P.D Ouspensky and non duality

[solr]

I recently began reading "The Psychology of Man's Possible Evolution" by Ouspensky.

Quote:

"What does it mean that man is a machine? It means that he has no independent movements, inside or outside of himself. He is a machine which is brought into motion by external influences and external impacts. All his movements, actions, words, ideas, emotions, moods and thoughts are produced by external influences. By himself, he is just an automaton with a certain store of memories of previous experiences, and a certain amount of reserve energy."

- I'm totally on board with this, but where does non duality fit in this picture? Wouldn't this use of the word "external" indicate some sort of duality?

[Dantas]

@solr

Ouspensky uses very delicate lenguage in this book, which is not actually a book, but a collection of teachings in coferences. Read it through and think critically about it - That's right 

12 minutes ago, solr said:

Wouldn't this use of the word "external" indicate some sort of duality?

The claims he made are dual, as it must, because this is a little book that you can spend years putting into practice and observe in everyday life and yourself if you want to. And it's definetly worth it.

 

[jse]

12 minutes ago, solr said:

Wouldn't this use of the word "external" indicate some sort of duality?

Our mind's understanding is limited, and words are a way to express these limitations.

Duality-based vocabularies are "a concession  to the apparently separate self that believes and feels itself to be temporary and finite". (Rupert Spira)

[Leo Gura]

A) The context in which Ouspensky is speaking there is obviously a relative one. He is not trying to describe the Absolute there.

B) I doubt Ouspenky truly understood full nonduality.