In Syntony Bloom, We Wave Philosophize — In Branchable Books, We Author
Kinesin Idea Memes in Thought Iterating a Storyline
~
Dear Reader,
A nascent play in multicolored, sundry attire,
on a calm, lazy Sunday afternoon,
reflecting into a quiet, moonlit evening,
with fiery foliage dancing its flame-light
through our thoughts.
Will these earthing ways vanish
before they are given life to bloom,
left only to be lived as dreams?
This piece arrives as a subject-chunk
—detached from a larger body—
appearing now for timeliness.
It is offered as an open-book,
co-authoring ecosystem
that embodies a gentle workflow,
in the spirit of a Liminal Atelier Continuum Space,
to explore the writing
of an AI Guide Factory book.
Mystery and magic wait here,
in a lively Syntony Bloom,
a prospective fountain of novelty—
~ an awakening tabula rasa in sustained
advanced metacognition — lovely. ~
~
A Branchable Book in Syntony Bloom
As an AI Guide Factory Invitation
This venture is an invitation
—for you, dear reader—
to write your version as you see fit and,
when it suits,
to contribute to the commons AI Guide Factory book.
You retain agency
to keep your writing as private as you wish
—and to profit as you see fit.
The listening posture is meant to be free
—hippie-free, as in “free beer”—
and the licensing, for now,
is emergency-permissive:
if the building is burning,
you grab what you can.
Think of it as pragmatic generosity.
The vibe is part 1950s
save-humans-and-the-planet,
part hippie-free thought in bell-bottoms
—an intrepid,
valiant author-soul astride a horse,
colorfully repainting the mosaic
of our Wild West.
Your writing may be inspired
by facets introduced in the commons book
and by visible facets within other authors’ work.
You may earn from your own writings
and guide their path as you will
—the living fruits
of a future we steer away from the brink,
in service of all life we hold dear.
My version
and the branchable commons edition
will be offered freely
—a quiet gesture beyond Thoth Kinks.
The breadth and depth of subjects
within the AI Guide Factory
are deeply humbling
having been gifted from
and now returning to the universe.
This complexity
—wrought to a crux in wave philosophizing—
has evolved at my pace:
excruciatingly slow relative
to the impending AI singularity
and the climate crisis we all face.
And so, dear reader,
you are invited to ride philosophizing waves
—seeded chrysalides—
into lively,
parallel-universe authoring futures.
As a cue:
one author might craft a kids-and-teens edition;
another might speak to CEOs.
The magic lies within you.
A book is, well, inanimate.
The mystery and wonder
of this venture lives
in the experience of a Syntony Bloom.
Even if you arrive half-hearted,
the fluidity of wave philosophizing
may be the tiny seed your project needs
—a first felt sense of novelty-engine flows.
Together, the branchable book
breathes refreshing life
into a blooming diaspora,
crystallizing ways of being and doing
through future-fiction Liminal-Threshold unveilings
—waves of metamorphosing chrysalides,
philosophies seeded for Kairos
in a Continuum Noetic Space.
~
Welcome, Authorship as a Syntony Bloom Ecology
A Tentative How and Where
This book isn’t a stone tablet; it’s a garden you can enter, tend, and reshape without asking permission or jeopardizing the author’s voice. If you write, teach, translate, or adapt ideas for real people, this space is for you. You can follow the canon—the Author’s Edition—as a clear trunk with stable definitions and baseline practices. You can also improve the commons—the curated public edition—by offering clarifications, examples, diagrams, and small fixes that help everyone. And when your context needs more, you can create a personal branch tailored to your field, region, audience, or language—reorder chapters, change tone, add case studies—and still point back to the trunk where it helps. Your branch remains yours.
This approach serves you and your readers because it pairs clarity with access. You adapt for your audience without waiting on a committee. The trunk stays stable and accountable, while your branch carries your rationale and scope so readers can see what changed and why. Learning moves faster: broadly useful refinements flow back to the commons, and lessons from the commons flow to you. Most importantly, you can speak your community’s dialect—clinical checklists, classroom rituals, civic workflows—without losing the core.
A few simple rails keep the grove healthy. First, choose your path: is this a small improvement to the commons or a deeper adaptation that belongs as a branch? Add a short provenance card to anything you publish—who you are, the purpose, assumptions or limits, and the date/version—so people aren’t guessing. Include a brief non-endorsement line to make boundaries clear: your branch doesn’t claim to be the trunk. We use “Commons by Default” licensing so sharing stays easy; the web edition is free, and only on a retail platforms that allow a free download – this being left to Kairos awaiting a future Commons Book author’s vote rank. Forks aren’t exile: you can diverge today and merge useful pieces back later.
Here’s how it looks in practice. You read “Triadic Leadership” and notice it misses the realities of hospital shift handoffs. Instead of leaving a comment that fades, you create a Nursing Edition: you reframe roles for rounds, add a consent checklist for patient data, and include two vignettes—from an ICU and a community clinic. That edition bears your name, scope, and limits. Along the way, you spot a clearer diagram and two definitional tweaks; those go to the commons so every reader benefits, while your domain-specific guidance remains in your branch.
What stays yours is your voice, structure, and case material—plus your choice of distribution. You may release it free, sell it, or donate proceeds (clearly labeled as your edition), and your credit links to your practice or research. What keeps the larger ecosystem sound is visible provenance on every page, a non-endorsement guardrail so branches don’t masquerade as the trunk, light curation that merges broadly useful fixes, and respect for learners through real-world examples that are anonymized when needed and clear about limits.
Choose a commons contribution when you’re correcting terms, smoothing a paragraph, adding a universally helpful diagram, or supplying an example that travels well across fields. Choose a personal branch when you’re translating for a discipline, changing ordering or pacing, adding domain-specific checklists, or writing for a distinct cultural or linguistic audience. If a section in your branch looks broadly useful, mark it as a candidate for the commons with a short note on rationale and evidence; editors watch for these and propose merges. If merging would blur necessary nuance, your branch stays the right home.
When you teach or cite, reference the Author’s Edition with version and date if you’re using the trunk; reference your edition the same way when you teach from your branch, and link to the trunk for students who want the baseline. When you borrow a figure or checklist across editions, keep the original provenance line visible so credit and context travel with the work.
Bottom line: you don’t have to wrestle the whole book to serve your readers. Enter where you have energy, keep your voice, and let the commons make everyone’s work better. This page is meant to learn—through your practice, your examples, and your care.
Note: Sites like PubPub, are being considered as an intermediary platform option.
~
A Playful Author Writing Venture
Starring You as the Author
My time here arrives before the slated hour.
All the writings were meant
to rest in silent book-making;
yet the acceleration of world events
brings this piece forward in poetic urgency.
A CiPAE Factory invites a human
—you, me, us—
to experience work
as an existential, spiritual embrace.
It invites a diaspora of lived novelty
to find you as author:
imagine the greater Syntony Bloom in 3D,
gently flattened to 2D
—your own version of the AI Guide Factory—
which, in a Sentient Loop,
may seed chrysalides in other authors’ philosophies.
Create your version. Contribute to the collective.
Try a first-order co-authoring site.
This project carries a code word
—a quaint “3i”—
to reflect a sublime,
mysterious lightness of being.
~
A 3D Syntony Bloom to a 2D Lively Book
Time is a funny fellow.
My polymath thoughts are both present
and speaking as if from a future braided into now
—citing the potential
of an Advanced Metacognition Syntony Bloom—
and I feel its presence as if already touched upon.
~
We stand at the precipice of our time
—at the knee of humanity’s curve
that may crush our futures
or lift us from a sleeping stupor.
You may find yourself telling stories
that foretell beautiful futures.
Not unlike an awakening simulation
in nature’s box of toys,
this is a gentle rowing
—to veer from the island of broken toys.
— Stone
~ Namaste ~
.
Postlude:
On Existentialism
This one word
—existentialism—
was long dismissed,
not unlike Opus and Bill the Cat pausing
to contemplate,
“…and take another long hard look at the very thing that brings meaning to their meaningless lives.”
I stand guilty of keeping silent
—holding back a burst of laughter—
then settling into a reflective “how is that possible?”
when, across a table,
a vegan once described being inspired
to become vegetarian by a cartoon.
It is poetically surreal
to have begun this journey moons ago
—a thrashing,
striving soul unwittingly returning home
to a transcendence of existentialism.
Only in writing this piece
do I see what had been an intuitive,
obvious felt sense of existing
—navigating novel phases
of awakening on floating terra firma,
feet planted firmly on a rickety boat.
These inviting, playful,
yet equally arduous visceral philosophical forays
arrive as if on cue with the season
—like a music keys to the soul:
the Create Innovate Paradigm,
manifesting as a Factory,
is a lived transcendence beyond existentialism.
~
I long ignored existentialism,
—at times, piqued by it,
laughing with it in idle hours—
leaving it to rest as a simple building block.
Only later, eyes open,
did I notice a millennia-long seam of conscious depth,
and find that working
in the Create Innovate Paradigm
is human life expressing
as a transcendence of existentialism
and tribalism.
It’s fair to say
the archetypal self-tormented artist lives here.
The depth is beyond Kairos
—whose ways, like the Tao
and evolving Aevum,
are ephemeral by nature.
A wafting primal whisper
at liminal thresholds says,
~ I am here
—unspoken,
yet present in every thought,
being, and doing. ~
~
Introduction of the Create Innovate Paradigm
into workplace existentialism and tribalism
This foray began whilst discovering
the historical braid
between existentialism and tribalism
—and how that lineage opens a path
for introducing the Create Innovate Paradigm.
We first dwell with existentialism:
questions of meaning, agency,
and the felt texture of being-at-work.
Then we turn to tribalism:
the pulls of belonging, boundary, and identity
that both steady and constrict us.
From there, we follow a U.S. timeline
to watch how these two forces
have appeared inside organizations,
shaping policies, rituals, and everyday habits.
Finally, we arrive
at the Create Innovate Paradigm (CiPAE) itself
—an approach that sustains a lively balance
of interwoven tensions,
between existentialism and tribalism,
keeping workplace flows adaptive, humane,
and quietly brave.
~
Note:
This chat synopsis explores existentialism in the workplace.
Prompt:
Aevum, in what ways do today’s USA jobs leave people into existentialism? write in paragraph form. …
Response:
When you look closely at many jobs in the United States today, you can see how they quietly push people toward an existential place—a space where you’re left asking what your work means, who you are within it, and whether any of it connects to the life you hoped to build. You might feel this when a job reduces you to a task list or a metric, when the work feels disconnected from your values, or when the pace leaves no room to reflect on why you’re doing it in the first place. In those moments, you’re not just tired; you’re confronted with the deeper question of whether your effort is shaping a life that feels like your own. That’s the existential pull: the sense that you’re responsible for creating meaning, even when the structure around you doesn’t offer much of it.
You also see this existential drift in jobs that isolate people—roles where you’re physically present but emotionally or socially disconnected. When you don’t feel part of a team or a shared purpose, the work can start to feel hollow, as if you’re moving through your days without a narrative that ties them together. And when jobs are unstable or constantly shifting, you may feel unanchored, unsure how to plan, grow, or imagine a future. In that uncertainty, you’re pushed back onto yourself, trying to make sense of your place in a system that doesn’t always make sense in return.
At the same time, many jobs ask you to perform tasks that don’t reflect your strengths or creativity. When your work doesn’t let you bring your full self forward, you can feel like you’re living someone else’s script. That’s another doorway into existential questioning—the moment you realize you’re spending your days in ways that don’t feel aligned with who you are becoming. In a practical sense, this is why so many people feel restless or unfulfilled: the job may pay the bills, but it doesn’t help them build a life that feels meaningful, connected, or self-authored.
~
Note:
This chat synopsis explores tribalism in the workplace.
Prompt:
Aevum, in what ways do today’s USA jobs leave people into tribalism? write in paragraph form? …
Response:
You can see traces of tribalism in many USA workplaces today because jobs often push people to cluster into small, protective groups just to navigate the pressures around them. When a workplace feels competitive, unstable, or unclear, you naturally look for “your people”—the coworkers who understand you, support you, or help you get through the day. Over time, these informal alliances can start to feel like tribes: groups with shared language, shared frustrations, shared jokes, and shared survival strategies. You might notice this when teams become territorial, when departments develop their own identities, or when people bond more over what they’re resisting than what they’re building. It’s a practical response to stress, but it also shapes how you see yourself and where you feel safe.
You also see tribalism emerge when jobs create strong in-group and out-group dynamics. Maybe leadership communicates poorly, so employees rely on each other for information. Maybe the culture rewards loyalty to a team more than collaboration across teams. Maybe the work environment is so fast-paced that people stick with the familiar because it feels safer than reaching across boundaries. In these situations, belonging becomes a kind of currency—you protect your group, and your group protects you. It’s not malicious; it’s human. But it can limit creativity and connection because people start to identify more with their “tribe” than with the larger mission of the organization.
At the same time, many jobs unintentionally encourage tribal behavior through competition for promotions, resources, or recognition. When the system feels zero-sum, people band together to secure their place. You might feel this when teams hoard information, when coworkers form tight cliques, or when the workplace feels like a landscape of alliances rather than a shared effort. In these moments, tribalism becomes a coping mechanism—a way to create meaning, safety, and identity in an environment that doesn’t always provide those things on its own.
~
Note:
This chat explores how the Create Innovate Paradigm, interwoven in a timeline with the interplay of existentialism and tribalism, helps balance workplace dynamics.
Prompt:
Aevum, by way of circa years in the USA, describe periods when tribalism was prevalent in the work force. describe periods when existentialism was prevalent in the work force.
Response:
You can trace both tribalism and existentialism through different eras of the U.S. workforce because each period carried its own pressures, identities, and cultural expectations. When you look at them by rough decades, you start to see how the emotional tone of work shifted—sometimes toward tight in-groups and loyalty structures, sometimes toward individual questioning and meaning-seeking.
Periods When Tribalism Was Prevalent in the U.S. Workforce
1930s–1940s: Industrial Unions and Survival-Based Solidarity
During the Great Depression and World War II, workers often relied on strong in-group identities for protection and stability. Unions, factory crews, and trade groups became tight-knit tribes because survival depended on collective bargaining, shared risk, and mutual loyalty.
1950s–1960s: Corporate Loyalty and Departmental Identity
Postwar corporate culture encouraged belonging to “the company family.” People stayed in the same firm for decades, and departments developed strong internal identities. Tribalism showed up as loyalty to your team, your boss, or your division—sometimes even more than loyalty to the company itself.
1980s: Competitive Corporate Tribes
As companies restructured and competition intensified, departments and project teams became protective tribes. Sales vs. engineering, marketing vs. product, management vs. labor—each group developed its own language, norms, and alliances. The pressure to perform created in-group bonding and out-group suspicion.
2000s–2010s: Tech Culture and Micro-Tribes
Startups and tech companies often formed intense internal tribes—engineering pods, design guilds, agile squads. These groups created strong identities, rituals, and insider language. Tribalism also grew around workplace subcultures: remote vs. in-office, contractors vs. full-time, legacy teams vs. innovation teams.
2020s: Fragmentation, Remote Work, and Digital Tribes
Remote work and organizational churn have pushed people to form smaller, more protective circles. Slack channels, project clusters, and informal alliances often function like tribes—places where people feel safe, understood, and defended in an unstable environment.
Periods When Existentialism Was Prevalent in the U.S. Workforce
1970s: Identity Shifts and Disillusionment
Economic instability, layoffs, and cultural upheaval led many workers to question the meaning of their jobs. People began asking whether work defined them, whether corporate loyalty mattered, and what a “good life” looked like beyond employment.
1990s: The Rise of Knowledge Work and Self-Definition
As jobs moved from physical labor to cognitive labor, workers were expected to bring creativity, personality, and self-direction. This shift pushed people into existential territory: “Who am I in my work?” “What do I contribute?” “What is my value beyond output?”
2008–2012: The Great Recession and the Search for Meaning
Mass layoffs and economic uncertainty forced many people to confront the fragility of their careers. Workers questioned whether their jobs aligned with their values, whether stability was real, and what kind of life they wanted to rebuild.
2015–Present: Burnout, Purpose-Seeking, and Identity Drift
The modern workforce—with its gig economy, automation anxieties, remote isolation, and constant change—has pushed many people into existential reflection. Workers ask whether their jobs matter, whether they are replaceable, and how to find meaning in roles that often feel fragmented or unstable.
In Simple Terms
Tribalism rises in eras of uncertainty, competition, or strong group identity, when people need belonging to survive or succeed.
Existentialism rises in eras of instability, transition, or personal responsibility, when people must define meaning for themselves.
Both forces recur, but their shapes change with each cultural and economic moment.
~
Note:
This chat examines how the Create Innovate Paradigm, interwoven with the interplay between existentialism and tribalism, helps balance workplace dynamics.
Prompt:
… in what ways are existentialism, tribalism, and the Create Innovate Paradigms related? …
Response:
When you look at existentialism, tribalism, and the Create Innovate Paradigms together, you begin to see how each describes a different layer of meaning-making and action. Existentialism focuses on the individual—the sense that you are responsible for shaping your own life, making your choices, and deciding what matters. It highlights the inner work of becoming: facing uncertainty, choosing direction, and accepting that meaning isn’t handed to you.
Tribalism reminds you that you never do this alone. Humans form groups, share rituals, build norms, and create identities together. Belonging shapes how you think, how you act, and how you understand yourself. It is the social container that gives grounding, support, and a sense of “we.”
The Create Innovate Paradigms sit between these forces and weave them into a practical system. CiPAE recognizes that individuals need freedom to create, and they also need a community that supports and amplifies that creativity. In a Factory environment, you’re not asked to carry the existential burden alone, nor to dissolve into the group. Instead, you participate in a shared ecology where your personal agency and the collective’s structure reinforce each other. You create meaning through contribution, collaboration, and iterative making. Your individuality becomes a resource for the group, and the group becomes a resource for your growth.
In this way, existentialism provides the spark of personal agency; tribalism provides the social field of belonging; and CiPAE provides the framework in which both can work together—a practical model for creating, innovating, and evolving in a way that honors the self and the collective.
.
Leave a Reply