This seems to belong to a family of personal narratives invented by people at CFAR (some combination of Andrew Critch and Valentine Smith?).
Here’s a post about a narrative that says that you’re immune to narratives.
There’s also the “Fully General Meta-Narrative” that says that you can get the benefits of any particular narrative without actually employing the narrative. (For example, if you’re tired, there’s probably a narrative that will give you a second wind. The Fully General Meta-Narrative says you can just get a second wind when you want to. I hope I’m remembering this correctly.)
In this language, you’re proposing a narrative that says that you can employ any object-level narrative you wish.
Oh, interesting. To the best of my knowledge, the invention of the terms diachronic and episodic has nothing at all to do with CFAR. Or are you pointing more at the “taking [some framework] as a given, try to do something useful through narrative manipulation” bit? I agree that that does seem to be pointing in the same basic direction, or to be based on similar assumptions, although I didn’t intend for my post to be making claims that are quite as strong or confident as the things you linked.
This seems to belong to a family of personal narratives invented by people at CFAR (some combination of Andrew Critch and Valentine Smith?).
Here’s a post about a narrative that says that you’re immune to narratives.
There’s also the “Fully General Meta-Narrative” that says that you can get the benefits of any particular narrative without actually employing the narrative. (For example, if you’re tired, there’s probably a narrative that will give you a second wind. The Fully General Meta-Narrative says you can just get a second wind when you want to. I hope I’m remembering this correctly.)
In this language, you’re proposing a narrative that says that you can employ any object-level narrative you wish.
Could you explain or link to something about the “Fully General Meta-Narrative”?
Oh, interesting. To the best of my knowledge, the invention of the terms diachronic and episodic has nothing at all to do with CFAR. Or are you pointing more at the “taking [some framework] as a given, try to do something useful through narrative manipulation” bit? I agree that that does seem to be pointing in the same basic direction, or to be based on similar assumptions, although I didn’t intend for my post to be making claims that are quite as strong or confident as the things you linked.