex in a human being provides the ability to separate the information away from this instinct, and even to change one's mind in the event that the information highlights a discrepancy between actual reality and perceived reality. Whenever such a discrepancy is eliminated by the cortex of a human, the value of that human to the communities in which he or she participates will increase or decrease. The change in value depends on the kind of community. One might say that an evil community is one in which the elimination of such a discrepancy would decrease the value of the human. In other words, evil communities survive because individuals remain ignorant. If a community benefits more from members that tend to eliminate discrepancies between actual reality and what they perceive or believe, one might call it a "good" community.

We all recognize the enjoyment of being part of a good community. In any community, there will be controversies, and some members will try to suppress input that supports a viewpoint opposed to their own regardless of the quality of that input. For example, the rep of a writeup is used to value it in an official way here, so it's in our best interest to discourage the downvoting of writeups based on their compatibility with one's own views. Coalescent evolution will manifest itself in those willing to expose themselves to truths they think are false. We should value evidence that we are wrong.