Authority & Resources
The scholarship behind this framework—what’s original here, and the established sources it synthesizes.
Authority & Sources
The Meta-Note on Sources
Here's the thing about authority: consciousness doesn't need citations to know itself.
But Somebody (that character you're playing) needs training wheels. The mind wants to know: "Is this real? Can I trust this?" So we provide sources—eight domains, 100+ years of research, cross-cultural validation.
The paradox: You're reading an authority page that tells you authority is a construct.
The invitation: Use these sources as railings on the bridge. Check them. Test them against your Tuesday-morning life. Then cross the bridge and leave the railings behind.
If this already makes sense: Close this page. You don't need someone else's credentials to validate your own transformation. If you're still reading: Good. Let's build your confidence so you can eventually abandon it.
What This Page Does
Shows you the framework isn't made up. Every pattern has been mapped by multiple independent traditions. Cross-domain convergence = probably real.
Quick reference when you want to go deeper into a specific source or check the research behind a practice.
Teaches you to trust pattern recognition over authority. When five domains describe the same structure, you're looking at consciousness documenting itself. Eventually: you are the authority. These are breadcrumbs home.
The Source Domains
Credibility Tiers ★★★★★ = Established research, peer-reviewed, clinically validated ★★★★ = Strong theoretical work, widely accepted ★★ = Speculative, metaphorical only, never used as proof
1. Story Structure (Hollywood Craft) — ★★★★★
Why it matters: Story beats mirror consciousness change. Act 3's "All Is Lost" shows up in every transformation arc because your brain processes meaning this way.
Foundation:
Campbell, J. (1949). The Hero with a Thousand Faces — The monomyth; cross-cultural story patterns → Link
Vogler, C. (1992). The Writer's Journey — Hollywood adaptation of Campbell's structure → Link
Snyder, B. (2005). Save the Cat! — 15-beat structure; "All Is Lost" beat → Link
McKee, R. (1997). Story — Structure as character; narrative mechanics
Hasson et al. (2012). "Brain-to-brain coupling during storytelling," PNAS — Neural synchronization during narrative
Observable proof: Your life follows these beats whether you've read Campbell or not. The structure is descriptive, not prescriptive.
See: Story Structure as Consciousness Technology • The 12 Beats Overview • The Divine Game
2. Neuroscience & Psychology — ★★★★★
Why it matters: Integration is embodied. Tuesday behavior reflects nervous-system regulation, not just insights. Your body is the implementation layer.
Key Figures & Works:
van der Kolk, B. (2014). The Body Keeps the Score — Trauma lives in the body; somatic integration required → Link
Porges, S. (2011). The Polyvagal Theory — Nervous system states; window of tolerance; safety precedes integration → Link
Clark, A. (2023). The Experience Machine — Predictive processing; brain as prediction engine → Link
Menon, V. (2023). "20 years of the default mode network," Nature Reviews Neuroscience — DMN scaffolds narrative self; identity is neurally constructed
Siegel, D. (2012). The Developing Mind — IPNB; repeated states become traits
Levine, P. (2010). In an Unspoken Voice — Titration, pendulation, somatic experiencing → Link
Friston, K. (2010). "The free-energy principle," Nature Reviews Neuroscience — Brain minimizes prediction error → Link
Observable proof: If it doesn't change your Tuesday-morning nervous system, it didn't integrate. Peak states are unreliable narrators.
See: Integration vs. Bypassing • The Tuesday Test • Working with Resistance
3. Mystical Traditions — ★★★★★
Why it matters: The dark night (Act 3) and integration (Act 4) appear across centuries of lived practice. Cross-cultural convergence validates the map.
Sources by Tradition:
Advaita Vedanta
Tat Tvam Asi ("Thou art That")
Ramana Maharshi's self-inquiry
Christian Mysticism
Dark Night of the Soul
St. John of the Cross
Sufism
Fana (annihilation) & Baqa (subsistence)
Rumi's poetry
Buddhism
Form is emptiness; emptiness is form
Heart Sutra; Nagarjuna
Zen/Dōgen
Practice-realization are one
Shōbōgenzō
Dzogchen
Rigpa (pure awareness)
Recognition vs. attainment
Kabbalah
Tzimtzum (divine contraction)
Tikkun olam (repair)
Observable proof: Every tradition points to the same structure: forgetting → seeking → crisis → integration. Different languages, same territory.
Permission to Leave If you've already recognized Nobody/Somebody, you don't need these sources. Direct recognition beats scholarship every time.
See: Act 0: Divine Play • Act 3: Journey In • Nobody/Somebody
4. Developmental Psychology — ★★★★
Why it matters: Acts correlate with stage shifts. Conscious practice can accelerate reorganization. What you're "subject to" can become "object."
Key Work:
Kegan, R. — Stages of consciousness; subject-object distinction
Loevinger, J. — Ego development stages
Wade, J. — Integral framework; developmental stages
Wilber, K. — Integral theory (comprehensive but can become spiritual bypassing)
Pattern: Act 1 → subject to story. Act 4 → story becomes object.
See: Pattern Recognition • Storyteller vs. Character
5. Habit Science — ★★★★★
Why it matters: Explains Act-2 seeking loops and Act-4 stabilization. Integration = updated habits that run automatically on Tuesday morning.
Key Works:
Brewer, J. (2017). The Craving Mind — Habit loops; trigger-behavior-reward; awareness interrupts
Clear, J. (2018). Atomic Habits — Identity-based habits; environment design; small wins compound → Link
Fogg, B.J. (2019). Tiny Habits — Behavior design; tiny contextual actions drive lasting change → Link
Observable proof: Your Tuesday-morning habits reveal your actual identity, not your peak-state insights.
See: The Tuesday Test • Daily Rhythm • Act 4: The Missing Act
6. Narrative Therapy — ★★★★★
Why it matters: Re-authoring changes life outcomes. Story change precedes symptom change. Acts 1-4 provide the structure for narrative transformation.
Founders & Key Work:
White, M. & Epston, D. (1990). Narrative Means to Therapeutic Ends — Re-authoring identity through story → Link
Adler, J.M. (2012). "Living into the story," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology — Narrative identity changes precede symptom change; agency imported into story predicts mental health
Observable proof: When your Tuesday-morning self-talk changes, your behavior follows.
See: Map Your Story • Beat Sheet Template • Story Structure as Consciousness Technology
7. Spiritual Bypassing Research — ★★★★★
Why it matters: Critical safeguard—distinguish genuine Act-4 integration from bypass. Without this, frameworks become sophisticated avoidance.
Key Figures:
Welwood, J. (2000). Toward a Psychology of Awakening — Coined "spiritual bypassing"; premature transcendence → Link
Masters, R.A. (2010). Spiritual Bypassing — Comprehensive treatment; using spirituality to avoid psychological work → Link
Trungpa, C. (1973). Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism — Ego collecting spiritual experiences
Observable proof: If Tuesday relationships are still broken, peak states bypassed the work.
Critical Warning Even THIS framework can become bypass. If you're using Acts 1-4 to avoid feeling your actual life, you've turned the map into a new prison. → Integration vs. Bypassing
See: When to Pause • When Tools Become Traps • Training Wheels
8. Consciousness Studies (Speculative) — ★★
Why it matters: Useful poetic parallels ONLY. Not evidence. Clearly marked as speculation throughout the framework.
Sources:
Bohm, D. (1980). Wholeness and the Implicate Order — Undivided wholeness; enfoldment
Penrose-Hameroff: Orchestrated objective reduction (Orch OR) — Controversial quantum consciousness theory
Wheeler's "Participatory Universe" — Observer as participant
Wave-particle duality as metaphor for Nobody/Somebody
Tier 3 = Metaphor Only We NEVER use quantum physics as proof. These are poetic parallels that help some people grok the Nobody/Somebody distinction. If you're claiming "quantum mechanics proves non-duality," you've bypassed.
See: Act 0: Divine Play (Authority Box — Physics & Mind section)
Cross-Domain Validation
The power of this framework isn't any single source—it's the convergence.
Example: Act 3 (Crisis/Dark Night)
Story Structure
"All Is Lost" beat (Snyder)
Character loses everything external
Mysticism
Dark Night of the Soul (St. John)
Loss of consolation, spiritual aridity
Neuroscience
Window of tolerance breach (Porges)
Nervous system overwhelm, dysregulation
Psychology
Developmental crisis (Kegan)
Subject-object shift, ego death
Behavior
Habit loop collapse (Brewer)
Old patterns stop working
Pattern: When five independent domains describe the same structure, you're looking at something real.
The Synthesis
What's Original Here
Mapping Hollywood's 12-beat structure onto consciousness transformation with:
Clinical safeguards (window of tolerance, titration)
Integration practices (Act 4 protocol)
Observable measures (Tuesday Test)
Bypass detection (spiritual materialism checks)
The meta-layer: Knowing all of this is training wheels
What's Not Original
The underlying patterns:
Campbell found them in myth
St. John lived them in contemplation
Neuroscience measures them in the lab
Your nervous system runs them automatically
We're just making the map explicit and usable.
The Missing Piece
Act 4. Most frameworks stop at insight (Act 3 peak).
We map integration:
Forgiveness as mechanism
Somatic rewiring protocols
Relational repair sequences
Tuesday-morning living
Key Idea If it doesn't show up on a random Tuesday, it didn't integrate. → The Tuesday Test
How to Verify (Don't Take Our Word for It)
Notes on Methodology
Synthesis methodology:
Pattern recognition across domains
Cross-validation (does it appear in multiple traditions?)
Empirical grounding where available
Phenomenological testing (lived experience)
Observable measures (Tuesday Test, not peak states)
We don't:
Cherry-pick sources to support predetermined conclusions
Use speculative sources as proof
Claim the framework is "proven" (it's a map, test it yourself)
Mix tiers without labeling (★★★★★ vs ★★)
Take ourselves too seriously (this is consciousness playing with structure)
The Irony This methodology section is itself a construct. Even "cross-domain validation" is a move in the game. Use it until you don't need it. Then laugh at how seriously you took it.
When to Outgrow This Page
You know you're ready to leave this behind when:
✓ You trust your Tuesday-morning experience over any authority ✓ You can spot patterns without needing citations ✓ Sources feel like training wheels you've outgrown ✓ You recognize all authority is consciousness referencing itself ✓ You realize the map isn't the territory and you're already home
At that point: Delete your bookmark. Close the tab. Live Tuesday.
If this landed: Close this page now. You don't need anyone else's credentials to validate your own experience.
If you're still reading: You probably need more evidence before you can trust yourself. That's fine. Use these sources as railings on the bridge. Then cross.
Full Research Library
All cited works are compiled with:
Full references (author, year, title, publisher)
Credentials of each figure
Why each source matters
Which pages use which sources
Direct links where available
Access: Comprehensive Research Library (available in project files) Traceability: Each page in this GitBook links back to specific sources with proper citations.
See Also
Framework
Safeguards
Practice
Advanced
The Meta-Sell
The framework stands on scholarship. The implementation requires work. Support is available (or isn't—both paths are valid).
If you find yourself stuck in seeking-loop validation of sources instead of living your Tuesday-morning life, that's a signal.
→ When to Get Support • Work with Oriya
Last updated
Was this helpful?