[MET] and popular science on "who we really are"

I was reading the chapter on [MET] and at the same time contemplating on the following

and I say to myself that this view:" you are a bag of molecules, a hardware that runs a particular software", the view that supports "looking to the universe from beyond" (as if we are the only sentient being and all the rest is the artifacts Physicists have imagined) is a [MET] being trying to pin us, to make us take ourselves for what it has already specified.



It is one thing to augment the world with the artifacts Natural scientists (and social scientists too) have invented and found functional and arrive to a cyborged experience where explanations and arguments help us move around, and it is another thing to enter the bifurcational world and allow oneself to be pinned by this world view.

This highly publicised [MET] being "takes us for others" and still, in the spirit of AIME, I can ask: can I make it hit a different target? Can I deflect it? (and get advantage of its formidabel energy?)

(In a sense this is a central question in learning. Every learning of a certain quality has to do with not just been targeted by knowledge, but in being transformed in such a way that we can have an operational handling of knowledge. Knowledge becomes knowledge for us, it gets to be contextualized in our lives, in our concerns.)

How does this [MET] being "terrify" me? How does it pin me?
By claiming of understanding me better than I do myself. As if one is naked in front of others and can do nothing to hide one's nakedness, as if one is like a child and the mature/adult scientists continually outsmart him.

"You may think this or that but look":

And one can find many many examples of illusions. Of "you may think that, but, poor thing , look what those who know better know. Look how easily you can be fooled! Look how easily we can pull this trick on you! So be prudent and just be friend with us. Be on our side, the side of the Brights"
All this reminds a little bit the older contrast between the Soul and the Body (the Soul/science who has access to real truth and the bestial Body/"self -dillusion of the common person" who goes by its machinery)

How can I deflect this powerful [MET] being?
I think its target is not really me. Its target  is for example "a sudden idea" that came to my mind or an "intuitive conviction" about whom I would vote for, or my sense of when this or that happened or an "urge" I feel in me.  There are various studies that say that "my own explanations" are incomplete. But I am not my experiences and explanations.
I like I.A. Richards presentation of the Will in "Mencius on the Mind"
"The Will is for [Mencius] a Ruler and the Confucian conception of an ideal Ruler is always of one who rules by benevolence , by caring for the interests of the governed, by consent". I am the quality of this Will (and in my tradition this quality has to do with [REL])

So I would say that the ontological narratives that scientists produced can be experienced as the [MET] counterparts of the [MET] beings that we always met in our ways. A seductive figure finds itself targeted by an evolutionary account and a narrative on bodily structures and neurotransmiters ([MET] beings themselves searching for target).

And I, the common "I" of the everyday person, may find myself in the company of a community of fellows who may be scientists (that is concept technicians amongst other things), but who are brothers and sisters who collectively with the others help get the energising power of the [MET]beings they help unravel and do not want to cash their knowledge in some wise-man kind of privileged social role.