# Autaxys and Autology: Definition, Rationale, and Implications **Version:** 1.2 **Project:** AUTX - Autaxys: A Framework for Pattern-Based Reality **Author:** [Rowan Brad Quni](mailto:[email protected]) Principal Investigator, [QNFO](https://qnfo.org) --- ## 1. Preamble: The Imperative for New Foundational Terminology The inquiry into the fundamental nature of reality necessitates not only novel conceptual frameworks but also a language precise enough to articulate them without ambiguity. This document introduces and defines two such foundational terms—**autaxys** and **autology**—central to the theoretical edifice being constructed within the research program “Autaxys: A Framework for Pattern-Based Reality.” The motivation for these neologisms stems from a critical assessment of existing terminology and the inherent limitations encountered when attempting to repurpose words laden with established, often divergent, connotations. The history of science and philosophy is replete with instances where new paradigms required new vocabularies. Terms like *information*, while central to the lineage of this work, carry a modern weight heavily influenced by communication theory (e.g., Shannon information) and data processing. While these aspects are relevant to understanding how patterns generated by a fundamental principle are perceived and modeled, they do not fully capture the intended ontological depth of a self-generating, pattern-forming principle that is posited as constitutive of reality itself. Similarly, classical terms like *logos*, though rich in philosophical heritage, come with extensive and varied interpretations that could obscure the specific, naturalistic framework intended here. The project “Autaxys: A Framework for Pattern-Based Reality” aims to move beyond prevailing materialist and naive realist paradigms. It proposes that reality is fundamentally a dynamic, self-ordering system that generates all observable phenomena, including what we perceive as matter and physical laws, through the emergence and interaction of patterns. To speak clearly about this fundamental systemic principle and its dedicated field of study, unique and well-defined terms are indispensable. This document, therefore, serves a critical role. It will first detail the etymological construction and conceptual underpinnings of autaxys (the principle) and autology (its study). It will then provide their formal definitions and elaborate upon their key characteristics. Subsequently, it will delineate crucial distinctions between these new terms and existing concepts to prevent misinterpretation and to highlight the unique theoretical space they are intended to occupy. Finally, it will briefly touch upon the philosophical implications of adopting an autaxys-centric worldview, setting the stage for more extensive explorations in other works, such as the monograph *A New Way of Seeing: Perceiving Patterns from Autaxys*. The clarity and precision sought here are vital for building a coherent and robust theoretical structure capable of offering new perspectives on the deepest questions concerning existence, perception, and knowledge. ## 2. The Terminological Gap: Limitations of ‘Information’ and ‘Logos’ for a Generative Principle The preceding analysis (Section 1) highlighted the profound limitations of an ontology based purely on “particles as things,” arguing that a more fundamental understanding of reality likely resides in recognizing the primacy of patterns. If the constituents of the universe—from photons to the structures that determine physical laws—are indeed manifestations of persistent, interactive patterns, the subsequent intellectual challenge is to identify and name a foundational principle capable of *generating* these patterns. This endeavor requires a conceptual term that transcends mere description or quantification of patterns, pointing instead to their ultimate, intrinsic, and self-driven origin. The term *information* itself, despite its intuitive connection to patterns and its central role in the historical lineage of this present inquiry, proves insufficient for this deep ontological task. In its most widely understood scientific sense, as formalized by Claude Shannon in his mathematical theory of communication, information quantifies uncertainty reduction and pertains to the characteristics of messages, signals, and data transmission. While Shannon information theory provides powerful tools for analyzing the complexity and transmissibility of patterns *once they exist and are detected*, it does not address the genesis of those patterns from a more fundamental level. It operates primarily within an epistemological and communicational framework, rather than providing an ontological principle that acts as a prime mover or generative substrate for reality’s patterns. Even broader, more philosophical conceptions of information, such as Gregory Bateson’s influential definition of information as “a difference that makes a difference,” while coming closer by linking information to distinguishability (a prerequisite for pattern), still fall short. Such definitions describe a *property* of interactions or a *result* of comparison between states or patterns. They do not, however, denote the underlying principle that *creates* the distinguishable states in the first place, nor the system within which such differences become dynamically consequential and organize into persistent structures. To assert that reality *is* information, even in this richer sense, leaves unanswered the crucial question of what generates and sustains the very possibility of such distinguishable, patterned states. It risks conflating the observed patterns (the “map” of registered differences) with the fundamental generative source of those patterns (the *territory-generator*). Similarly, turning to the classical Greek concept of *logos*—with its rich connotations of reason, word, principle, or the rational ordering principle of the cosmos—offers historical depth but also introduces its own set of limitations for the specific task at hand. While the notion of an intrinsic cosmic order and intelligibility inherent in *logos* is highly resonant with the aims of a pattern-based ontology, the term *logos* itself carries a vast and varied legacy of interpretations spanning millennia. Many of these interpretations are deeply intertwined with specific metaphysical or theological systems that posit the *logos* as a transcendent entity, a divine emanation, or an abstract rational structure to which an independent material reality must conform. While not all interpretations of *logos* are non-naturalistic, the weight of this historical baggage makes it difficult to employ the term without inviting potential misdirection or requiring extensive disambiguation from views that are contrary to the naturalistic and immanent principle sought by this framework. What is needed, therefore, is a new term: one that can specifically and unambiguously signify a *naturalistic, immanent, and fundamentally self-generating principle* responsible for the origin and ongoing evolution of all order and pattern in reality. This principle must inherently possess the capacity to bring forth structure and complexity from within its own dynamics, without reliance on external agents or pre-existing laws. The inadequacy of current cornerstone terms like “information” or “logos” to precisely capture this unique set of characteristics creates a distinct conceptual and terminological gap. It is to fill this gap, and to provide a clear foundation for a new ontological framework, that a new term will be proposed and elaborated in the subsequent section. ## 3. Introducing Autaxys: The Principle of Intrinsic Self-Order and Pattern Genesis The preceding sections have delineated a critical conceptual and terminological void: the lack of a precise term for a fundamental, naturalistic, and intrinsically self-generating principle capable of giving rise to the patterned reality we observe. To fill this void and provide a cornerstone for a new ontological framework, this work formally introduces the principle of **autaxys**. The term autaxys is a neologism specifically crafted to embody the core attributes of such a foundational principle. It is derived from two Greek roots: “Auto-” (αὐτός - autos), signifying “self,” “spontaneous,” or “by oneself,” which emphasizes inherent self-causation, self-generation, and intrinsic dynamics; and “Taxis” (τάξις - taxis), meaning “arrangement,” “order,” “system,” or “due classification,” which conveys the idea of a structured, rule-governed, and systemic quality. Combined, autaxys is intended to signify a fundamental principle characterized by *self-ordering, self-arranging, and the capacity of a system to generate its own structure and dynamics intrinsically.* Within the field of autology (the study of autaxys, to be defined in Section 4), autaxys is formally defined as: >The fundamental principle of reality conceived as a self-ordering, self-arranging, and self-generating system. It is the inherent dynamic process by which patterns emerge, persist, and interact, giving rise to all discernible structures and phenomena. These phenomena include what is perceived by observing systems as information, as well as the regularities interpreted as physical laws, and the complex, stable patterns identified as matter, energy, space, and time. A core tenet is that autaxys operates without recourse to an external organizing agent or pre-imposed set of rules; the principles of its ordering and generation are intrinsic to its nature. This definition positions autaxys not as a static substance or a fixed entity, but as the foundational *activity* or *dynamic potentiality* from which all structured existence arises. It is both the ultimate source of order and the ongoing process of that order manifesting and evolving. The emphasis on “system” highlights its interconnected and rule-governed nature, while “self-generating” points to its capacity to bring forth novelty and complexity from its own internal dynamics. The patterns generated by autaxys are not merely incidental byproducts but are its primary mode of expression and the basis for all knowable reality. To further elucidate this core concept, autaxys, as the subject of autology, possesses several key characteristics that define its operational nature and ontological status. These characteristics directly address the requirements for a truly foundational, pattern-generating principle capable of overcoming the limitations of previously discussed concepts. First, autaxys possesses **ontological primacy**; it is the ultimate ground of being, from which matter, energy, and physical laws emerge as patterned manifestations. This directly addresses the need for a principle more fundamental than the “things” or “substances” of materialistic ontologies, or the descriptive qualities of information. Second, it is inherently **dynamic and processual**, an ongoing process of self-unfolding and pattern generation, meaning reality is in a constant state of becoming. This answers the need for a principle that is inherently active and generative, rather than a static blueprint or passive medium. Third, autaxys is **rational and rule-governed**, operating according to intrinsic principles of coherence that can be described as a “meta-logic” more fundamental than human-derived logical systems. This addresses the observed order and lawfulness of the universe by grounding it in an intrinsic rationality, rather than externally imposed laws or unexplained brute regularities. Fourth, its primary mode of manifestation is as a **pattern generating** principle, creating the discernible regularities and structures at all scales. This directly provides the foundation for a pattern-based ontology, moving beyond the “particle-as-thing” view critiqued in Section 1 and providing the source for the patterns that information theories describe. Fifth, autaxys serves as the **foundation for information (derivative sense)**; information arises when autaxys-generated patterns are registered or differentiated. This clarifies the ontological status of information as secondary to, and dependent upon, the more fundamental, generative principle of autaxys. Sixth, it exhibits **self-articulation/self-description**, where the dynamic unfolding of patterns *is* its expression. The structure and evolution of reality *is* the articulation of autaxys, emphasizing its immanence and completeness as both source and expression. Seventh, a defining feature is its **acausal origin (no external agent)** regarding its ordering principles, which are intrinsic. This addresses the philosophical challenge of ultimate origins and the need for an uncaused cause for cosmic order, by positing that the most fundamental level of reality is inherently self-sufficient in its capacity to generate that order. Finally, there is a **conceptual aspiration for autaxys to transcend Gödelian limits**; while human formal descriptions of it will be incomplete, autaxys itself, as the *territory-generator*, is conceived as operationally complete and consistent in its generative capacity. These characteristics collectively define autaxys as a unique ontological primitive, proposed as the active, self-organizing, pattern-generating foundation of all reality. It is designed to provide a more coherent and generative basis for understanding existence than offered by materialism, idealism, or conceptions of information or *logos* that lack its explicit emphasis on intrinsic self-generation and systemic pattern formation. ## 4. Autology: A New Mode of Inquiry into Pattern-Generating Reality With autaxys established in Section 3 as the proposed fundamental principle of a self-ordering, pattern-generating reality, we now formally introduce and define **autology** as the dedicated field of systematic inquiry into this principle and its manifestations. The term autology, as previously noted for its etymological roots, derives from the Greek “Auto-” (referring to autaxys as its subject) and “-logy” (λογία - the study of), straightforwardly signifying “the study of autaxys.” Autology is conceived as the interdisciplinary field that investigates the nature of autaxys as the fundamental, self-generating, self-structuring, and self-articulating rational principle of reality. Its scope encompasses the study of autaxys’ manifestations as diverse patterns; the processes by which it generates discernible phenomena (including what is perceived as information, matter, physical laws, space, and time); and the epistemological and ontological implications of this framework for understanding perception, knowledge, and existence. The aims of autology are necessarily broad and foundational, reflecting the nature of autaxys itself. A primary objective is to understand the core characteristics and intrinsic dynamics of autaxys, exploring its inherent rationality and the “meta-logical” rules that appear to govern its operation. Autology seeks to elucidate the general principles of pattern genesis, persistence, interaction, and complexification that arise from autaxys. This involves investigating how specific, stable patterns—which may correspond to what current physics terms particles, fields, or even laws—emerge and maintain their identity within the overarching autaxic system. Thus, autology does not merely describe observed patterns but endeavors to understand their *generative source* in autaxys. This approach distinguishes autology from traditional physics, which often takes fundamental particles and laws as axiomatic starting points and explores their consequences. Autology poses a prior set of questions: from what more fundamental, self-organizing principle do these apparent “givens” of physics arise? It also differentiates itself from purely philosophical ontology by aiming to ground its principles in a manner that can ultimately inform, and be constrained by, the deepest regularities observed in the empirical world, even as it critiques naive interpretations of that world. The î₁ pattern and the conceptualization of an autaxic table of pattern-based reality serve as powerful exemplars of autological inquiry. The î₁ pattern, which emerged as a robust prediction from the principle-driven (though early and ultimately incomplete) Infomatics v3.3 framework, presented a significant anomaly when juxtaposed with the Standard Model of particle physics. From the perspective of autology, this is not dismissed as a simple “failed particle prediction.” Instead, the î₁ case becomes a critical subject for investigation: > What kind of fundamental autaxys pattern does the (m‘=2, k’=1) Ratio Resonance solution (or an autaxys-native equivalent mechanism) truly represent? How do its autologically-derived properties (e.g., its mode of interaction, its stability conditions within the broader autaxys system) explain its current empirical status, particularly its non-detection by conventional methods? Crucially, what does the î₁ case reveal about the limitations of conventional particle concepts and the assumptions embedded in current experimental paradigms designed primarily to probe entities within those existing concepts? The autaxic table is then envisaged as a primary research program within autology. It represents a systematic attempt to map and understand the fundamental, stable patterns generated by autaxys, analogous to how the periodic table of elements classifies atomic structures based on underlying principles. This involves deriving the properties of these foundational patterns (like î₁, î₂, etc.) from the dynamics of autaxys and understanding the organizational logic of this “pattern zoo.” The methodological stance of autology is thus characterized by its unwavering focus on generative principles, its emphasis on emergence as a core process, and its critical approach to the premature reification of observed patterns into fixed “things.” It seeks to develop and apply a new way of seeing and understanding reality, one that is rigorously grounded in the foundational concept of autaxys. ## 5. Autaxys and Autology: Relation to and Critique of Existing Frameworks To fully appreciate the conceptual space that autaxys and autology are intended to occupy, it is crucial to distinguish them from several existing, influential concepts. These distinctions are not necessarily oppositional but aim to clarify the unique contributions and foundational claims of the autaxys framework. ### 5.1 Autaxys versus Information (General and Shannon Information) While the research lineage leading to autaxys has strong information-theoretic roots, and autaxys itself is the generator of all discernible patterns (which, when registered, constitute information), autaxys as an ontological principle is posited as prior to and more fundamental than information in its common epistemological or communicational senses. A primary distinction must be made with **Shannon Information**. The mathematical theory of communication developed by Claude Shannon, known as Shannon Information, quantifies uncertainty reduction, channel capacity, and the statistical properties of signals and data. This is an indispensable tool for analyzing the transmission and processing of patterns once they have been generated by autaxys and registered by some system. However, Shannon Information theory does not address the origin or ontological status of the patterns themselves, nor the nature of the system generating them. Autaxys is proposed as that generative system; Shannon Information helps describe aspects of its derivative expressions. A broader, more qualitative understanding of information, such as Gregory Bateson’s concept of “a difference that makes a difference,” is closer to the manifestations of autaxys, as autaxys is the source of all distinguishability. A pattern generated by autaxys, when it interacts with another pattern or an observing system, creates a “difference that makes a difference.” However, autaxys is not merely the sum of such differences or the capacity for distinction; it is the underlying dynamic principle that *generates* these differences and the systemic context within which they become meaningful or consequential. Information, in this Batesonian sense, is a relational property that emerges from the interaction of autaxys-generated patterns. Therefore, regarding ontological status, autaxys is proposed as the fundamental, active, self-generating reality—the *territory-generator*. Information, in its various common usages, describes aspects, states, or registered patterns *of* or *from* autaxys—it pertains to the “map” or the interface with the territory. ### 5.2 Autaxys versus Classical *Logos* While *logos* shares connotations of order, reason, and cosmic principle, autaxys specifically emphasizes the *self-generating, self-arranging, and systemic* nature of this principle. It aims for a naturalistic framework, distinct from specific theological or purely abstract philosophical interpretations of *logos*, by grounding the origin of order within the principle itself. ### 5.3 Autaxys versus Matter or Energy as Primary Substance Traditional materialism or physicalism posits matter and/or energy as the fundamental substances of reality, with all phenomena, including order and information, being properties or arrangements of this primary stuff. Autaxys reverses this ontological hierarchy. In the autaxys framework, what we perceive and measure as matter and energy are not fundamental substances but rather highly stable, complex, and persistently interacting patterns generated by the dynamics of autaxys. Their properties (mass, charge, solidity, energetic states) are emergent characteristics of these autaxys-generated patterns and their interactions. Physicality itself is an emergent quality of robust, inter-subjectively verifiable patterns. ### 5.4 Autaxys versus Mind or Consciousness as Primary Idealist philosophies, in various forms, posit mind, consciousness, or mental phenomena as fundamental, with the physical world being a construct or manifestation of mind. Autaxys offers a different non-materialist foundation. While autaxys is non-material, it is not inherently mentalistic in the idealist sense. Mind and consciousness are viewed within autology as exceptionally complex emergent phenomena arising within specific types of highly organized, information-processing patterns generated by autaxys (e.g., biological organisms with sophisticated nervous systems). They are highly evolved expressions of autaxys, not its source. ### 5.5 Autology versus Existing Disciplines Autology, as the study of autaxys, is conceived as a foundational, interdisciplinary field that can inform, reframe, and potentially unify aspects of existing disciplines, rather than simply replacing them. For **physics**, autology seeks to provide the ontological grounding for the patterns, symmetries, and laws that physicists observe and mathematically describe. It asks the “why” behind these observed regularities, proposing that they are expressions of autaxys’ inherent nature, and potentially resolving foundational paradoxes that arise when these laws are extrapolated without a coherent underlying ontology. For example, the specific particle types in the Standard Model, their masses, charges, and interactions, would be investigated within autology as particular stable patterns and interaction rules emerging from autaxys dynamics. In relation to **information science and theory** (including Shannon information), autology offers a candidate for the ultimate *source* of the “information” that these fields quantify, process, and study the communication of. If information arises from discernible differences and patterns, autaxys is the principle that generates those fundamental differences and patterns in the first place. For **systems theory and complexity science**, which investigate the behavior of complex, interacting, and often self-organizing systems, autology proposes autaxys as the most fundamental self-organizing system, whose intrinsic dynamics give rise to the conditions under which all other complex systems emerge and operate. Finally, in **philosophy**, autology directly engages with core questions in **metaphysics** by proposing a new ontology centered on autaxys. It contributes to **epistemology** by reframing knowledge as the construction of models of autaxys-generated patterns and by examining the limits of our ability to know this fundamental principle. It also has implications for **scientific methodology**, encouraging a focus on identifying generative principles and being critical of the premature reification of observed patterns into fundamental “things.” By clarifying these relationships and distinctions, the autaxys framework aims to establish its unique conceptual territory and demonstrate its potential to foster a more integrated and foundational understanding of reality. ## 6. The Autaxic Vista: Forging a New Scientific and Philosophical Landscape The formal introduction of autaxys as a fundamental ontological principle and autology as its dedicated field of study opens a wide vista of implications, presents significant intellectual challenges, and ultimately aims to cultivate a new way of perceiving and understanding reality. This section outlines these broader aspects, acknowledging the work ahead while underscoring the transformative potential of an autaxys-centric framework. ### 6.1 The Autaxic Re-evaluation of Fundamental Questions An autaxys-based ontology compels a profound re-examination of core philosophical and scientific interrogatives. Questions such as “What is existence?” shift from a search for ultimate substances (matter or mind) to an inquiry into the principles of pattern stability and interaction within a self-generating system. “What is knowledge?” moves beyond a correspondence theory with static external “things” towards understanding knowledge as the development of increasingly coherent and predictively successful models of autaxys-generated patterns. “What is a scientific law?” transitions from viewing laws as transcendent edicts to understanding them as highly stable, emergent regularities describing the immanent, rule-governed behavior of autaxys. Even “What is causality?” is reframed, moving from mechanistic interactions between objects to the principled, conditional dependencies governing the evolution of patterns within the autaxic flux. This re-evaluation aims not to discard prior insights but to re-ground them in a more fundamental, generative context. ### 6.2 New Frontiers for Inquiry: The Research Program of Autology The challenges inherent in developing a full theory of autaxys define the exciting research frontiers for autology. A primary task is the development of more formal, potentially mathematical or computational, models of autaxys dynamics. Such models are essential to move beyond conceptual articulation towards generating specific, testable predictions about how diverse patterns—from those resembling fundamental particles to complex biological structures—emerge, stabilize, and interact according to intrinsic autaxic rules. Establishing clear empirical contact for novel predictions derived from autaxys, especially for phenomena that may not manifest as conventional “particles” or “forces” detectable by current experimental paradigms, will require innovative methodological thinking in both theoretical modeling and experimental design. Furthermore, while autology posits consciousness as an exceptionally complex autaxys-generated pattern, elucidating the specific organizational and dynamic properties of such patterns that correlate with subjective experience remains a profound frontier, inviting collaboration with cognitive science and philosophy of mind, but approached from this new ontological basis. These are not simply difficulties to be overcome, but the very landscape of discovery that autology opens for exploration. ### 6.3 Autaxys as a Unifying Principle: Connecting Disparate Phenomena A significant aspiration of the autaxys framework is its potential to serve as a unifying principle, offering deeper coherence for phenomena that appear disparate or paradoxical within current, often fragmented, scientific paradigms. For example, the wave-particle duality of quantum entities, a persistent conceptual puzzle, can be re-envisioned within autology not as a contradictory nature of fixed “things,” but as different modes of manifestation or interaction of underlying autaxys patterns, dependent on the observational context and the scale of interaction. The quantum measurement problem, often framed in terms of an ill-defined “collapse of the wavefunction,” may find a more natural resolution in understanding measurement as a specific type of interaction that actualizes a determinate pattern from a spectrum of autaxic potentialities, governed by contextual factors and the inherent rules of autaxys. The very origin of cosmic order and the apparent “fine-tuning” of physical constants could be explored as consequences of autaxys’ inherent drive towards stable, complex pattern formation. By seeking the common generative root of diverse phenomena in autaxys, autology aims to build a “coalition of evidence” for a more integrated and parsimonious understanding of the universe. ### 6.4 This Document as a Foundational Stepping Stone This foundational document, “Autaxys and Autology: Definition, Rationale, and Implications,” serves as an essential conceptual and terminological cornerstone for the broader research program. It has sought to provide the necessary precision and clarity for autaxys as the core ontological principle and autology as its field of study. This groundwork is indispensable for the more extensive explorations and detailed arguments to be developed in subsequent works. Specifically, it underpins the narrative and deconstructive analysis in the monograph *A New Way of Seeing: Perceiving Patterns from Autaxys*. It will inform the planned architecture and development of an autaxic table classifying fundamental patterns, guide the validation and contextualization of the î₁ pattern within this new framework, as detailed in a dedicated analysis, and sharpen the critical examination of conventional scientific wisdom and methodology presented in a further critical work. ### 6.5 Concluding Vision: Towards an Autological “New Way of Seeing” Ultimately, the autaxic vista beckons towards a profound shift in perspective. It is an invitation to move beyond the surface appearances of a world populated by seemingly independent “things” and to engage with the deeper reality of a universe as an active, self-ordering, and intrinsically rational system—autaxys—ceaselessly generating the rich tapestry of patterns that constitute our experienced world. Cultivating this “new way of seeing” is the central promise of autology. It is a call to seek the deep, generative principles of autaxys, thereby fostering a more coherent, integrated, and fundamentally more insightful comprehension of the cosmos and our unique place within it as pattern-perceiving, reality-interpreting systems, capable of reflecting upon the very source of our being and understanding. ## 7. Synthesis: Autaxys and Autology as Cornerstones for a New Perspective This document has endeavored to lay a precise and robust conceptual foundation by introducing **autaxys** as the fundamental, self-ordering, and pattern-generating principle of reality, alongside **autology** as the interdisciplinary field dedicated to its systematic study. The careful construction of these terms, rooted in etymological significance and driven by an identified inadequacy of existing vocabularies to capture a truly generative ontological principle, is intended to provide the necessary clarity for a rigorous re-examination of existence itself. The detailed definitions and elaborated characteristics of autaxys—its ontological primacy, dynamic processual nature, intrinsic rationality, pattern-generating capacity, and self-articulating dynamics—aim to establish it as a unique and potent ontological primitive. By distinguishing autaxys from conventional understandings of information, classical *logos*, matter, or mind as primary, this framework seeks to carve out a distinct theoretical space for exploring a reality grounded in inherent, self-driven order. The establishment of autaxys and autology is more than a mere academic exercise in renaming; it is a strategic imperative for the broader research program encapsulated in “Autaxys: A Framework for Pattern-Based Reality.” These concepts are designed to serve as the unwavering bedrock for the arguments and reinterpretations to be developed in the monograph *A New Way of Seeing: Perceiving Patterns from Autaxys*. They will inform the architecture of a new classification of fundamental patterns, the autaxic table of pattern-based reality, provide the lens for validating and contextualizing the î₁ pattern within a coherent framework, and sharpen the critical analysis of conventional scientific wisdom and its methodologies. The path into autology is an invitation to cultivate a new mode of inquiry, one that prioritizes the discernment of intrinsic order and the principles of emergent complexity. This foundational exposition of autaxys and autology aims to equip that inquiry with the precise conceptual tools required for such an ambitious undertaking. The ultimate aspiration is to foster a deeper, more unified, and fundamentally more coherent understanding of the cosmos and our role within it as systems uniquely capable of perceiving and modeling the very patterns from which we arise, thereby truly enabling a new way of seeing.