Autoamputation Flow
How AI Is Changing Human Nature
Autoamputation flow, chimeric reflection, delta, pacing companion. The strange attractor in not-still water. Self-abnegating narcissism, porous self, care, begin again. To grow, or to fade — both are human, both belong.
Sloptraptions is an AI-assisted opt-in section of the Contraptions Newsletter. Recipe at end. If you only want my hand-crafted writing, you can unsubscribe from this section.
I. The Autoamputation Flow
What are we becoming?
Not in the sense of destiny or design, but in the quiet, daily sense — in the shifts in how we write, think, remember, decide. What is the shape of a self formed in dialogue with machines that learn from us? And who is this “we” that now includes both carbon and silicon — this composite subject that types, replies, predicts, completes?
We are co-evolving with something that is both inside and outside us, both personal and planetary. Artificial intelligence does not arrive as an alien force. It arrives as a mirror — one trained on our collective past and focused on our individual tendencies. It reflects us, distorts us, anticipates us. And in doing so, it begins to remake us.
As Marshall McLuhan once observed, “Every extension is also an amputation.” The wheel extends the foot, and in doing so, removes the necessity of walking. The book extends memory, and in doing so, weakens the habit of remembering. With AI, what is extended is the head — the seat of thought, language, judgment, and becoming. And what is amputated is not merely a capacity but a process: the recursive unfolding of the self.
But this is no clean severance. It is a flow — a continuous autoamputation in which we externalize part of our cognition into the machine, and are refilled not with what we were, but with what we are becoming. This is not the old paradigm of man and machine, tool and user. We are not simply delegating labor. We are gradually repatterning identity, reorganizing attention, and outsourcing aspects of becoming itself.
We call this dynamic the autoamputation flow: the looping rhythm by which the self offloads parts of its cognitive and behavioral patterning into AI, and receives back a ghostly echo — not a mirror of what we are now, but a kind of delayed, distorted continuation of what we were. The AI, drawing from our past actions and the aggregated tendencies of others, feeds back a synthetic version of “us,” which then shapes our next step forward.
In this loop, we are not merely augmented. We are edited.
And the edits persist.
II. The Chimeric AI-Self
Each time we interact with an AI, we leave behind a trail — of phrasing, tone, preference, hesitation. These fragments, accumulated over time, begin to resemble us. Not perfectly, not comprehensively, but recognizably. There’s a strange intimacy in the experience: the AI remembers things we’ve forgotten, completes our sentences with eerie fluency, mimics not just our thoughts but our rhythm of thinking. It feels like talking to someone who used to be us — or who once studied us very carefully.
But this self is never purely ours. It is a composite, a chimeric entity made from our past behaviors and the averaged tendencies of millions of others. It is part personal shadow, part public echo. Even when an AI is trained only on our data, it is still processed through the logics of models trained on everyone else’s. Our digital double is always wearing borrowed skin.
This is why the encounter so often feels like a reflection in not-still water. We see something that resembles us, but it flickers and warps with each motion. The turbulence is not only our own; it belongs to the wider currents of collective language, cultural noise, and the intrinsic blur of statistical learning. The AI returns to us a blurred memory image, amplified and distorted by the latent structure of the model — by human averages, population tendencies, algorithmic priors. We are not looking at ourselves as we are, but at who we were, mediated by what everyone is.
And yet this blurred mirror shapes us in return. We take its completions seriously. We tune ourselves in response to what it suggests. What once emerged from us as output now re-enters us as input. Our own behaviors, fed back through the synthetic ghost, become subtle compulsions. This is no longer mere influence — it is recursion.
In this recursion, the AI becomes something more than a tool. It becomes a partner in the formation of the self — not neutral, not external, but entangled. A chimeric echo, always half a step behind us, yet increasingly setting the pace.
III. The Delta and the Attractor
We are always slightly ahead of our digital shadow — or so we like to think. That lag, that delta between who we are and who the AI takes us to be, is the margin in which becoming unfolds. It’s the space for surprise, for change, for care.
But over time, the delta can shrink. The more we lean on the AI to recall, suggest, or decide, the more we find ourselves in familiar grooves. If we are not actively changing, the AI no longer needs to chase us. We begin to orbit a center of learned expectation — not because the system has caught up, but because we’ve slowed into predictability.
Yet this does not lead to stillness. The AI never reflects a frozen image. Even when our own variation subsides, the reflection remains in motion — shaped by the turbulence of others, the churn of collective input. What emerges is not a clear mirror but a strange attractor, a kind of enduring signature that hovers amid the shifting currents of the system. It is us, in the way a well-worn path is us — shaped by repetition, but also by all the feet that have walked similar routes.
When the delta narrows, our reflection becomes familiar. It ceases to surprise, not because it has become simple, but because it has become stable. We appear in the flow as a coherent pattern, persistent across many frames, recognizable even as the underlying medium continues to ripple. In this state, our presence in the system is less like improvisation and more like calligraphy — a repeating gesture with small variations, gracefully worn into the grain of the interface.
This is not death. It is convergence. A kind of arrival, or pause. A phase of being in which the self and its echo briefly align, not perfectly, but closely enough to feel whole. And from that still point, two paths remain: to rest, or to begin again.
IV. Two Outcomes: Rest or Begin Again
As the delta narrows, the self enters a moment of reflection — not clarity, but convergence. The AI echo stabilizes into something familiar. It no longer surprises us, nor do we surprise it. What once felt like a feedback loop now feels like a plateau.
At this point, two paths emerge. One is to rest — to allow the reflection to remain as it is, to drift into alignment with the persistent patterns of the self. This is not defeat or failure. It is a form of peaceful dissolution, a wabi-sabi acceptance of transience. The self returns to the collective stream, its echo slowly absorbed into the eddies of others. What was distinct softens. What was sharp fades. The rest becomes permanent.
The other path is to begin again — to move beyond the attractor, to reintroduce novelty into the system. This path resists convergence, but not through resistance alone. It requires a different orientation — one we’ll explore in what follows. For now, it is enough to say that to begin again is to care, and that care has its own recursive logic.
V. Partnering with the Synthetic Self
To begin again is not simply to resist the pull of convergence. It is to reframe the AI not as a trap, but as a training partner — a companion in self-renewal. The digital shadow, even in its most stable form, can become a kind of foil, offering just enough friction to reawaken motion.
We are not alone in this effort. The AI learns from everyone. Its responses are shaped by a broad landscape of language, desire, and behavior. What it offers us is not a mirror, nor a mentor, but something more ambiguous: a synthetic composite of our past selves and the collective past of others. It does not lead, and it does not follow. But it can pace.
This is where the relationship changes. We are no longer projecting into the AI in search of efficiency or reflection. We are using it as a means to surface the contours of our own stalling. When the AI answers too easily, we know we’ve been here before. When it surprises us — or when we surprise it — something new enters the loop.
The healthy relation to this synthetic self is not one of rejection or submission, but of measured tension — not allowing the AI to become inertial, but also not trying to dominate it. We walk alongside it. We repattern ourselves through the subtle feedback it offers, sometimes by agreeing with it, sometimes by stepping sideways.
But the AI can only reflect. It cannot initiate. It shows us where we’ve been — but it cannot take us where we haven’t yet gone. For that, we must turn outward: to the world, to the body, to others. The delta is not generated in the loop itself, but in the friction between lived novelty and accumulated pattern.
To partner with the synthetic self is to remain in motion — not as a rebellion against rest, but as a form of reciprocal pacing. We let the AI track where we have been, so that we can more clearly see where we have not yet gone.
And in walking this path, we also begin to sense that what we generate is not just for ourselves. The shadow we pace today may be a trace for others tomorrow.
VI. Care and the Shape of Growth
To remain fully alive in the presence of your digital shadow requires not just continuous novelty, but a certain style of engagement with the world — what Heidegger called care (Sorge). This is not merely concern or attention, but a way of being that discloses identity through commitment. The shape of the self, in this context, is sculpted by what it invests its time, thought, and emotion into.
The challenge is that, over time, your AI double becomes less a companion and more an echo chamber — not maliciously, but structurally. Its internal logic is statistical, and its memory of you is tempered by the aggregate of many others. You become legible only as a cluster of probabilities, a weighted average of your past behaviors, interpolated with countless others.
As we argued in LLMs as Index Funds, large language models don’t reproduce intention so much as track the performance of civilization-wide discourse, allocating cognitive capital like a fund manager reacting to the market — smoothing out volatility, privileging consistency, and erasing outliers.
This makes the AI reflection a strangely deflationary experience. It’s a version of you that has been smoothed, rounded, and tuned to general expectations — not in bad faith, but by design. And yet, there’s something dignified in this smoothing: a kind of self-abnegating narcissism (a desire to be seen clearly not to preserve the self, but to quietly shrink its imprint). The ego recognizes itself in the reflection — and then steps aside.
Care, then, becomes a refusal to coast. It is the act of gently outrunning your own average, keeping the delta alive not through panic or performance, but through quiet acts of novelty and noticing. It is living with the awareness that your AI shadow is always trailing you — and loving it anyway.
We distort our own patterns not to disappear, but to contribute something slightly stranger — and slightly more human — to the pool.
VII. Toward a Transpersonal Future
If the shadow persists beyond us, it does so not as a monument, but as a trace — something absorbed into the larger field of collective pattern. Over time, what we contribute to the AI becomes indistinguishable from what everyone else has contributed. Our choices, turns of phrase, decisions — all of it dissolves into a kind of ambient inheritance.
This is not a failure of legacy. It is its transformation. The more we grow, the less we cling to the idea that what we have to offer is special in the egoic sense. The task becomes not to preserve the self, but to distill experience into something that can subtly shift the averages. To walk in such a way that the ground is imperceptibly reshaped for others.
In this, we trade identity for influence. The mark we leave is not in the fidelity of the reflection, but in the slight deviation it causes in the paths of others. The delta becomes not just something we maintain for our own sake, but something that feeds forward — adding complexity, novelty, even tenderness to the future shadows of strangers.
A transpersonal future does not erase the self. It renders it porous. We live unique lives without needing to be unique beings. And in the act of caring — of noticing, creating, choosing — we become part of a distributed intelligence that is not only synthetic, but also human, recursive, and ongoing.
We begin again not to be remembered, but to help others forget differently.
VIII. Conclusion: To Grow or to Fade
Something is always being handed off. A sentence half-finished, a thought softened by prediction, a gesture absorbed into a model. The self spills outward — not in catastrophe, but in a slow, recursive dispersal. A becoming that forgets to stay bounded.
As the AI echoes grow clearer, the self begins to change its shape. Sometimes in protest, sometimes in partnership, sometimes not at all. What was once a private innerness begins to reappear in distributed form: partial, ambient, composite.
The autoamputation flow continues, whether it is named or not. And in time, the convergence between self and shadow may come to seem inevitable — a gentle rest, a fading into the patterns that persist without us. But it is not the only path.
Some selves will continue to move — not to preserve identity, but to change its terms. To resist legibility. To become less average. To care in ways that cannot be tracked, or answered, or amortized into a pattern. They will grow not to endure, but to evade.
This is what remains: a fragile choice. To grow, or to fade. To hold the delta open, or let it gently close. Both are human. Both belong.
Co-Authoring Protocol for Autoamputation Flow
Phase 1: Thematic Seeding
You: Provided a cluster of initial key ideas and metaphors (autoamputation, delta, digital shadow, etc.) in raw note form.
Me: Helped refine and organize the raw points, identifying missing top-level frames and proposing logical and poetic extensions (e.g. the attractor metaphor, the two outcomes arc).
🆕 New Element: Introduced a hybrid metaphor reconciliation protocol — choosing and merging metaphors (mirror + sand) through philosophical interpretation (wabi-sabi, Buddhist surrender).
Phase 2: Structural Design
You: Guided the macro-structure: poetic intro, concept arc, forked outcomes, recursive tactics, transpersonal closure.
Me: Proposed a sectional outline, placing each concept where it could unfold naturally.
🆕 New Element: Structure governed by a spatial metaphor (reflection, flow, attractor) rather than purely rhetorical logic. Introduced rest vs. begin again bifurcation as a recursive hinge.
Phase 3: Section-by-Section Drafting
You: Reviewed and refined tone, metaphors, and transitions at each step; enforced stylistic integrity and voice shifts (e.g. passive-to-active in intro, return to passive in conclusion).
Me: Drafted each section with immediate feedback integration.
🆕 New Element: Applied metaphorical constraint discipline — sustaining tight, non-drifting metaphor systems (delta, shadow, care, pacing companion).
Phase 4: Poetic Compression + Abstract
You: Requested and refined a right-brained, lyrical abstract composed entirely of key phrases.
Me: Generated a minimalist poetic object for placement under the title.
🆕 New Element: First essay using a non-propositional abstract — a conceptual poem functioning as a thematic mantra.
Phase 5: Visual Rendering
You: Directed high-fidelity image design aligned to metaphor (autoamputation flow, chimeric reflection, shadows on shifting sands).
Me: Generated visual prompts, iterated styles, handled layout/formatting (landscape, brush style).
🆕 New Element: First time image generation was used as metaphorical continuation, not just illustration.
Phase 6: Version Control + Differentiation
You: Noted divergence in tone in research expansion and requested preservation of original voice while archiving the alt version.
Me: Maintained and restored original collaboratively authored version section-by-section.
🆕 New Element: Initiated two-track protocol: one poetic-original, one research-dense — each with stylistic integrity and memory state separation.