The society of the future falls less within the province of a Newtonian anthropology than a pragmatics of language particles. There are many different language games, a heterogeneity of elements. They only give rise to institutions in patches, local determinism.

The decision makers, however, attempt to manage these clouds of sociality according to input and output matrices, following a logic which implies that their elements are commensurable and that the whole is determinable. They allocate our lives for the growth of power. In matters of social justice and of scientific truths alike, the legitimation of that power is based on its optimizing the system's performance and efficiency.

The application of this criterion to all of our games necessarily entails a certain level of terror, whether soft or hard: be operational, that is commensurable, or disappear. The operativity criterion is technological, it has no relevance for judging what is true or just.

Is legitimacy to be found in consensus obtained through discussion? Such consensus does violence to the heterogeneity of language games. And invention is always born of dissension.