I’m experimenting with how I reference self and other(s).

Currently, I feel inclined to use these shortenings, in increasing order of currently perceived generality (with a specific twist at the end):

  • TM = this/that mind
  • TB = this/that being
  • TE = this/that entity
  • T = this (anything) - like, “this one” or “that one”, or just “thing”
    • Also could represent me more specifically (due to “T” being my primary initial).

These are generally self-referring, but with capacity to other-reference. T will see what typical usage emerges over actual usage.

Why introduce these things? Often, TM feels that the use of “I” induces unnecessary egoic baggage, which is generally more subconsciously/emotionally perceived, but which has the potential to influence/contaminate expression by subtly encouraging the outputter to identify with its outputs. That is, if I express a thought via a “thought-introducer” such as “I think…”, I find myself more inclined to cling to that thought, protect it, guard it, possess it as my own mental property. If I instead introduce a thought using a more neutral (as TM currently believes) statement prepend like “TM thinks”, it instates a sort of mental distance between the thought and thinker (which in this case is me), which can enable easier disidentification and hence adaptability/agility in thought expression and worldview development/evolution/expansion. And, in the case of other-referencing, this thought-thinker mental distancing is good for neutralising negative emotional reactions that often cling to individuals, surround them in our mind, when they express thoughts we disagree with (and/or find disagreeable) - reactions which cloud our mental vision and can disable our ability to think and see clearly, and entertain unreasonable, civil-conversation-inhibiting hostilities toward our momentary mental adversaries.

Ultimately, “I” is quite a “loaded” pronoun - it comes with a lot of mental, emotional and even spiritual baggage. This is why TM currently advocates for an incorporation of “less loaded” (possibly just due to currently limited/barely existent usage, but potentially due to the nature of encapsulating both self and other -referencing in a single signifier, via “this/that”) pronouns, such as TM, TE, TB, T and whatever else a mind feels inclined to use.


Another explanation that emerged on the july-2026 stream:

“TM” is generally used to mean “this mind” (self) but could also be used to represent “that mind” (other) and TM feels inclined to use it for several reasons, one of which being the blurring of the border between self and other. It just feels particularly “integral” (as in, conducive to integration, which partially, can be considered as the state of being in which oneness is recognised). Additionally, it allows a kind of separation/distinction between the “I” that is your entire being, and the “I” that is the mind/thinker - so, it allows “you” (whatever that is) to observe your thoughts, and to externalise them in the recognition/acknowledgement that they are simply outputs of the neuronal/biological processor you have been allocated in this lifetime, and not necessarily representative of your being. So, concomitantly, TM also enjoys the usage of “TB” to mean “this being” or “that being”, which is similar to the TM (mind, rather than being) version, but instead pertains to the entirety of a subject (in this context, conscious entity) as opposed to just its thinking/sensory-perceiving mechanism (which could be considered “mind”), and so encompasses e.g. emotional, even spiritual, experiences, which can’t necessarily be represented via thought (via mind). Indeed, sometimes useful to draw distinction between self and other via e.g. “I” and “you”, but use of “TM” and “TB” encodes the view that everything is ultimately (universally) unified, stemming from the same Source. Can potentially allow for more self-transcendent (non-egoic) modes of existing, acting, and externalising thought (communicating). So, “I” and “TM” will be used relatively interchangeably, based on TM’s momentary inclination.