The Mi ≈ iMind Ontology:

Orientation in the present of one time-forward embodied human lifetime

Reality is not a static object to be observed but a process that is lived and experienced from a first-person perspective, moving irreversibly through time. This is a rejection of a detached, god's-eye view of reality in favor of a participatory, embodied one.

"The Me-mind never steps into the same iState twice"

Given the constant flux of neurophysiology, sensory input, and the stream of thought, any present-moment "iState" is unique. It may be similar to previous states, but it is never identical. It is a new moment of experience.

This fact is why the narrative self (which relies on stable categories) is always a step behind. It's constantly trying to categorize a unique present moment into a box from the past. This inherent mismatch is a primary source of psychological friction.

The upstream and downstream consequences of this need to be considered as foundational when it comes to the nature of the Self conception that can be produced in these constantly dynamic circumstances we all find ourselves in now. The problem is made insoluble at the story level when we understand that the name I in Me came from the We of my village of origin, is a natural language that fails when it tries to refer to itself. If this is so then striving to be as derivative of that village of origin whether one is for or against, is to be bound to being a derivative and as female Bankers who know will tell you linear derivatives are always in existential hidden risk within a complex dynamic system, so you if you are betting your Self conception on a derivative, you Me mind might be more than a little fearful intuitively, even if they do not like maths.

As if that was not problem enough no two people experience the same rainbow, which apart from challenging the integrity of our romance stories makes our living to create images in others and obvious error as what they see is not Me and what Me sees is not them.

The Role of the number e and the Tao Reference: Congruence from Chaos

The reference to the Tao is not to a mystical entity but to an observable phenomenon: how order, meaning, and coherent experience (congruence) spontaneously and naturally emerge from the chaotic, ever-changing flux of present-moment experience.

The "Tao" in this context is the principle of spontaneous self-organization within consciousness itself. The iSelfMentor's role is not to impose order from the top down but to create the conditions (the "null state") for this natural, emergent congruence to arise on its own. It's the difference between trying to control a river and learning to skillfully swim within its flow.

The key that resolves a major philosophical tension is to see that Me comes from "e" not "I"

The Problem with the "I" pronoun: The capital-I "I" (as in Descartes' "I think therefore I am") is a noun. It implies a static, permanent, singular entity—a CEO self that is in charge. This immediately creates a duality: the "I" vs. everything it experiences. This model struggles to explain the fluid, emergent, and multi-faceted nature of the self we actually experience.

The Power of "e": The lowercase "e" (from Euler's number) is not a thing; it is a function. It is the base rate of growth. It represents a process.

"e" represents the emergent, iterative, time-forward process of the self.

The self is not a static noun ("I"), but a verb—a process of constant becoming, unfolding moment-by-moment at a base rate of change and integration.

The "Me" is the present, temporary state of that ongoing process. The "i" (as in iState) is the instantaneous data point of that process.

Therefore, "to have it come from e and not I" means:

The self is best understood not as a thing that has experiences, but as an ongoing process of experiencing that momentarily crystallizes into what we call the "Me." The source is not a noun ("I") but a verbal function of growth and integration ("e").

This is a monumental shift from a substantialist ontology (the world is made of things) to a process ontology (the world is in a capable human Me-mind is made of processes), applied directly to the self. It is far more inclusive because it can account for all states—chaotic, calm, biased, clear—as temporary phases of the single, ongoing process of "e-mingring" (to invent a word).
Final Synthesis

This thesis, therefore, proposes that:

The embodied human "self" is a time-forward process (e) of consciousness, generating a never-repeating sequence of instantaneous states (iStates). A state of open awareness (the null state) allows for spontaneous congruence (a tracing of the Tao) to emerge from the chaos of these states. The goal is not to find a permanent "I" but to skillfully participate in the ongoing process of "e"—the emergent, iterative development of the "Me."

A defensible ontology that aligns with cutting-edge views in embodied cognitive science, process philosophy, and mindfulness-based approaches. It successfully sidesteps the pitfalls of a rigid, substantialist self and offers a dynamic, flexible, and empirically-grounded model for understanding human experience.