nucleation

LIT-1941: M-Autonomy

2 min read

Properties6
StatusActive — read in full 2026-11-01 (NOTE-1497), from the author's copy on his Mainz university pages (blogs.uni-mainz.de/fb05philosophie/files/2013/04/Metzinger_M-Autonomy_JCS_2015.pdf, linked from thomasmetzinger.com), typeset with the journal's running heads and pagination, text extracted with pdftotext. Worth reading for the sharpest statement of the will-organization question in Metzinger: what mind-wandering loses is "not the ability itself" but the conscious knowledge of it, and "one can only deliberately and autonomously exert an ability if that ability is explicitly represented in one's phenomenal self-model" (THEORY-1300). It also argues that the return of control is represented as self-caused even when an unconscious event caused it (THEORY-1298). A development of LIT-1942 with the empirical detail cut; no new data.
Tagsagency, self, cognition, personhood
ExtendsLIT-1942 — The myth of cognitive agency: subpersonal thinking as a cyclically recurring loss of mental autonomy
Cited as “extends” byLIT-1945 — The Problem of Mental Action: Predictive Control without Sensory Sheets
Cited as “paper” byNOTE-1497 — Metzinger — M-Autonomy
Cited as “source” byTHEORY-1297 — Mind-wandering is a recurring loss of M-autonomy, the veto-centred ability to suspend or end one's own ongoing mental processes; on the figures Metzinger uses, it takes about half of conscious time, not the two thirds he states, THEORY-1298 — When mental control returns after mind-wandering, the self-model represents the return as the person's own act whether or not the person's control system caused it, because it must bridge to earlier control to keep the autobiographical self-model continuous, THEORY-1300 — In mind-wandering the capacity for veto over one's own mental processes is kept and its representation in the self-model is lost, and on Metzinger's principle a capacity can be deliberately exercised only while it is so represented; the loss of M-autonomy is then the loss of a condition of the capacity's efficacy, not of the capacity

Graph View

Metzinger, T. (2015). M-Autonomy. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 22(11–12), 270–302.

Read in full in NOTE-1497.

Key takeaways

  • Second-order mental action. M-autonomy decomposes into “The imposing of rules on one’s own mental behaviour; explicit goal-selection, goal-commitment, goal-permanence; satisfaction of rationality constraints or rational guidance; intentional inhibition, suspension, or termination of an ongoing process” (p. 276), and veto “may have to be the central semantic element” (p. 278).
  • The ability is kept; its representation is lost. “what we have lost is a specific form of knowledge, and not the ability itself, namely, conscious knowledge of our potential for second-order mental action. We are still persons, because we have the relevant potential” (p. 282).
  • Representation as a condition of exercise. “the principle of ‘Autonomy by Phenomenal Self-Representation’: one can only deliberately and autonomously exert an ability if that ability is explicitly represented in one’s phenomenal self-model” (p. 280).
  • The personal level is drawn by the self-model. “an individual representational token or event only becomes part of a personal-level process by being functionally integrated into and actively controlled with the help of … the ‘epistemic agent model’ (EAM), and by being embedded into a highly specific sociocultural context” (p. 296); and the EAM “is not a little man in the head, but itself an entirely subpersonal process” (p. 282).
  • Regained control is represented as self-caused. “the re-emergence of an EAM, really triggered by unconscious events, may necessarily involve a confabulatory element (‘I generated this insight myself!’) in order to ensure the coherence of the autobiographical self-model over time” (p. 291).
  • Meditation. “a systematic and formal mental practice of cultivating M-autonomy” (p. 288). Focused practice has an EAM; advanced open monitoring is “meta-awareness without an EAM” (p. 289).

Standing in the record

Filed at the owner’s request of 2026-11-01 and read for the will-organization line. Its moderate reading is the will-organization question at the scale of mental action: an agent keeps a capacity and it loses and regains efficacy, and the paper names the condition, the capacity’s representation in the self-model. Whether that representation is a condition of efficacy or its accompaniment is QUESTION-367. It carries no instruction for machine-learning practice.

Backlinks