“If you look closely, you may observe a crisis anchored in two domains that are both extremely fundamental to human mental orientation, as well as comprising the precursors to anything resembling an opinion or belief:

Authority and schemas of authorization.

These general terms refer to aspects of the otherwise invisible foundations to how and what people think. Nearly all people. We depend upon these things to make decisions and initiate action.

If this wasn’t previously obvious, we live now in a situation in which it’s explicit. People cite some source of authorization or they depict themselves as disciples of one authority or another. Many of these are actually little more than media objects.

Some few people are creative enough to originate perspectives, but even these are the result of complex authority/authorization games that remain, in most cases, entirely unconscious. The rest are simply … consumers. Of prepackaged ‘what’s going on here.’

Of course, decision-making is strenuous; and actually useful original perspectives are both difficult to produce and invoke unforeseen consequences. Their value usually depends on their capacity to effect their own obsolescence. These must self-exceed.

And so everyone is experiencing a strange social game, where a perspective they chose to promote is ‘pretend-authorized’ by media or … simply the fact that it exists in some form that can be referenced.

But what if some of them became aware of this, and began to examine both their relationships to actual authorities… (and internal hypostases of these)… to authorization itself… that their usual orientations were invisibly founded upon?

What if they could begin to see and escape their long unconscious relationships with figments and figures, and establish something capable of producing… freedom, intelligence… community… or »reliable authority?”

— …