You bifurcate "I" and "me" implying the former can reliably create such a state in the latter; if this is the case, then what's actually at work in forming your "me"?

I used two different terms to aid the reader, but I and me are just pointers to self and like a ruby class running metaprogramming on self, one can rewrite oneself. The new code still comes from the self, though.

not felicitous to say the least. you're ignoring my point that your self is formed by something which also has a form that you're ignoring since you're so in love with its ability to change.