The Axiomatic Theory of Polymathic Civilization, Institutional Adaptation and Human Leadership in AI-Native Societies

Abstract This paper develops an axiomatic and interdisciplinary framework for the emergence of a polymathic civilization under conditions of accelerating artificial intelligence, technological interdependence, and institutional transformation. Building upon the ANOA (AI-Native Organizational Architecture) research programme, the study examines whether institutions designed around conventional specialization can preserve effective coordination, constitutional legitimacy, and human sovereignty as the complexity and velocity of innovation increase. The paper investigates the structural limits of fragmented expertise, the potential contribution of AI-augmented polymaths, and the conditions under which interdisciplinary integration may improve institutional adaptation without replacing specialist knowledge, democratic accountability, or legitimate authority. Drawing upon the architectural tradition of Vitruvius, the infrastructural administration of Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa, and the institutional stewardship of Sextus Julius Frontinus, the research develops historical analogies between the construction of physical civilization and the emerging requirements of AI-native computational infrastructures. A central contribution is the proposed Polymathic Leadership Retainer (PLR), an economic model for financing the continuous availability of independently verified interdisciplinary capabilities before specific institutional problems or research outputs can be fully defined. The study further examines innovation–adaptation asymmetry, institutional coordination deficits, public-debt constraints, modern patronage, interdisciplinary education, and the recognition of AI-augmented polymathic competence. Stoic philosophical principles, particularly those associated with Epictetus, inform a contemporary constitutional framework based on disciplined judgment, bounded authority, human dignity, accountability, intellectual independence, and service to the common good. The resulting framework distinguishes intellectual leadership from political sovereignty and places economic arrangements for polymathic research under explicit constitutional and institutional safeguards. Through axiomatic formulations, conditional analytical propositions, counterexamples, and falsifiable research hypotheses, the paper establishes a theoretical foundation for investigating the organization and financing of human intellectual leadership in AI-native societies. The research does not claim that polymaths universally outperform specialist teams, that institutional collapse is inevitable, or that intellectual competence confers political legitimacy. Research status: Independent theoretical working paper, Version 1.0. The proposed models and institutional arrangements require independent empirical evaluation and further formal validation. Research programme: ANOA — AI-Native Organizational Architecture. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.24128701