“Without self knowledge, without understanding the working and functions of his machine, man cannot be free, he cannot govern himself and he will always remain a slave.”
Self Authorship is the possibility of living your life as if you were the author of it in a similar way that a writer authors a story. The beginning of Self Authorship starts with becoming conscious of how we are not that. This what I call the state of Rusty autopilot. In Rusty autopilot one is a kind of automation living out yesterdays habits, and others expectations.
- The 3 blue pills of Rusty Autopilot is the primary deconstruction of Rusty Autopilot.
- Life is a function of my circumstances (vs my life is a function of my self authoring)
- The only thing that creates a genuine change in ones life is a growth of ones capability; ones capacity for self authorship.
- Rusty Autopilot is a Narrative Therapy "bad guy" who we can fight against as "other"
- The opposite? of Meaningful Participation
- A worldview based in a dyadic structure. For instance subject and object or Right and Wrong
- A term that refers to the current “cultural norm”
- One of the key features of Rusty Autopilot is one of not changing or growing. Staying where you are. The status quo. Status quo is Latin for "existing state."
- [[The 5 Disabilities of Slumbering Submission]]
- Ref The “Unlived Life”
- Self Authorship VS. _______ _______
something that has me
- Reined (in)
- Horse and buggy
- Second hand
- not thinking for themself
- Not coming up with anything original
- Caught in polar thinking
- Martin Heidegger uses the term “thrown-ness” to indicate being a passive victim that is thrown into the moment without agency. This seems to me very similar to the notion of /this/ concept incorporating all three elements of The 3 blue pills of Rusty Autopilot
If the primitive structure of MPa is triadically structured then what is the structure of Rusty Autopilot?
- I asked myself this question when reading the NewPhilosopher magazine issue on perception and seeing the question of perception being framed as realism and solipsism, both of which are dyadic
Realism and solipsism are two competing philosophies that explain the natural world. A realist view is that the world exists outside of one's perception of it, that we can be sure of the existence of the world around us even when we are not perceiving it. A solipsist view is that the world does not exist outside one's perception of it, and that the only thing we can be sure of is that our mind exists.
- Both are based on a dyadic structure of subject and object which exist (or don't) in their own independent domains.
- Opposite thinking is also a function of this dyadic structure
- triadicism and dyadicism are more fundamental than MPa or USu?
- I thought it might be helpful to speak to the limitations in the maps and models of our dominant worldview and therefore to flesh out USu and it's primitive architecture
- In reading my remembrance this morning about being conscious of Rusty Autopilot it made me wonder what set of practices were needed to do this. It’s like /I’m trying to move from one pathway to another /. How can I do this?
Habituality (or mechanicality) is one end of a continuum of which total autonomous freedom (in service of meaning) is the other? “SA fitness or capability” is the defining characteristic of where we are on this continuum and “Meaningful Practice” is the process of developing this
- What Cait Flanders in “Adventures in Opting Out” calls the ::“default script":: is a combination of habituality and external authority. She says “step away from the default and choose a life guided by intention and purpose”. Recognise how the "default script" can shape your goals and values