<aside>
Reality Myths, defined
Paradoxically for humans, fictions are an essential part of reality. For this reason, knowing how to dispel destructive ones is essential for well-being and integrity — not only as individuals but collectively.
To influence what is real such that it might be OTHERWISE, we do two things.
These forms of enaction are related. The first has us enacting intentions of or for individuals. The later has us constructing shared (entwined pair, group, or collective) intention.
OTHERWISE orientation has consequences that deeply affect both human awareness and reality modeling. A common way our awareness adapts to unintended or unpleasant modifications of shared reality - where intention has been applied to bring about change - is to retrospectively shrug it off. “If it happened, then it was supposed to [by God’s will]” or “let the chips fall where they may [I am not personally responsible when it comes to consequences]”. Due to the outcomes being entwined with our narratives about reality, we find the new conditions “reasonable.” If I can be “reasonable”, it is only possible to conclude, logically, that shrugging helplessly at bad outcomes is self-defeating nonsense. In fact, distortions of reality may well have entered self-defeated by our well-meaning, reasonable selves.
<aside>
OKIC is in no way meant to facilitate individuals with personal “manifesting”, like vision boards etc. Quite the opposite. Reality phenomena will naturally overlap, but do not get confused that the purpose of relating meaningfully to the Reality Myths here in this way is intended primarily to inform traditional self-help.
</aside>
We are capable of and do even regularly choose to hand away our agency over to fictions. Many times that’s fine because there’s no harm no foul as the fiction represents something real in a meaningful way. Discerning when reasonableness is no longer a sufficient belief is the current crossroads of human awareness and agency. It is time we aim to account for outcomes, both dire and benign, from the potential follies of fictitiously informed enaction.
The structure and patterning of distortions is not random or even unpredictable. The unique position the OKIC Reality Cipher holds is to define how. The Reality Myths defined in it are important because they set us on the way to grasping how the patterning behind well-meaning fictions-becoming-foibles, for example, happens. At the far end of the extreme, otherwise fictions, even well intentioned ones, become beset (communication shitshow) by dispassion and lack of clarity. This is a result of enacted intentions getting so out of sync with each other that reality feels less grounding than disorienting. The otherwise charming process of imagining a better widget or a better social order takes a dark turn.
To shed light, we start with clarity about these fundamental REALITY MYTHS, a total of two types, specified “First Myths” and “Second Myths”.
Portrayed in the figures below on a structure known in finite geometry ias a Fano plane. The Second Myths figure is different in that an inscribed equilateral triangle representing in OKIC a timeline has been added.
First Myths
Second Myths
With the OKIC Reality Cipher the promise is that, supported by technology’s natural capacity to enhance objectivity and timeless memory, humanity can increasingly relate to reality understanding the difference between a reality myth and bound states. Informed by participation infused with new insights, we systematically repair underlying dysfunction.
