The following is from a conversation on the Yahoo! Mythoself Group. For further reading, i encourage you to join the group or simply visit Joseph’s blog at www.josephriggio.com.

My Benefactor, Joseph

“Position” is a word I’ve been using since I began training in this
work, as in, “Operating Position.” This refers to the internal
position that an individual is operating from at any given moment in
time. The operating position is the sum total, cumulative organization
of the individual’s system in any given moment neurologically,
physiologically and somatically. In essence the way I use this is to
state that “WHO” a person IS in any moment is a function of the
position they are operating from, i.e.: the Operating Position, the
operating position is the ontology of the individual in any given
moment.

This is what I organize my ideas of ontology around, specifically
state in terms of the idea that the MythoSelf Process is an
ontological vs. an epistemological process. Again, the idea here is
that epistemology follows ontology. What makes this so powerful is
that the ontology remains constant, while the epistemology remains
fluid, i.e.: open to change and maintaining a massive respond-ability.
This is at the core of what we call the Ready State in the MythoSelf
Process.

The power in this system, i.e.: the MythoSelf Process, is that it is
based in the oscillation between ontology and epistemology that
generates behavior, and subsequently performances leading to outcomes.

From a pragmatic point of view ontology can be thought of as a
manifestation of the somatic form, i.e.: the totality of the somatic
form expresses the ontology of the individual isomorphically. In other
words, the ontology of the individual is expressed as the somatic
form, as the somatic form of the individual expresses the ontology.
When you set the totality of the somatic form into a particular
position you are expressing an particular ontology as well.

So in terms of becoming an exquisite performer yourself or working
with others to induce exquisite performance, operating somatically is
the most precise, effective, efficient and powerful means of attaining
the ontology necessary to producing exquisite performance. When you
know how to set the position you stabilize the ontology and produce an
extremely powerful operating position from which anything becomes
possible for you as an individual.

For the sake of clarity, “anything becomes possible for you as an
individual” means anything you are capable of doing within the limits
of your being, i.e.: your neurological, physiological and somatic
limits and in relation to your learning, i.e.: knowledge and skills as
expressed behaviorally, with the conditions of behavioral expression
including cognition and speech acts.

As a final point for now, position is accessed and set somatically.
Within the scope of the MythoSelf model you are led to an explicit
awareness of the somatic expression of the operating position of the
Ready State and from there taught how to re-access and sustain it at
will. This position is then further enhanced, expanded and stabilized
through the use of mythological form linking it deeply to the
epistemological operating structures accessed when operating from this
position.
> >I also have a question as to how to maintain the largest narrative
> > bound for the neurobiologic position or state. With any narrative
> there
> > are boundries and a set container. From a well formed story or
> myth or
> > narrative how do you set the story to keep the best state at it’s
> optimal
> > position.

The first thing you want to put in place if you are considering your
question on the basis of my work, i.e.: the MythoSelf Process model,
would be that narrative always flows from the operating position. The
consideration of how the neurological form and function are operating
is a function then of epistemology. By default epistemology always
arises sequentially after the ontology has been set. The particular
manner in which the ontology is set and sustained defines the
beingness of the individual in that moment, i.e.: WHO they are being.
The individual awareness of being and the system that contains the
individual who is aware would then be what we refer to as the
epistemology of the individual. Within this structure narrative form
is a function of epistemology, as epistemology is a function of
ontology.

Ultimately your question refers to the iterative and recursive nature
of narrative in terms of the epistemological form. Specifically, any
perception, experience and/or event can be perceived and experienced
from multiple perspectives.

Within the NLP model for instance the perspectives they consider
include at least the idea of the filters of the representational
systems (V-A-K-O/G) as organized in term of strategies, i.e. the
specific sequencing of the representation systems in terms of the
perception and cognition of an event either real or imagined. NLP also
includes the idea of perceptual positions in terms of the
interpersonal position of perception from which an event is considered
where ‘First Position’ is defined as the consideration of the event as
though from the perceptual position of the individual experiencing the
event first-hand, ‘Second Position’ is defined as the consideration of
the event as though from the perceptual position of the individual/s
with whom the individual is having the interaction with, i.e.; “as
though through the eyes of the other/s” and ‘Third Position’ is
defined as a perceptual position once removed from the event as though
from a perceptual position of an observer observing the event others
are engaged in experiencing.

Within the MythoSelf Process model we consider events in terms of
holographic representations that are topologically organized.
Specifically, WHERE the representation is located in relation the
perceptual position of the individual considering it will determine
what the representation “IS” for/to them, i.e.: the “semantic form” or
“meaning” is a function of location. Another way of thinking about
this would be to say, the angle of approach will determine both what
and how you experience any event to be in relation to your experience
of it. Taking this idea of a bit further we could say, the holographic
form contains the entirety of the experience and the position you
encounter it from in relation to your angle of approach will determine
what projects from the holographic form giving meaning to the event
contained within it.

Without going any further than that what I’ll add simply is that the
narrative form describes the angle of approach in vector terms with
regard to the holographic form being considered. So essentially the
narrative you are operating through, in terms of mythic form,
determines what the events of your life will be experienced as being
for/to you. When considered in this way establishing powerful
narrative structures becomes essential to manifesting potent
performances, i.e.: mythic form determines behavior, which in turn
determines performance, which in turn determines outcome.

I’ll simplify that beyond the explanation:

“If you want to create extraordinary outcomes first put an
extraordinary myth in place about what and how in relation to the
outcome you want to create.”

That alone should pretty much sum up your questions about the
narrative form, at least from within the structure of the MythoSelf
Process model.

How about we leave that as ‘good enough for now’ and we’ll save any
conversations for function and belief for another time after you’ve
had a chance to digest what I’ve written here and commented on that
should you choose to first?

Best regards,

Joseph Riggio, Ph.D.
Architect and Designer of the MythoSelf Model

http://www.josephriggio.com