I strike myself with...the enormity of this. Imagine if someone figured out cold fusion. Or some infinite energy source. One that could immediately cease the use of fossil fuels. I'm not sure many people would believe it. And converting to this new energy source and away from fossil fuels would likely implode our current economic system. THIS FEELS SIMILAR. To actually accept that the world we live in is ONLY...the world WE live in, and our "reality" is subjective...completely implodes the stories we've built as fact. Can we handle it? It feels like either people will sense gargantuan, monumental freedom, OR...they'll reject this with all their might. Though I just don't now how it can be refuted. It's easy to differentiate between objective and subjective, and easy to conceive of using subjective language to bring it all to life. But getting my brain around it has been...a long process for me. Like going from regular shoes with arch support and cushion and heel lift, to minimalist shoes with almost nothing. Even though it quickly cured all my musculoskeletal problems, it took my feet SO long to adjust. So strengthen. To support themselves (as I choose to believe they were made to). Well. I will devote myself to helping myself, and everyone I can, with this concept. Thank you, Jake & Hannah
When we take responsibility—not because we’re to blame, but because we can—
we gain access to a deeper kind of internal security, one that doesn’t depend on changing the world around us.
Yes - there it is again - the security - for me it's trusting in God and integrity and Truth to prevail. I am just beginning to grant myself permission to be SAFE with boundaries i chose to protect myself . I can consider actions and choices that comfort me rather than specifying or declaring "suggestions" that come across as restrictive boundaries to demand others stay away as form of punishment .
Typically when I try to control by " making " others suffer because of how i interpret their motivations or actions- I.e. toxic - i end up more frustrated and unhappy. (So do they)
I also resonated to your observation about grief - it is what it is and thats OK -- permission for me to feel and freely recognize that emotion as long as i don't collapse into it. (That's not fun when the victim sensation and overwhelm grabs hold)
Applying AI and chat GPT to help rephrase and guide me in rephrasing my ideas according to the SAGE method is interesting. I look forward to discussing further once we have our blueprint group in action
Do you consider OS1 as a seamless experience, without recognition of cause and reaction; without me or you? How would you describe 0S1?
Thank you, for so clearly presenting this opportunity to use language and understanding, that we may reinforce a sense of personal empowerment through choice. I am completely onboard with speaking and thinking to reinforce my own free agency, while reflecting to others, their own, possibly obscured, free agency; or, even more preferable, to dance myself more freely in the field of awareness with other empowered individuals! At least, surely, we would not want to limit ourselves. For there is nothing I desire more in this life than greater and greater freedom, and alignment with Truth . . . Nothing.
I see and accept that consciousness is meta to the material world. Through my own meditative exploration, “I” ultimately know and accept that “I” am consciousness. Therefore, the “I” that is doing anything to me, or with me, must ultimately be me. At the same time, I see and accept that I am living this life in some sort of a feedback loop (simulation, echo chamber, video game, dream, virtual reality, etc). Within this feedback loop there is what we perceive as cause and reaction. The sun shines, therefore, the grass grows and the birds sing. If I were the grass, or a bird who sings with the dawn, and I was using OS3, I’d say I stifle myself, or I rest myself, in the absence of the Sun. I could own it. But for a bird or grass, how could it be otherwise? Without sunshine, most grass does not grow. The birds do not begin to chirp until the break of dawn, “because” this is their nature. And coming back to my take on 0S1, it’s all a grand symphony, right!
I make room for paradoxes to be true, because in the grand scheme of things, they often are. We are solid and yet made of space.
As humans, it is within our nature to be dynamic and to explore all options. 0S3, supports our dynamism. But to swing the pendulum from a paradigm of blame to one of complete accountability, do we limit ourselves in any way? This is the question I am sitting with and would love to hear some thoughts from our “perceivable others.”
I am looking forward to the opportunity to practice this paradigm shift with others, in consciousness-expanding community!
Question 3, Jake, how did you program GT Chat to use 0S3 and is it working for you?
Celeste—I appreciate what I perceive as very thoughtful observations and questions. And there are a few, so I'll break this down:
What Is OS1?
You asked how we would describe OS1, and your framing is actually quite aligned with ours. OS1 can be thought of as a kind of seamless immersion in experience, where there is little or no self-reflection. There is action and reaction, but without conscious narrative or analysis. It’s preverbal, pre-conceptual, and in many ways, pre-self.
You could say that OS1 is the state of a newborn, or perhaps of a person in deep flow or instinctive response—before interpretation kicks in. There’s no “me doing to me,” and no effort to understand or explain what’s happening. Just the happening.
This is part of what makes your metaphor about grass and birds so evocative. Their behaviors are congruent with the environment, not because they interpret, but because they embody a kind of pure responsiveness—a synchrony with natural rhythms that we might call OS1.
So you’re right: OS3 doesn’t apply to grass or birds. OS3 is distinctly human, because it emerges from self-reflective awareness—the capacity to observe, interpret, and then consciously re-interpret experience.
OS3 and the Power of Interpretation
Your point about paradox is well taken, too. S.A.G.E. doesn't aim to collapse paradoxes into singular truths, but rather invites us to hold multiple interpretations lightly and consciously—to recognize that we are always shaping the meaning of our experience, whether we do so unconsciously (OS2) or with intentional awareness (OS3).
Is Full Accountability Limiting?
You also raised the question: Does moving from blame to full accountability limit us in some way?
Here’s how we see it:
OS3 doesn’t require us to hold accountability as a burden. It offers it as an expression of freedom. When we take responsibility—not because we’re to blame, but because we can—we gain access to a deeper kind of internal security, one that doesn’t depend on changing the world around us.
When we operate from OS3 (Subjective Awareness and Genuine Expression), we engage with life from a place of agency, clarity, and ownership of our experience. That means:
Challenging systems doesn’t require us to see ourselves as powerless victims or blame others to justify our stance. We can speak up because something doesn’t work for us—not because someone else is objectively wrong or bad.
Setting boundaries becomes an act of self-care and clarity rather than a reaction based on resentment or fear. We say, “I choose not to engage this way,” instead of, “You’re toxic and I have to protect myself from you.”
Grieving isn’t suppressed. It’s welcomed. But in OS3, we don’t treat grief as something being done to us. We recognize it as a reflection of what we value or have lost, and we allow ourselves to feel it—without identifying with it or collapsing into it.
In OS3, we often describe the shift as moving from blame to full accountability—but that doesn’t mean bypassing hard truths or ignoring injustice. It means we stay rooted in our own agency, even while navigating what we perceive as difficult.
We can still challenge systems, set boundaries, or grieve what’s hard—but we do so in a way that keeps us in relationship with ourselves. We don’t abandon ourselves by collapsing into blame, roles, or reactivity. Instead, we stay present to our own interpretations, sensations, and choices. That’s what OS3 makes possible. That’s the freedom.
It means we stay connected to our own interpretations, sensations, and choices, rather than slipping into objectivity-driven narratives (OS2). In OS2, we tend to:
Hand our power over to others (“You made me feel this way.”)
Collapse into roles (the victim, the fixer, the rebel) instead of standing in clarity
Suppress or distort what we actually need or feel
Wait for permission or validation from others before trusting ourselves
In contrast, OS3 allows us to stay in relationship with ourselves while still showing up fully in the world. That’s the difference. That’s the freedom.
A Note on ChatGPT
Finally, you asked how I “programmed” ChatGPT to use OS3—what a fun and meta question!
While I didn’t program it, I do work with this AI in ways that train it to reflect S.A.G.E. principles—like using subjective language, avoiding praise/blame, and centering agency and interpretation. So yes, to a meaningful extent, it can be used in an OS3-compatible way. (And it helps when the person interacting with it is operating from OS3 themselves.)
Thanks again for your reflections. We look forward to hearing more as you experiment and explore this terrain—especially in community with others who are committed to living more consciously, creatively, and freely.
Thank you for your thoughtful response to my questions, Jake! The biggest nugget I am taking away is about taking responsibility because we want and choose to, because we see where it is ultimately liberating, not as a burden. As for so many, refining my way to a healthy equilibrium of what is mine and what is not mine has been a lifelong pilgrimage! I am glad to have found my way to the tools that you offer and am using them to actively updating my operating system!
“S.A.G.E. doesn't aim to collapse paradoxes into singular truths but rather invites us to hold multiple interpretations lightly and consciously.” I relax my nervous system with this one. I also have questions pertaining to inauthentic interpretations, which I will hold for discussions.
There is so much more I am eager to explore with this community! I look forward to deepening my understanding and fine tuning my nervous system!
Hi Sharon, if you used the link to sign up for a copy of the S.A.G.E. Blueprint, we'll send it to you in May. It's not quite ready, and we have a bit of a backlog, but if your name is on the list, you'll receive it. . . Thanks for your interest.
I did request a copy of your blueprint - and haven't seen it yet. Maybe landed in spam and was deleted. I will request again with my icloud address this time.
Hi Mary, we have not finalized the S.A.G.E. Blueprint—probably will happen in May. And at that point we'll send out copies to 20 people at a time. So, please be patient. It is coming to you . . . .
I strike myself with...the enormity of this. Imagine if someone figured out cold fusion. Or some infinite energy source. One that could immediately cease the use of fossil fuels. I'm not sure many people would believe it. And converting to this new energy source and away from fossil fuels would likely implode our current economic system. THIS FEELS SIMILAR. To actually accept that the world we live in is ONLY...the world WE live in, and our "reality" is subjective...completely implodes the stories we've built as fact. Can we handle it? It feels like either people will sense gargantuan, monumental freedom, OR...they'll reject this with all their might. Though I just don't now how it can be refuted. It's easy to differentiate between objective and subjective, and easy to conceive of using subjective language to bring it all to life. But getting my brain around it has been...a long process for me. Like going from regular shoes with arch support and cushion and heel lift, to minimalist shoes with almost nothing. Even though it quickly cured all my musculoskeletal problems, it took my feet SO long to adjust. So strengthen. To support themselves (as I choose to believe they were made to). Well. I will devote myself to helping myself, and everyone I can, with this concept. Thank you, Jake & Hannah
allows us to stay in relationship with ourselves while still showing up fully in the world. That’s the difference. That’s the freedom
When we take responsibility—not because we’re to blame, but because we can—
we gain access to a deeper kind of internal security, one that doesn’t depend on changing the world around us.
Yes - there it is again - the security - for me it's trusting in God and integrity and Truth to prevail. I am just beginning to grant myself permission to be SAFE with boundaries i chose to protect myself . I can consider actions and choices that comfort me rather than specifying or declaring "suggestions" that come across as restrictive boundaries to demand others stay away as form of punishment .
Typically when I try to control by " making " others suffer because of how i interpret their motivations or actions- I.e. toxic - i end up more frustrated and unhappy. (So do they)
I also resonated to your observation about grief - it is what it is and thats OK -- permission for me to feel and freely recognize that emotion as long as i don't collapse into it. (That's not fun when the victim sensation and overwhelm grabs hold)
Applying AI and chat GPT to help rephrase and guide me in rephrasing my ideas according to the SAGE method is interesting. I look forward to discussing further once we have our blueprint group in action
Do you consider OS1 as a seamless experience, without recognition of cause and reaction; without me or you? How would you describe 0S1?
Thank you, for so clearly presenting this opportunity to use language and understanding, that we may reinforce a sense of personal empowerment through choice. I am completely onboard with speaking and thinking to reinforce my own free agency, while reflecting to others, their own, possibly obscured, free agency; or, even more preferable, to dance myself more freely in the field of awareness with other empowered individuals! At least, surely, we would not want to limit ourselves. For there is nothing I desire more in this life than greater and greater freedom, and alignment with Truth . . . Nothing.
I see and accept that consciousness is meta to the material world. Through my own meditative exploration, “I” ultimately know and accept that “I” am consciousness. Therefore, the “I” that is doing anything to me, or with me, must ultimately be me. At the same time, I see and accept that I am living this life in some sort of a feedback loop (simulation, echo chamber, video game, dream, virtual reality, etc). Within this feedback loop there is what we perceive as cause and reaction. The sun shines, therefore, the grass grows and the birds sing. If I were the grass, or a bird who sings with the dawn, and I was using OS3, I’d say I stifle myself, or I rest myself, in the absence of the Sun. I could own it. But for a bird or grass, how could it be otherwise? Without sunshine, most grass does not grow. The birds do not begin to chirp until the break of dawn, “because” this is their nature. And coming back to my take on 0S1, it’s all a grand symphony, right!
I make room for paradoxes to be true, because in the grand scheme of things, they often are. We are solid and yet made of space.
As humans, it is within our nature to be dynamic and to explore all options. 0S3, supports our dynamism. But to swing the pendulum from a paradigm of blame to one of complete accountability, do we limit ourselves in any way? This is the question I am sitting with and would love to hear some thoughts from our “perceivable others.”
I am looking forward to the opportunity to practice this paradigm shift with others, in consciousness-expanding community!
Question 3, Jake, how did you program GT Chat to use 0S3 and is it working for you?
Cheers!
Celeste—I appreciate what I perceive as very thoughtful observations and questions. And there are a few, so I'll break this down:
What Is OS1?
You asked how we would describe OS1, and your framing is actually quite aligned with ours. OS1 can be thought of as a kind of seamless immersion in experience, where there is little or no self-reflection. There is action and reaction, but without conscious narrative or analysis. It’s preverbal, pre-conceptual, and in many ways, pre-self.
You could say that OS1 is the state of a newborn, or perhaps of a person in deep flow or instinctive response—before interpretation kicks in. There’s no “me doing to me,” and no effort to understand or explain what’s happening. Just the happening.
This is part of what makes your metaphor about grass and birds so evocative. Their behaviors are congruent with the environment, not because they interpret, but because they embody a kind of pure responsiveness—a synchrony with natural rhythms that we might call OS1.
So you’re right: OS3 doesn’t apply to grass or birds. OS3 is distinctly human, because it emerges from self-reflective awareness—the capacity to observe, interpret, and then consciously re-interpret experience.
OS3 and the Power of Interpretation
Your point about paradox is well taken, too. S.A.G.E. doesn't aim to collapse paradoxes into singular truths, but rather invites us to hold multiple interpretations lightly and consciously—to recognize that we are always shaping the meaning of our experience, whether we do so unconsciously (OS2) or with intentional awareness (OS3).
Is Full Accountability Limiting?
You also raised the question: Does moving from blame to full accountability limit us in some way?
Here’s how we see it:
OS3 doesn’t require us to hold accountability as a burden. It offers it as an expression of freedom. When we take responsibility—not because we’re to blame, but because we can—we gain access to a deeper kind of internal security, one that doesn’t depend on changing the world around us.
When we operate from OS3 (Subjective Awareness and Genuine Expression), we engage with life from a place of agency, clarity, and ownership of our experience. That means:
Challenging systems doesn’t require us to see ourselves as powerless victims or blame others to justify our stance. We can speak up because something doesn’t work for us—not because someone else is objectively wrong or bad.
Setting boundaries becomes an act of self-care and clarity rather than a reaction based on resentment or fear. We say, “I choose not to engage this way,” instead of, “You’re toxic and I have to protect myself from you.”
Grieving isn’t suppressed. It’s welcomed. But in OS3, we don’t treat grief as something being done to us. We recognize it as a reflection of what we value or have lost, and we allow ourselves to feel it—without identifying with it or collapsing into it.
In OS3, we often describe the shift as moving from blame to full accountability—but that doesn’t mean bypassing hard truths or ignoring injustice. It means we stay rooted in our own agency, even while navigating what we perceive as difficult.
We can still challenge systems, set boundaries, or grieve what’s hard—but we do so in a way that keeps us in relationship with ourselves. We don’t abandon ourselves by collapsing into blame, roles, or reactivity. Instead, we stay present to our own interpretations, sensations, and choices. That’s what OS3 makes possible. That’s the freedom.
It means we stay connected to our own interpretations, sensations, and choices, rather than slipping into objectivity-driven narratives (OS2). In OS2, we tend to:
Hand our power over to others (“You made me feel this way.”)
Collapse into roles (the victim, the fixer, the rebel) instead of standing in clarity
Suppress or distort what we actually need or feel
Wait for permission or validation from others before trusting ourselves
In contrast, OS3 allows us to stay in relationship with ourselves while still showing up fully in the world. That’s the difference. That’s the freedom.
A Note on ChatGPT
Finally, you asked how I “programmed” ChatGPT to use OS3—what a fun and meta question!
While I didn’t program it, I do work with this AI in ways that train it to reflect S.A.G.E. principles—like using subjective language, avoiding praise/blame, and centering agency and interpretation. So yes, to a meaningful extent, it can be used in an OS3-compatible way. (And it helps when the person interacting with it is operating from OS3 themselves.)
Thanks again for your reflections. We look forward to hearing more as you experiment and explore this terrain—especially in community with others who are committed to living more consciously, creatively, and freely.
Warmly,
Jake
Thank you for your thoughtful response to my questions, Jake! The biggest nugget I am taking away is about taking responsibility because we want and choose to, because we see where it is ultimately liberating, not as a burden. As for so many, refining my way to a healthy equilibrium of what is mine and what is not mine has been a lifelong pilgrimage! I am glad to have found my way to the tools that you offer and am using them to actively updating my operating system!
“S.A.G.E. doesn't aim to collapse paradoxes into singular truths but rather invites us to hold multiple interpretations lightly and consciously.” I relax my nervous system with this one. I also have questions pertaining to inauthentic interpretations, which I will hold for discussions.
There is so much more I am eager to explore with this community! I look forward to deepening my understanding and fine tuning my nervous system!
I would like to request a copy of your blueprint .
Hi Sharon, if you used the link to sign up for a copy of the S.A.G.E. Blueprint, we'll send it to you in May. It's not quite ready, and we have a bit of a backlog, but if your name is on the list, you'll receive it. . . Thanks for your interest.
I did request a copy of your blueprint - and haven't seen it yet. Maybe landed in spam and was deleted. I will request again with my icloud address this time.
Hi Mary, we have not finalized the S.A.G.E. Blueprint—probably will happen in May. And at that point we'll send out copies to 20 people at a time. So, please be patient. It is coming to you . . . .