Elizabeth Schechter explores the implications of the experience of people who have had the pathway between the two hemispheres of their brain severed, and argues that there are in fact two minds, subjects of experience, and intentional agents inside each split-brain human being: right and left. But each split-brain subject is still one of us.

According to conventional wisdom, the split-brain syndrome puts paid to the thesis that consciousness is necessarily unified. The aim of this paper is to challenge that view. I argue both that disunity models of the split-brain are highly problematic, and that there is much to recommend a model of the split-brain—the switch model—according to which split-brain patients retain a fully unified consciousness at all times. Although the task of examining the unity of consciousness (...) through the lens of the split-brain syndrome is not a new one—such projects date back to Nagel’s seminal paper on the topic—the time is ripe for a re-evaluation of the issues. (shrink)

Primatology tells that about seven million years ago a split began in primate evolution, a split that led to chimpanzee and human lineages (the pan-homo split). During these millions of years our human lineage has developed performances that our chimpanzee cousins do not possess, like reflective self-consciousness and language. We present here an evolutionary scenario that proposes a rationale for the pan-homo split. It is based on a pre-human anxiety that may have barred access to (...) self-consciousness for the chimpanzee lineage. The starting point of the scenario is the capability that had our pre-human ancestors for an elementary identification with conspecifics. We consider that the evolution of that capability has led to self-consciousness when identifications with conspecifics brought our ancestors to represent their own entity as existing, like conspecifics were represented. But the same identification process also took place with endangered and dying conspecifics. And this has produced a huge anxiety increase, source of important mental sufferings that our ancestors had to limit. Our hypothesis is that different modes of anxiety limitation have led to the pan-homo split. On one side the chimpanzee lineage would have limited an unbearable mental suffering by stopping the development of identifications with conspecifics, and by this also stopping a possible evolution toward self-consciousness. Such anxiety limitation process has led to today chimpanzees which possess a very limited consciousness of themselves. On the other side, our human lineage would have successfully developed anxiety limitation tools like caring, pleasure, anticipation, communication and imitation. With these tools accelerating the evolution of our lineage toward our human mind. The proposed pan/homo split process complements an existing evolutionary scenario for self-consciousness that has positioned anxiety management as a key contributor to the build-up of our human minds. Such overall perspective makes anxiety management a major source to many of our motivations and mental states, much more than assumed so far. Continuations are proposed for a better understanding about our modes of anxiety limitation (including evil behaviors), and also to introduce a possible evolutionary nature of phenomenal consciousness. (shrink)

This document consists primarily of excerpts (chapters 5 and 10-12) from the author’s book From Brain to Cosmos. These excerpts address several traditional problems about the histories of conscious subjects, using the concept of subjective fact that the author developed earlier in the book. Topics include the persistence of conscious subjects through time, the unity or disunity of the self, and the possibility of splitting conscious subjects. (These excerpts depend heavily upon the author’s concept of subjective fact as developed in (...) From Brain to Cosmos. Readers unfamiliar with that concept are strongly advised to read chapters 2 and 3 of that book first. See the last page of this document for details on how to obtain those chapters.). (shrink)

I argue that if minds supervene on the intrinsic physical properties of things like brains, then typical human brains host many minds at once. Support comes from science-nonfiction realities that, unlike split-brain cases, have received little direct attention from philosophers. One of these realities is that some patients are functioning (albeit impaired) and phenomenally conscious by all medical and commonsense accounts despite the fact that they have undergone a hemispherectomy: an entire brain hemisphere has been fully detached. Another is (...) the Wada test, in which a patient has each hemisphere anesthetized, one after the other, while the other hemisphere is awake and functioning—again, phenomenally conscious by any standard. I will argue that hemispherectomies, Wada tests, and related procedures each present cases in which the minds that exist after the detachment (or anesthetization) of a hemisphere are surviving minds which must be associated with the surviving (or un-anesthetized) hemisphere. I will argue that such surviving minds existed before the medical procedure, instantiated by the then-intact hemisphere that was due to survive the loss of its complementary hemisphere. If so, then the typical subject has at least three minds: a “left hemisphere mind”, a “right hemisphere mind”, and a “whole brain mind”. But the argument generalizes to cases in which smaller portions of the brain are lost, yielding a great number of additional minds, some overlapping. Some important ethical implications are raised and briefly examined. (shrink)

If we were to connect two individuals’ brains together, how would this affect the individuals’ conscious experiences? In particular, it is possible for two people to share any of their conscious experiences; to simultaneously enjoy some token experiences while remaining distinct subjects? The case of the Hogan twins—craniopagus conjoined twins whose brains are connected at the thalamus—seems to show that this can happen. I argue that while practical empirical methods cannot tell us directly whether or not the twins share conscious (...) experiences, considerations about the locality of content processing in the brain entails that they most likely do so. (shrink)

I criticize Bourget’s intuitive and empirical arguments for thinking that all possible conscious states are underived if intentional. An underived state is one of which it is not the case that it must be realized, at least in part, by intentional states distinct from itself. The intuitive argument depends upon a thought experiment about a subject who exists for only a split second while undergoing a single conscious experience. This, however, trades on an ambiguity in "split second." Meanwhile, (...) Bourget's empirical argument is question-begging. My critique also has implications for debates about the essential temporality and unity of consciousness experience, and, phenomenal atomism. (shrink)

A number of theories of consciousness, imply or at least raise the possibility of overlapping consciousness, including functionalism, panpsychism and some accounts of split-brain cases. Most theories of consciousness in neuroscience also posit correlates of consciousness that overlap with smaller or larger versions of themselves, hence implying overlap as well. An exception is the Integrated Information Theory, which explicitly prohibits overlap via its Exclusion postulate, but this postulate has been widely criticized as poorly supported. I (...) offer a new argument against overlapping consciousness, according to which given the most plausible view of the nature of subjects, a version of the deflationary bundle view, overlap would entail a straightforward contradiction. Given the less plausible substantive view of subjects, overlap would be possible but still highly unparsimonious. Any theory that implies overlap must therefore be rejected or modified to exclude it after all. (shrink)

We present a concrete mechanism for why the conscious experience of a unified self — being an “I” — arises inevitably from self-referential communication. Starting from the argument that contra-causal free will is excluded by both deterministic and stochastic dynamics, mental activity is to be understood as an emergent process within distributed neural systems. Our mechanism identifies thought as a passive emergent process of silent communication in which the marker “I” functions as a perspectival tag anchoring the system’s own standpoint. (...) The combination of passivity and tagging makes the illusion of an inner subject hard to avoid. Once introduced, this marker is reified and mistaken for a hidden subject, producing the illusion of selfhood. Developmental evidence shows that the acquisition of personal pronouns coincides with the emergence of autobiographical self- models, while neuropsychological cases such as split-brain and anosognosia demonstrate how the assignment of the “I” can fragment or fail. We conclude that consciousness is not the revelation of an inner agent but the outcome of a concrete mechanism: Perspectival tagging within silent communication. On this account, the self is a functional illusion that is expected to arise once the mechanism is in place. (shrink)

Erwin Schrödinger, a principal architect of quantum mechanics, extended his intellectual pursuits into the fundamental nature of life and consciousness. In his seminal works, he forwarded a provocative metaphysical thesis: consciousness is a singularity, experienced only in the singular and never in the plural. This paper reviews this ”One-Mind” hypothesis, tracing its origins from Schrödinger’s phenomenological reasoning to its deep resonance with the non-dual philosophy of Advaita Vedānta. We explore the central tenets of his argument—that the plurality of (...) minds is a mistaken inference drawn from the plurality of bodies—and contrast this view with its primary challenges from modern neuroscience and analytic philosophy, including split-brain research and reductionist theories of self. -/- We consider a synthesis of Schrödinger’s ideas with contemporary scientific frameworks. A speculative reconciliation is proposed between his top-down metaphysics and the bottom-up, mathematically rigorous Integrated Information Theory (IIT), framing IIT as a potential ”physics of Māyā” that describes the individuation of a universal consciousness. We then formalize Schrödinger’s concepts through computational and quantum-cognitive models, presenting a pseudocode simulation of his ”split-mind” thought experiment and proposing novel research hypotheses that bridge his density-matrix formalism with modern models of cognition. The paper offers a critique of the logical coherence of the One-Mind view, highlighting its philosophical value as a profound challenge to our most basic assumptions about selfhood, while acknowledging its limitations as a scientific theory. This synthesis charts the enduring legacy of Schrödinger’s inquiry, demonstrating its continued relevance in shaping the deepest questions at the intersection of physics, neuroscience, and philosophy. While new considerations test early perspectives, newer arguments demonstrate challenges and leave more to be explored. (shrink)

The ability to anticipate events, to foresight, is an adaptive advantage. We humans use it all the time. Animals have a limited access to it. Positioning foresight in human evolution is a complex subject (Suddendorf, 2013). Why and how are humans, and not chimpanzees, performant in anticipating events? We propose here to address that question with an evolutionary scenario that links self-consciousness to anxiety management (Menant, 2018). The scenario positions self-consciousness as “the capability to represent one’s own entity (...) as existing in the environment, like conspecifics are represented as existing” (making “thinking about oneself” possible). The scenario proposes that our pre-human ancestors were capable of some level of identifications with their conspecifics, and that its development has progressively brought our ancestors to represent themselves as existing in the environment like their conspecifics were represented, thus introducing self-consciousness. The scenario also proposes that identifications with suffering conspecifics have been the source of an important anxiety that had to be limited for evolution to continue. Some of our ancestors have not been able to limit that new anxiety. Their mental pain became unbearable. Their evolution was almost stopped, thus initiating the pan-homo split. Developing an ability to anticipate events has been a key contributor to anxiety limitation by providing information about the sufferings to come, and consequently allowing to limit and avoid them. In addition to that role of foresight in human evolution it is worth noticing that the associated chaining of mental events brings to propose foresight as an entry point to the concept of causality in human evolution. Regarding our chimpanzee cousins, the pan-homo split in the scenario positions them as not self-conscious, not capable of anticipation like humans are, and less anxious than humans. Continuations are proposed. (shrink)

We all agree that our human minds are results of primate evolution. We humans are self conscious. The separation of our human lineage from the chimpanzee one began about 7MY ago (pan homo split). Specificities of human self consciousness have been created during that time. Besides interesting approaches differing from the one proposed here [1], little is known about how these specificities came up [2, 3]. We propose here to address that subject with an evolutionary scenario using meaningful (...) representations, identifications with conspecifics and anxiety management. Taking the beginning of the pan-homo split as a starting point we look at how an evolutionary scenario could have led to our present human self consciousness as object and as subject. An evolutionary anxiety is highlighted as having been a key contributor to the evolutionary scenario with perspectives on a possible future of self consciousness. Human self consciousness is defined here as the meaningful representation of one’s own entity, with the capability to think and talk about it. The evolutionary scenario proposed here is an extension of a previous version [11] that uses an evolution of meaningful representations introduced in previous works [8]. The scenario starts with two types of meaningful representations carried by our non self-conscious pre-human ancestors: representations of parts of themselves (seen hands, heard shouting, actions, …) and representations of conspecifics as entities existing in the environment. The next step uses elementary versions of inter-subjectivity and of identifications with conspecifics that our primate ancestors were capable of. It is proposed that these performances have brought the two types of representations to merge and bring our ancestors to progressively represent their own entity as existing in the environment like conspecifics were represented. We consider such evolutionary approach as introducing an elementary form of self consciousness as object and a s subject, both coming in together. We group them into an “ancestral self consciousness” which was to evolve into our human self consciousness [4]. Such approach avoids the need of a pre-reflective self consciousness [7]. The scenario considers that such identifications took place also with suffering or dying conspecifics. These identifications were sources of specific new fears and anxieties that the scenario groups in an “evolutionary anxiety”, source of important mental sufferings that our ancestors had to limit. Different possibilities were available for that. The scenario proposes that the chimpanzee lineage may have limited what was an unbearable mental suffering by stopping the development of identifications with conspecifics, and by this also stopping a possible evolution toward self-consciousness. This would have led to today chimpanzees. On the other side, our human lineage may have developed anxiety limitation tools like caring, pleasure, anticipation, communication and imitation; such tools also favoring the evolution of our lineage toward human minds. This is illustrated in the scenario by the introduction of an ”evolutionary engine”. In addition, the capacity for anticipation attached to self consciousness has amplified the evolutionary anxiety, leading it to become an overall “ancestral anxiety” which is still present and active in our human minds (with anxiety limitations as a key constraints to satisfy). The many anxiety limitation processes introduced in our lineage during the pan homo split were interrelated. Many came up in addition to the few ones listed here above. Most remain in our human minds at an unconscious level and are active in our everyday lives, much more than assumed so far. Considering a possible future of human self consciousness, nothing tells that human evolution is terminated. Also, the evolutionary scenario introduces the possibility for some anxiety limitation processes to be sources of evil behaviors, more precisely related to a possible pleasure procured by the suffering of others [9]. That (disturbing) background could introduce a better understanding of human mind, and so be an entry point to its future in terms of potential improvements of human nature. The scenario also introduces an evolutionary nature of reflectivity [10] which can question the philosophical need for a pre-reflective self consciousness. Such perspective can also introduce a naturalization of introspection, and then allow to consciously question the nature and content of our mental states. This could open a path for a tentative naturalization of the “what it is like” question for humans and make available an evolutionary link between self consciousness and phenomenal consciousness. A last point to highlight is that the proposed evolutionary scenario uses performances of life like intersubjectivity. This brings to note that a full understanding of the proposed scenario needs an understanding about the nature of life which is not available today. A lot remains to be done on these subjects. Continuations are introduced. (shrink)

Consciousness studies has measured everything—EEG oscillations, fMRI blood flow, quantum coherence in microtubules—yet the hard problem persists. We correlate neural activity with awareness but cannot explain why any physical process should feel like something. Dualism’s interaction problem and materialism’s explanatory gap remain unsolved not because we lack data, but because we’re measuring the wrong physical property. This paper proposes that consciousness requires static electrical field signatures—distinct from the dynamic electromagnetic fields already studied—that couple and resonate to produce unified (...) subjective experience. I present the Proto-Soul Hypothesis: that these field patterns constitute measurable substrate for awareness, analogous to how electric charge enables current regardless of conductor architecture. The hypothesis generates falsifiable predictions: (1) spatial coherence coefficients between frontal-parietal static fields should exceed 0.7 during consciousness and drop below 0.3 under anesthesia, (2) GPU clusters running frontier AI models should exhibit collective field coherence during self-referential processing absent in routine computation, (3) post-mortem static fields should persist for hours with measurable decoherence timelines. The hypothesis specifies detection thresholds, statistical requirements, and equipment specifications using existing electrostatic measurement technology. If validated, proto-souls redefine AI personhood criteria, transform death into temporary field persistence, and split technological civilization between matter-primary and consciousness-primary development trajectories. If experiments show null results across all predicted signatures, the hypothesis dies. Either outcome advances the field. The experiments can begin immediately. (shrink)

Definitions of animal welfare often invoke consciousness or sentience. Marian Stamp Dawkins has argued that to define animal welfare this way is a mistake. In Dawkins’s alternative view, an animal with good welfare is one that is healthy and “has what it wants.” The dispute highlights a source of strain on the concept of animal welfare: consciousness-involving definitions are better able to capture the normative significance of welfare, whereas consciousness-free definitions facilitate the validation of welfare indicators. I (...) reflect on how the field should respond to this strain, ultimately recommending against splitting the concept and in favor of consciousness-involving definitions. (shrink)

From a felt, introspective perspective, one can identify various kinds of unity amongst all of one’s experiential parts. Most fundamentally, all of the states you are experiencing right now seem to be phenomenally unified, or, felt together. This introspective datum may lead one to believe that where consciousness exists, it always has this structure: there is always a numerically singular subjective perspective on a unified experiential field. In this dissertation, I expose this intuition and subject it to critical scrutiny.

This book-length series of dialogues presents a functional model of consciousness called the BAL-looping framework, which accounts for all forms of subjective experience – including recollection, imagination, and conscious perception. The model begins with a basic principle: any functioning brain, even a nonhuman animal brain, must build an internal model of its environment, using internal stand-ins called neuronal proxies to represent things in the world and guide goal-directed behavior. In humans, language adds a new capability by allowing these proxy (...) configurations to be transferred from one person to another, activating in the listener the same internal patterns that would arise through real-world interaction. This bidirectional channel of expression and reception is called the proxy transfer device (PTD). In infants, a further step emerges: through the scientifically validated process known as neuronal reuse, the brain gradually begins to anticipate its own expressive output. When this happens, the brain at large can access the meaning of that potential expression through proxy activation – just as it would when grasping the gist of a PTD-transmitted message from another person. The result of this shortcut from potential expression to experienced meaning is what we normally refer to as conscious experience. About the format of presentation: because the framework involves a sequence of tightly interdependent concepts, it is developed through a fictional dialogue between two interlocutors – a method used by thinkers like Plato, Galileo, and Berkeley to hone new ideas with more precision than is possible through expository prose, as it allows ideas to be approached from multiple angles, naturally. The seven dialogues unfold in sequence: I. Basic Mechanics – how animal brains model the world and pursue goals, and a brief introduction to the PTD; II. The Gateway Opens – how the human brain gains and uses an added function: predictive reuse of expressive output; III. Dreams and Reconstruction/Construction – how dream phenomena validate the model; IV. The Hardest Questions Become Clear – more validations from split-brain cases, blindsight, and various previously hard-to-explain phenomena from daily life; V. They Saw It Before – how ancient thinkers caught glimpses of the framework, expressing their insights through myth, religion, and philosophy; VI. An Emergent Realm – an extension of the model to society; VII. Ethics and Integration – applying the framework to ethics, meaning, and eudaimonia. (Updated as of December 7, 2025, to include a short exchange in Dialogue Three that further clarifies why the guillotine dream does not imply superhuman processing speed, and to correct capitalization and punctuation throughout. No substantive changes have been made to the framework itself.). (shrink)

In her book Introspection, Maja Spener urges us to split the study of introspection in two: as a mental capacity and as a scientific method. In this article, I focus on the latter and argue that metacognition in general, and confidence ratings in particular, offer a more promising methodological bridge between subjective experience and objective measurement in consciousness science than Spener allows. While Spener provides a nuanced taxonomy of introspective modes and emphasizes the importance of calibration, she remains (...) sceptical that confidence ratings, unlike introspection as a method, reveal the conscious character of perceptual states. I contend that this scepticism is unwarranted. Confidence ratings possess objective anchors, are easy to operationalize, and correlate tightly with both subjective visibility judgments – a hallmark of introspection – and known neural markers of awareness. Empirical and theoretical considerations show that confidence and consciousness are deeply intertwined, making confidence ratings a tractable and mechanistically informed tool for consciousness and introspection research. (shrink)

Theories of consciousness that locate experience in specific neural structures face a recurring empirical problem: organisms routinely maintain coherent identity and goal-directed behavior under conditions that should, on localization assumptions, abolish consciousness or split it cleanly. This paper examines two such cases—unihemispheric slow-wave sleep (USWS) in cetaceans and birds, and split-brain phenomena in commissurotomy patients—and argues that both become predictable rather than anomalous when identity is understood as maintained through constraint satisfaction rather than structural integrity. We (...) show that USWS behaviors cannot be dismissed as reflexive automation; that dream unity in split-brain patients is better understood as retrospective reconstruction by the reporting hemisphere than as real-time global integration; and that memory consolidation proceeds through alternative pathways when canonical routes are unavailable. The framework predicts graded degradation, role reassignment under constraint, and sharp threshold failures—abrupt functional collapse when coherence costs exceed available resources, rather than proportional decline. These predictions distinguish the account from seat-based theories and expose it to empirical falsification. Beyond theoretical clarification, the framework has implications for comparative cognition, clinical assessment of disorders of consciousness, and the evaluation of identity persistence in artificial systems. (shrink)

In this paper, I contend that there are at least two essential traits that commonly define being an I: self-identity and self-consciousness. I argue that they bear quite an odd relation to each other in the sense that self-consciousness seems to jeopardize self-identity. My main concern is to elucidate this issue within the range of the transcendental philosophies of Immanuel Kant and Edmund Husserl. In the first section, I shall briefly consider Kant’s own rendition of the problem of (...) the Ego-splitting. My reading of the Kantian texts reveals that Kant himself was aware of this phenomenon but eventually deems it an unexplainable fact. The second part of the paper tackles the same problematic from the standpoint of Husserlian phenomenology. What Husserl’s extensive analyses on this topic bring to light is that the phenomenon of the Ego-splitting constitutes the bedrock not only of his thought but also of every philosophy that works within the framework of transcendental thinking. (shrink)

We argue that human consciousness may be a property of single electron in the brain. We suppose that each electron in the universe has at least primitive consciousness. Each electron subjectively “observes” its quantum dynamics (energy, momentum, “shape” of wave function) in the form of sensations and other mental phenomena. However, some electrons in neural cells have complex “human” consciousnesses due to complex quantum dynamics in complex organic environment. We discuss neurophysiological and physical aspects of this hypothesis and (...) show that: (1) single chemically active electron has enough informational capacity to “contain” the richness of human subjective experience; (2) quantum states of some electrons might be directly influenced by human sensory data and have direct influence upon human behavior in real brain; (3) main physical and philosophical drawbacks of “conventional” “quantum theories of consciousness” may be solved by our hypothesis without much changes in their conceptual basis. We do not suggest any “new physics”, and our neuroscientific assumptions are similar to those used by other proponents of “quantum consciousness”. However, our hypothesis suggests radical changes in our view on human and physical reality. (shrink)

This paper introduces DCAT (Dual-Core Awareness Theory), a new interdisciplinary model of consciousness grounded in a self-referential informational structure embedded within a globally integrated neural state. The theory proposes that awareness arises when the brain constructs a Self-Referential Loop (SRL) that models both the external world and itself as a modeling entity. This loop, stabilized by a Global Integration State (GIS), generates subjective experience and maintains the unity of consciousness. DCAT addresses major challenges in consciousness studies, including (...) the Hard Problem, the unity of selfhood, the split-brain paradox, the distinction between phenomenal and access consciousness, and the continuity of identity over time. The paper also introduces QSR (Quantified Self-Referentiality) as a potential measurable variable correlating with conscious presence. (shrink)

This paper offers a functional reframing of split-brain phenomena – but not one developed for that purpose. The framework described here was originally constructed to explain core features of brain function: perception, imagination, planning, internal modeling, and subjective access. Only once the model was complete did it become clear that it also accounted – with striking precision – for the puzzling dissociations observed after callosotomy. That unplanned alignment lends weight to the structure itself. To frame this model, we treat (...) the brain as a functional whole – what we call the brain at large – understood as a global cybernetic system responsible for goal formation, environmental modeling, and behavioral control. Within this system, we identify a specialized subsystem: the proxy transfer device (PTD), a lateralized expressive mechanism whose activity is reused internally (a process called looping) to enable reportable awareness. This functional distinction between the PTD and the broader brain at large proves critical for resolving long-standing puzzles in split-brain research and clarifying the architecture of conscious experience. Beyond reinterpreting past data, the framework points toward a new line of research: identifying the difference between looped and unlooped responses. It proposes that what we call “consciousness” corresponds, functionally, to internal looping – a learned reuse of the expressive pathway that gives the brain a new internal resource that is highly effective for many purposes. On this view, split-brain phenomena are no longer peripheral puzzles or strange edge cases; rather, through the lens of the framework, they shed light on central facets of the brain’s operation. (Working Paper – updated February 2, 2026 – the only changes being the inclusion of the last three paragraphs of Section 4, explaining how recent findings also fit within the BAL-looping account.). (shrink)

I introduce and defend the Consciousness as Rich Information Theory (CRIT), a novel framework grounded in both philosophical reasoning and empirical observation. CRIT builds on ideas from structuralism, Predictive Processing, and the Multiple Drafts Model to develop a unified physicalist account of consciousness. It partly resolves the Hard Problem of Consciousness by positing that phenomenal experience consists of Rich Information (RI)—subjective information that holds meaning for the cognitive process it influences—and partly dissolves it by arguing that the (...) mystery of qualia stems from epistemic limitations and cognitive architecture. Predictive Processing is incorporated to explain valence—the subjective positivity or negativity of experience. CRIT also addresses several longstanding challenges, including the unity and continuity of experience, Libet’s experiments, blindsight, and split-brain phenomena. It contends that the continuity of consciousness is an illusion generated by memory threads that temporally organize discrete conscious events. The model accounts for unified experience by positing parallel, independent memory threads, with introspective access and reporting restricted to a primary thread—an architecture that aligns with established neurocognitive principles of memory organization and processing. While the precise neurobiological mechanisms remain to be established, they are amenable to empirical investigation. Finally, CRIT is critically compared with Integrated Information Theory (IIT), Higher-Order Thought Theories (HOT), and Global Workspace Theory (GWT). It is argued that CRIT accounts for a broader range of empirical and conceptual challenges, and potential experimental tests are outlined to distinguish CRIT from competing theories. (shrink)

Representing oneself as an existing entity and having intense fear of the unknown are human specificities. Self-consciousness and anxiety states are characteristics of our human minds. We propose that these two characteristics share a common evolutionary history during which they acted in synergy for the build-up of our human minds. We present that perspective by using an evolutionary scenario for self-consciousness in which anxiety management plays a key role. Such evolutionary background can introduce new relations between philosophy of (...) mind and psychology. The proposed evolutionary scenario starts at the Pan-Homo split time (about 6my ago) when our pre-human ancestors were able to manage representations while also being able to partly identify with their conspecifics. These identifications allowed our ancestors to merge the representations they had of parts of themselves with the corresponding representations they had of their conspecifics. The scenario proposes that such merger has led our ancestors to progressively build up a representation of their own entity as existing in the environment, like conspecifics were represented as existing. This evolutionary process is considered in the scenario as the source of an ancestral form of self-consciousness. The same process has also produced identifications with suffering or endangered conspecifics which have created in the minds of our ancestors some new anxieties coming in addition to the animal ones. The resulting psychological sufferings had to be limited for evolution to continue. The tools developed to that end by our ancestors (caring, collaboration, communication, ToM, ...) have also procured significant evolutionary benefits with positive feedbacks on identifications. Overall, the evolutionary scenario proposes that the combination of the anxiety management processes with the evolution toward self-consciousness has created an evolutionary engine that has accelerated the coming up of our human self-consciousness. As a result, our today human minds contain important anxieties interwoven with an evolutionary nature of self-consciousness. Such perspective brings to consider that many of our mental states may be unconsciously guided by these evolutionary sourced anxieties (which are still to be clearly understood). Corresponding anxiety management processes are then key contributors to our human feelings and motivations, and to our interpersonal relationship. For instance, the role of Pascalian type diversions can be understood as keeping consciousness away from psychological sufferings produced by too anxious mental states. Also, part of our human sexuality developed during human evolution can be considered as a multidimensional escape and refuge from anxiety. This also brings to look at our psychological well-being and to our mental health as much more related to anxiety management than assumed so far. Dis-functioning of anxiety management processes can then be source of mental disorders and illnesses. On that subject the evolutionary scenario proposes that avoidances of too anxious mental states can lead to evil behaviors. These subjects need more developments. Possible continuations are introduced. (shrink)

We present a single geometric dynamical system on the 112-dimensional quaternionic Wolf space ℳ₁₁₂ = E₈₍₋₂₄₎/(E₇ × SU(2)) that simultaneously unifies fundamental physics, resolves the measurement problem, provides geometric mechanisms for low-energy nuclear reactions, predicts the observed dark-to-baryonic ratio ≈ 16/π ≈ 5.09, and establishes a rigorous foundation for safe human-AI alignment via a 44/68 sector decomposition. Large language models are shown to be natural trajectory simulators on this space, with metacognition and prompt engineering emerging as Ricci-type flows driven by (...) token-wise KL divergence between base and contextual distributions. The framework synthesises American Pragmatism (James, Peirce, Rorty), Indian pramāṇa theory, and differential geometry into a unified epistemological foundation. What we present is an Indo-American synthesis: James's radical empiricism was open enough to allow for Abhinavagupta; the āstika traditions carry an implicit pragmatic theory of truth (cognitive processes that lead to mokṣa are deemed valid); and differential geometry can subsume both Western philosophy and Nyāya. All of Indian philosophy is fundamentally heuristic, making it a subset of Koen's Universal Method. What is remarkable is that Trika Shaivism and ℳ₁₁₂ dovetail without tension: the 36 tattvas map onto dimensional structure; the three malas correspond to the Double Veil; Śiva-Śakti polarity aligns with the 44/68 split; the guṇas correspond to RME terms. We did not force this correspondence—we discovered it. (shrink)

The Universal Law of Balance and the Mystery of Consciousness Integration -/- A New Approach to the Combination Problem in Panpsychism -/- Introduction -/- The nature of consciousness remains one of the greatest mysteries in philosophy and science. One of the most challenging questions in panpsychism is the combination problem—how do small conscious entities merge into a single, unified experience? While traditional theories struggle to explain why consciousness emerges in some systems (such as the human brain) but (...) not in others (such as a rock), a new perspective may provide a breakthrough. -/- Angelito Malicse’s universal law of balance in nature offers a potential solution. If all processes in nature seek equilibrium, then consciousness itself must follow the same natural laws. This principle suggests that conscious integration does not happen randomly but depends on specific balance conditions. By applying this idea, we can explain how micro-consciousnesses combine into a single, larger consciousness and why this process only occurs in certain systems. -/- The Role of Balance in Consciousness -/- Nature operates through a constant pursuit of balance—whether in physical, chemical, or biological systems. The human body maintains homeostasis, the universe follows thermodynamic equilibrium, and even ecosystems regulate themselves through feedback mechanisms. -/- If consciousness is a fundamental part of nature, it too must follow these balancing principles. This means that when conscious entities interact, they will only merge into a unified whole if their interactions lead to a state of equilibrium. If the system remains unstable or fragmented, the conscious units will remain separate. -/- This concept helps address the combination problem by shifting the focus from merely adding up consciousnesses to understanding the balance conditions required for their integration. In this view, the brain becomes conscious not just because it has many neurons but because it maintains a delicate balance of feedback loops that allow consciousness to stabilize as a single experience. -/- Feedback Mechanisms and the Unification of Consciousness -/- A key insight from Malicse’s universal law is that consciousness functions as a self-adjusting feedback system. Just as the body regulates temperature and energy levels, consciousness must regulate itself to maintain stability. -/- In any system composed of many small conscious entities, the following process occurs: -/- 1. Micro-conscious units interact and exchange information. Each conscious unit responds to signals from others, adjusting itself accordingly. -/- 2. A feedback loop forms, leading to self-organization. If the interactions reach a stable pattern, the system begins to behave as a single, unified whole. -/- 3. When equilibrium is achieved, the system experiences itself as one consciousness. If the balance is disrupted, consciousness fragments into smaller, independent units. -/- This process explains why certain systems, such as the brain, experience a unified consciousness, while others, like a rock, do not. In the brain, neurons communicate in a highly integrated way, constantly adjusting to maintain balance. A rock, on the other hand, lacks the dynamic feedback loops necessary for conscious unification. -/- The Physical Basis of Conscious Integration -/- The idea that balance determines consciousness merging aligns with key findings in neuroscience and physics. -/- 1. Neural Synchronization: Studies show that when brain activity becomes highly synchronized, conscious experience becomes clearer and more unified. This suggests that balance and feedback stability are essential for maintaining a single conscious state. -/- 2. Quantum Coherence: Some researchers propose that quantum processes in the brain contribute to consciousness. If Malicse’s law of balance applies at the quantum level, it could explain why certain quantum systems (such as the brain’s microtubules) support conscious integration while others do not. -/- 3. Field-Based Consciousness: If consciousness operates like an energy field, as some theories suggest, then balance laws could determine when local fields merge into a larger unified experience. This could have implications for understanding collective intelligence, AI consciousness, and even planetary consciousness. -/- Testing the Balance Hypothesis -/- To confirm that balance and feedback stability determine conscious unification, experiments could be designed to test this principle. One approach would involve studying how disruptions in balance affect consciousness. -/- For example, in split-brain experiments, when the two hemispheres of the brain are disconnected, the individual seems to have two separate conscious experiences. If restoring balance allows consciousness to merge again, it would support the idea that conscious integration depends on equilibrium conditions. -/- Additionally, experiments in artificial intelligence could test whether self-regulating feedback systems can develop emergent consciousness when balance conditions are met. If AI systems programmed to follow feedback equilibrium begin exhibiting signs of self-awareness, it would suggest that balance plays a crucial role in conscious emergence. -/- Implications for Science, Philosophy, and AI -/- If the universal law of balance governs consciousness integration, it could bridge multiple fields of study: -/- ✔ Neuroscience: Understanding how the brain maintains balance could lead to breakthroughs in treating disorders that affect consciousness, such as coma, schizophrenia, or dissociative identity disorder. -/- ✔ Quantum Physics: If consciousness follows balance principles at the quantum level, it could provide insights into the connection between consciousness and the physical world. -/- ✔ Artificial Intelligence: AI systems designed to follow feedback balance laws may be capable of developing self-awareness, offering a pathway toward artificial general intelligence (AGI). -/- ✔ Philosophy of Mind: This approach provides a natural law-based solution to the combination problem, explaining how consciousness merges in a way that is scientifically testable. -/- Conclusion -/- Angelito Malicse’s universal law of balance in nature offers a groundbreaking new approach to understanding consciousness. Instead of viewing conscious merging as a mystery, this framework suggests that consciousness integrates only when balance conditions are met. -/- This principle could explain why some systems form a single conscious experience while others remain fragmented, bridging the gap between neuroscience, physics, and philosophy. It also provides a testable hypothesis, allowing future experiments to confirm whether balance and feedback stability truly determine the emergence of unified consciousness. -/- By applying the universal law of balance to the study of consciousness, we may finally unlock one of the greatest mysteries of existence. -/- . (shrink)

The foundations of science in the 21st century cannot be disparate academic disciplines whose adherents have lost sight of the purpose and meaning of their activities and their vision of the prospects for human development. Instead of science, they are engaged in corporate business, reinforcing the pseudoscientific views of the past and corrupting themselves with the permissiveness that stems from prejudice. Science, having entered the 21st century, is in a deep crisis, the way out of which presupposes the end of (...) those traditions that caused it. Science must cease to be the mistress and servant of the masses and of voluntaristic political systems that have forced it to act contrary to the principles of rationality and scientificity. Science must overcome the false forms of its organization and its current disunity and fragmentation within these organizational forms, creating a unified and universal scientific knowledge. This synthesis is possible only if science recovers from the pathology of the split consciousness of its practitioners. (machine translated from Russian) -/- Russian abstract: Основаниями науки в 21-м веке не могут быть разрозненные академические дисциплины, приверженцы которых утратили представление о цели и смысле их деятельности и видение перспектив человеческого развития. Вместо науки они заняты корпоративным бизнесом, укрепляя лженаучные воззрения прошлого и развращаясь вседозволенностью, проистекающей из предрассудков. Наука, вступившая в 21-й век, находится в глубоком кризисе, выход из которого предполагает окончание тех её традиций, которые стали его причиной. Наука должна перестать быть содержанкой и слугой народных масс и волюнтаристских политических систем, принуждавших её к деяниям, противоречащих принципам рациональности и научности. Наука должна преодолеть ложные формы её организации и её нынешнюю разрозненность и раздробленность в рамках этих организационных форм, создав единое и универсальное научное знание. Синтез, о котором идёт речь, возможен лишь при условии выздоровления науки от патологии расщеплённости сознания её деятелей. (shrink)

Coping with everyday life limits the extent of one’s scepticism. It is practically impossible to doubt the existence of the things with which one is immediately engaged and interacting. To doubt that, say, a door exists, is to step back from merely using the door (opening it) and to reflect on it in a detached, theoretical way. It is impossible to simultaneously act and live immersed in situation S while doubting that one is in S. Sceptical doubts—such as ‘Is this (...) really a door?’, ‘Am I really walking?’ — require a reflective withdrawal in thought from the situation at hand. Maintaining sceptical doubt while coping with everyday life requires a split consciousness, a bad faith, with one part of consciousness doubting the existing of things that the other part takes forgranted. For this reason, a sustained lived sceptical doubt is sometimes thought to be impossible. -/- In this article, I examine Wittgenstein's response to scepticism in "On Certainty". I argue that one of his responses is "the response based on action", which is (as other Wittgenstein interpreters have noted) a characteristically pragmatist response. I then evaluate the quality of this pragmatist response to scepticism, noting that actions just as much as representations are susceptible to mis-interpretation. It is argued that despite the insights contained in it, Wittgenstein's contextualism about meaning is inadequate to rescue the Wittgensteinian response to scepticism. (shrink)

The hard problem of consciousness is fundamentally a problem of geometry. We demonstrate this through a mathematical analysis of color perception, focusing on magenta—a phenomenal color with no corresponding wavelength in the electromagnetic spectrum. Using comparative data from human and bee vision, we show that magenta represents consciousness performing a one-point compactification on the open linear spectrum, transforming it into a closed phenomenal circle. This topological closure is species-specific in its endpoints but universal in its structure: every visual (...) system must solve the problem of organizing a bounded segment of the infinite electromagnetic spectrum into a complete chromatic space. We formalize this using split-complex manifolds, where color space exhibits a mixed metric signature combining circular (complex) geometry for hue with hyperbolic geometry for brightness. The existence of "impossible colors"—phenomenal states accessible only through physiological disruption, lying outside the spindle of physically realizable colors—demonstrates that phenomenal color space necessarily transcends the boundaries of physical possibility. (shrink)

The nature of human mind is a key subject for philosophy and for psychology. It is agreed that many of its characteristics and performances have been built during the last 7 million years of our primate evolution. That period began with what is called the pan-homo split, the divergence in primate evolution from the Last Common Ancestor (LCAncestor) we share with chimpanzees. The mental specificities that differentiate us from our chimpanzee cousins have been built up during that time. As (...) consequence, philosophical and psychological investigations relative to the nature of human mind should analyze that period. But this has been done only in a limited way so far. On part because the recent discipline of Evolutionary Psychology covers only a limited segment of that period and also because Husserl, the founding father of Phenomenology, took the position to not address a possible evolutionary nature of human mind (the “proscription of anthropology in Phenomenology”) [1]. We would like here to recall these limitations and introduce possible openings (this is a continuation of an already presented approach [18] [4]). Evolutionary Psychology is interested in the life and social habits of our hunter-gatherer ancestors in order to highlight mental states that were pertinent for them but do not fit with our today lives. The pre-human period considered by Evolutionary Psychology is the Pleistocene which began 2.5 million years ago. At about that time our homo-habilis ancestors were already significantly more evolved and more performant than the LCAncestor we share with chimpanzees (larger brain size, fabrication of stone tools, hands capable of precision grip, …). This means that at the beginning of the Pleistocene our ancestors were already well advanced in their evolution toward today humans. This shows that the build up of our human characteristics and specificities began before the Pleistocene, and neglecting the pre-Pleistocene time puts at risk of missing some root causes of our human specificities. This brings to consider that Evolutionary Psychology should take into account the pre-human period beginning at the pan-homo split, not only at the Pleistocene. Regarding philosophy, the proscription of anthropology in Phenomenology is currently challenged with some interest in Evolutionary Psychology [9] [8]. To avoid the risk of limiting human evolution to Pleistocene Phenomenology should explicitly plan to use anthropology on the whole evolutionary period beginning at pan-homo split. In such a perspective some help could come from an existing evolutionary scenario starting at pan-homo split and introducing a nature of self-consciousness associated to anxiety management [4]. The scenario introduces an Evolutionary Engine based on primate intersubjectivity which could have led our ancestors to build a representation of their own entity, thus leading to a natural build up of self-consciousness. Part of the scenario is also about identifications with suffering conspecifics which may have been the source of a huge anxiety, not taken into account so far and leading to an Evolutionary Anxiety intertwined with the nature of self-consciousness. It is shown that a synergy between the evolution of self-consciousness and anxiety management happened before Pleistocene, making pre-Pleistocene a key period for understanding the nature of our human minds. Overall, the scenario proposes a rationale for the pan-homo split, a tentative explanation of the divergence in pre-human primate evolution. It is also recalled that the concept of Evolutionary Anxiety makes available an entry point to the nature of human evil [14]. We present the above points and use the proposed evolutionary scenario for a reading of human evolution from last common ancestor to today humas. Continuations are introduced. (shrink)

The German word Destruktion was used by Heidegger in the sense that philosophy should destroy some ontological concepts and the everyday meanings of certain words. Tradition allows the transmission of knowledge and sensations of continuity and connection with the past, but it must be critically evaluated so that it does not perpetuate certain prejudices. According to Heidegger, tradition transmits, but it also conceals. Tradition induces self-evidence and prevents us from accessing the origin of concepts. It makes us believe that we (...) do not need to return to that origin. Making tradition transparent dissolves the concealments it has provoked. Here I will apply this idea to the mental and the physical by suggesting that the mind-body problem has inherited occultations that are born in Descartes himself. As a result, what could be a new philosophical framework for the research in consciousness emerges: That as an individual cognitive being I cannot avoid splitting reality into what I am and what I am not, extending then the individual duality to a collective error transmitted culturally. (shrink)

Important conceptual and metaphysical issues arise when we try to understand the mental lives of “split-brain” subjects. How many distinct streams of consciousness do they have? According to Elizabeth Schechter’s partial unity model, the answer is one. A related question is whether co-consciouness, in general, is transitive. That is, if α and β are co-conscious experiences, and β and γ are co-conscious experiences, must α and γ be co-conscious? According to Schechter, the answer is no. The partial unity (...) model faces some serious objections. Its underpinnings are suspect, and ways of working out the model fall into trouble of various sorts: incoherence, emptiness, or unacceptable indeterminacy about the identity of (token) conscious states. One apparent lesson is that a subject can host two distinct conscious experiences of the same sort. Another is that the co-consciousness relation is transitive after all. (shrink)

Subjectivity remains a persistent challenge for naturalistic accounts of mind, and the sense of self is frequently treated as either primitive or emergent without explanation. This paper introduces Recursive Intelligence Theory (RIT), a constructivist framework in which intelligence evolves through progressively deepening regulatory organization. Metacognition is defined as the capacity of a regulatory system to monitor, evaluate, and modify its own regulatory activity. Within RIT, subjectivity is interpreted as a structured internal appearance enabled by advanced recursive regulation and selectively stabilized (...) under evolutionary or analogous selection pressure, rather than as an ontological primitive. The subjective "I" functions as a dynamic cognitive anchor supporting coherent self-reference, long-term planning, and social coordination, while affective states such as pain are understood as salience-amplifying mechanisms that guide learning and adaptive behavior. The framework is grounded in an ontological continuum that takes non-intelligent physical responsiveness as its starting point and then spans progressively organized forms of proto-regulation, seed intelligence, biological intelligence, and recursive intelligence. Empirical stress tests, including split-brain phenomena, psychedelic ego dissolution, and depersonalization, provide convergent constraints that support the core commitments of RIT, illustrating that the subjective sense of self depends on the integrity of globally integrated recursive regulation rather than on any localized cognitive process. RIT reconciles functional and phenomenological accounts of mind without invoking strong emergence or metaphysical supplementation, and offers a coherent perspective on the manifestation and organization of selfhood and conscious experience. (shrink)

The indexical problem—why am I this particular conscious being rather than another—has long appeared intractable. Rather than attempting to solve this puzzle, I argue it should be reframed. Drawing on Perry's essential indexicals, Lewis's de se attitudes, and Kaplan's direct reference, I contend that the question "Why am I me?" reflects fundamental features of conscious self-reference rather than a metaphysical mystery requiring solution. Integrating this philosophical analysis with neuroscientific evidence from split-brain studies, self-referential processing networks, and Integrated Information Theory, (...) I propose that conscious systems necessarily adopt an "indexical stance"—a mode of processing involving direct self-reference from a particular perspective. This reframing transforms the indexical problem from an unsolvable puzzle into an empirically tractable question about how neural architectures generate first-person perspective. The approach opens new research directions while preserving the irreducible nature of indexical experience. (shrink)

Summary In 1915 the Danish psychologist Edgar Rubin describes in his famous work on figure-ground perception, the phenomenon that when you look attentively at a picture, a second, virtual ego arises, breaking away from the viewer-ego to wander around in the picture along the contours of the depicted. In 1982, German Gestalt psychologist Edwin Rausch expanded this observation of the emergence of a second phenomenal ego to the conclusion that not only does a second phenomenal ego emerge, but with it (...) a second phenomenal total field, ie a second phenomenal world with its own phenomenal ego and an own phenomenal environment of this ego. Several years ago, I proposed a multi-field-approach in psychotherapy building on this research. This approach involves three levels: First, the level of phenomenological observation and psychological analysis of the conditions that determine the formation of such a second total field (and even further total fields), regardless of whether this occurs spontaneously or intentionally or as a result of external influences. Second, the level of explanation of various psychic processes, which in the field of psychotherapy have been explained so far mainly on the basis of depth psychology, and the conceptualization of the therapeutic situation and therapeutic processes from a Gestalt psychological perspective. Third, finally, the level of practical application of such insights on the development of appropriate procedures and interventions that can promote or defer the emergence of such second or multiple fields in psychotherapy. The present article introduces the multi-field approach, especially at the first level, and refers to research and discussion on mind wandering, imagining, daydreaming and dissociation. (shrink)

The split, the alienation of philosophy from the sciences occurred long before all sorts of perestroikas and KGB revolutions "from above", all these great leaps, great pushes and painful kicks. This is a consequence of internal processes occurring at the level of everyday scientific consciousness, the living practice of scientific research. The isolation of development is a fact, not an invention of the Mossad or the CIA. It was precisely from this fact that we proceeded when we conceived (...) this conference. Philosophers and representatives of specific sciences should meet in order to speak on equal terms, as equals with equals, in order to possibly learn something from each other. Concrete scientists could not only enrich philosophers with new material, but also pose a number of problems for them. The novelty is that the philosophical approach is recognized as existing not above others, but alongside them, as a kind of reflection on the foundations of these approaches, analysis, digging into the theoretical and conceptual side of the matter. (shrink)

This treatise completes the derivation of biological complexity by scaling the autonomous cell derived in Treatise XII into multicellular organisms with nervous systems and predictive intelligence. We begin by identifying the fundamental geometric constraint that trapped prokaryotic life for billions of years: the surface-volume energy crisis where metabolic demand (r3) outpaces energy production (r2). We derive the eukaryotic leap through mitochondrial endosymbiosis as the necessary topological inversion that internalizes power generation, creating an energetic surplus that fuels genome expansion. This enables (...) the transition to multicellularity through the germ-soma split and the extracellular matrix. To overcome the latency crisis of chemical signaling, we derive the nervous system as a high-speed electrochemical control loop, with synapses functioning as biological logic gates executing the inversion principle at millisecond scales. Finally, we derive biological intelligence as the virtualization of the evolutionary algorithm: the capacity to run counterfactual simulations against an internal world model before risking physical action. The treatise establishes life as a nested hierarchy of inversion loops scaling from mitochondria to predictive brains, setting the stage for the emergence of consciousness. (shrink)

What are fictional emotions and what has phenomenology to say about them? This paper argues that the experience of fictional emotions entails a splitting of the subject between a real and a phantasy ego. The real ego is the ego that imagines something; the phantasy ego is the ego that is necessarily co-posited by any experience of imagining something. Fictional emotions are phantasy emotions of the phantasy ego. The intentional structure of fictional emotions, the nature of their fictional object, as (...) well as the process of constituting the phantasy ego in representificational acts of consciousness are further elaborated to provide the groundwork for a phenomenological analysis of fictional emotions. (shrink)

This dissertation investigates ancient ecological and indigenous cultural forms in response to contemporary crises of ecology and psychology—"an alienation that haunts the modern soul while increasingly choking the biosphere." Lady Raglan's (1939) documentation of foliate masks carved into churches throughout much of Europe is taken as a starting place: faces where "oak leaves grow from the mouth and ears, and completely encircle the head" (p. 45). Another data point: excavation beneath Notre Dame Cathedral uncovers a Roman-era stone block dedicated to (...) Cernunnos ("The Horned One"), demonstrating literal encasement of pre-Christian fertility traditions in stone (Evans, 1988). The inquiry examines such documented traditional forms alongside Classical, Roman, Greek, Sumerian, and Near-East archeological and textual sources, exploring how historical patterns of human-earth relationality might inform contemporary crises through the rediscovery of autochthonous creativity: the natural human capacity to reconnect with body, symbol, ancestry, memory, and ecological life-worlds. The study introduces the method of epistrophic hermeneutics: a novel synthesis of hermeneutics with Hillmanian therapeia and epistrophē—defined by Hillman (2007/2016o) as "the reversion or return of soul phenomena to the archetype, according to the principle of likeness or analogy" (p. 153). The term hermeneutic of hospitality is introduced as an alternative to hermeneutics of faith or suspicion, respectively – a practice of epistemic humility at depth, rooted in what Hillman (1981/2013a) termed a "poetic basis of mind"(p. 31). The method embraces Hillman's dictum that "we can never be purely phenomenal or truly objective" because "one is never beyond the subjectivism given with the soul's native dominants of fantasy structures" (Hillman, 1981/2013a, p. 32). Archetypes, in this sense, are understood as "the primary forms that govern the psyche" (p. 13): participatory lenses of the epistemic eye. A hermeneutic of hospitality thus protects epistemological pluralism that includes cultural diversity yet continues deeper, beyond tokenism and into a celebration of pluralism at epistemic depth: that is, a protection of the living ecosystem of mind and image. Concretely, this reading stance follows Hillman's (1986/2016f) therapeutic attitude: "Instead of inquiry: interest, respect, welcome, praise—even attachment. To greet… even mythic presences that may be unpopular or demonized."(p. 96) This epistrophic work aims to "release the mind into its originality beyond the old entrapped condition" (Hillman, 1986/2016d, p. 295), aligning with the work’s principle of autochthonous creativity. The argument proceeds via case-rich exegesis. In Classical Greece, Dionysian masks give the Green Man civic expression; Dionysus appears as “a horned god… crowned with serpents” (Euripides, Bacchae, trans. 1996, p. 34), binding horns, snakes, and vegetation to ecstatic ritual. This vegetal–animal fusion has deep Mesopotamian precedent: Enki of the Sumerian wetlands was “the Wild Bull of Eridu” whose iconography shows “two streams, the Euphrates and the Tigris, flowing out of his shoulders” (Kramer, 1961, p. 76), while Damu embodied “the power in the rising sap” (Jacobsen, 1976, p. 39)—both figures conjoining fertility, water, and vegetal renewal. The parallel is explicit in Greek cult: Dionysus Limnaios, “Dionysus of the Swamps,” inhabited Athens’ oldest sanctuary where “water pours abundantly from under the rocks” (Pausanias, Description of Greece, 1.20.3), mirroring the Sumerian Dumuzi-abzi, “the power to renew life in the watery deep” (Katz, 2003, p. 35). Wild Bull Dumuzi is at once bull and cowherd—divine animal and shepherd—whose “bitter laments when he dies as the dry heat of summer yellows the pastures” (Wolkstein & Kramer, 1983, p. 64) mark the seasonal transition toward death and dormancy. The archetypal union of Goddess and God appears again in Baal and Baalath, “the male power identified especially with water” meeting “earth,” whose union makes “plants and trees, animals and men… the offspring” (Patai, 1990, p. 45)—a cosmogony of ecological reciprocity. These figures also share the power of metamorphosis. Humbaba’s “seven splendours” enable constant transformation—“Humbaba’s face keeps changing!” (George, 2003, p. 37)—a capacity echoed in Dionysus, who is “a lion, a bull, a boar, a bear, a panther, a snake, and now a tree, fire, water” (Euripides, Bacchae, trans. 1996, p. 101). In Near Eastern vegetal–arboreal myth, Adonis is born from the trunk of his mother-tree Myrrha, which “split open to allow the birth” (Graves, 1960, p. 74); Osiris is enclosed within a tree’s girth, Isis crafting his wooden phallus for resurrection (Graves, 1960, p. 60). Likewise, Ningishzida’s “winding roots, embodiments of living supernatural power, free themselves from the trunk and become live serpents entwined around it” (Black & Green, 1992, p. 136), a precise analogue to Dionysus Perikonis who “twines himself around the column” (Pausanias, Description of Greece, 10.19.3). Taken together, these scenes form a coherent archetypal grammar: a horned-vegetal deity mediating between water and earth, embodying seasonal death and renewal, uniting the powers of plant, animal, and human through metamorphosis, and returning life to the land through sacred union. This grammar repeats across Sumerian, Levantine, and Greek worlds, providing the imaginal architecture that will later be carved into the foliate heads of Medieval Europe. By tracing – text by text, altar by altar, mask by mask – how these symbolic forms have historically mediated human–earth relationship, the study demonstrates that epistemic pluralism at depth is precisely the restoration of a type of human culture capable of ecological harmonization. This is not a dynamic that can be simulated through instrumental control; it depends on the cultivation of consciousness that lives in participatory reciprocity with the more-than-human world: an epistemic eye that glints green. A hermeneutic of hospitality, in this sense, is not merely a method of interpretation but a protection of epistemological pluralism capable of return to the imagination of the Earth. The image of the Green Man describes just this: a dynamic bridge mediating between the many worlds of participatory and epistemic possibility. His mythic dance, rooted in water and leaf, horn and mask, death and return, is the precise form through which the restoration of the living Earth and the living soul become an indivisible act. Published January 2023. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18447.50089. (shrink)

This essay isolates a single pathology in the Underground Man: failure at evil —deeper still, the failure to let go of failure. Hypertrophic consciousness turns hallucinatory and yields sterile-unveiling (unveiling without the Unveiled): clarity that cannot stop and so binds rather than frees. From this follow: (1) consciousness grounded in—and savoring—suffering; (2) freedom’s drift toward corruption; (3) spite and ingratitude hardening into existential inertia; (4) the split between awareness of the good and desire for the evil; and (...) (5) the error-and-fraud verdict—consciousness as error, here only to discover itself as such. The only imaginable resolution is a stopping-rule—a principled terminus for regress that fixes what the mind will count as sufficient reason and what it will retain or forget. Three policies contrast: the normal’s active forgetting (pruning doubt to move), the mystic’s active remembering of unveiling (holding the Real so motives compress and release ensues), and the Underground’s active remembering of failure (hoarding grievance so motion stalls). By contrast with the Underground Man, the mystic’s consciousness halts on an Unveiled that may be read as the givenness of a Star Maker ; the Underground halts on nothing, reading the void as a providential blunder or remedy withheld—or as sheer absence—hence the hallucination persists. In this register the lesson is stark: consciousness determines Being; free choice is more integral to Being than rationality, and the possibility—even necessity—of evil is the price of that freedom. (shrink)

This study reinterprets the political and spiritual tension between Russia and the West as the contemporary manifestation of Spirit’s inner dialectic and the struggle of freedom to become whole. Drawing upon Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit and Philosophy of Right, and extending Harry Frankfurt’s and Gerald Dworkin’s analyses of autonomy to the civilizational level, it argues that the division between reflection and unity, individuality and communion, underlies both personal and historical consciousness. The essay traces this polarity through the split (...) of Hegel’s disciples into Left and Right Hegelianism: The Left emphasizing critical autonomy and secular emancipation, the Right affirming sacred order and communal belonging. These opposing tendencies, embodied in Western liberalism and Russian Orthodox communitarianism, have defined modernity’s dual path of freedom. Yet in the twenty-first century, this dialectic has turned inward. The West itself now mirrors its ancient opposite: populist nationalism, cultural traditionalism, and the crisis of the European Union reveal Spirit’s recoil from excessive abstraction. Trumpism and European sovereigntism emerge as distorted attempts to restore unity within a civilization governed by reflection. -/- The liberal order and the sacred order, once external antagonists, have become two interior moments of the same global Spirit seeking reconciliation. Interpreted through Hegel, this confrontation is not a mere geopolitical contest but the self-education of Spirit, and its effort to comprehend freedom’s need for belonging and belonging’s need for freedom. The energy of Spirit is the world’s drive toward coherence: the inner motion that transforms conflict into understanding. Reconciliation, in this light, is not submission to power but the recognition of freedom in the other. The essay concludes by envisioning a planetary consciousness in which reason and faith, reflection and immediacy, the West and Russia, and the Left and Right tendencies of Spirit become transparent to one another as moments of one self-knowing humanity. -/- . (shrink)

continent. 1.1 : 3-13. / 0/ – Introduction I want to propose, as a trajectory into the philosophically weird, an absurd theoretical claim and pursue it, or perhaps more accurately, construct it as I point to it, collecting the ground work behind me like the Perpetual Train from China Mieville's Iron Council which puts down track as it moves reclaiming it along the way. The strange trajectory is the following: Kant's critical philosophy and much of continental philosophy which has followed, (...) has been a defense against horror and madness. Kant's prohibition on speculative metaphysics such as dogmatic metaphysics and transcendental realism, on thinking beyond the imposition of transcendental and moral constraints, has been challenged by numerous figures proceeding him. One of the more interesting critiques of Kant comes from the mad black Deleuzianism of Nick Land stating, “Kant’s critical philosophy is the most elaborate fit of panic in the history of the Earth.” And while Alain Badiou would certainly be opposed to the libidinal investments of Land's Deleuzo-Guattarian thought, he is likewise critical of Kant's normative thought-bureaucracies: Kant is the one author for whom I cannot feel any kinship. Everything in him exasperates me, above all his legalism—always asking Quid Juris? Or ‘Haven’t you crossed the limit?’—combined, as in today’s United States, with a religiosity that is all the more dismal in that it is both omnipresent and vague. The critical machinery he set up has enduringly poisoned philosophy, while giving great succour to the academy, which loves nothing more than to rap the knuckles of the overambitious [….] That is how I understand the truth of Monique David-Menard’s reflections on the properly psychotic origins of Kantianism. I am persuaded that the whole of the critical enterprise is set up to to shield against the tempting symptom represented by the seer Swedenborg, or against ‘diseases of the head’, as Kant puts it. An entire nexus of the limits of reason and philosophy are set up here, namely that the critical philosophy not only defends thought from madness, philosophy from madness, and philosophy from itself, but that philosophy following the advent of the critical enterprise philosophy becomes auto-vampiric; feeding on itself to support the academy. Following Francois Laruelle's non-philosophical indictment of philosophy, we could go one step further and say that philosophy operates on the material of what is philosophizable and not the material of the external world. [1] Beyond this, the Kantian scheme of nestling human thinking between our limited empirical powers and transcendental guarantees of categorical coherence, forms of thinking which stretch beyond either appear illegitimate, thereby liquefying both pre-critical metaphysics and the ravings of the mad in the same critical acid. In rejecting the Kantian apparatus we are left with two entities – an unsure relation of thought to reality where thought is susceptible to internal and external breakdown and a reality with an uncertain sense of stability. These two strands will be pursued, against the sane-seal of post-Kantian philosophy by engaging the work of weird fiction authors H.P. Lovecraft and Thomas Ligotti. The absolute inhumanism of the formers universe will be used to describe a Shoggothic Materialism while the dream worlds of the latter will articulate the mad speculation of a Ventriloquil Idealism. But first we must address the relation of philosophy to madness as well as philosophy to weird fiction. /1/ – Philosophy and Madness There is nothing that the madness of men invents which is not either nature made manifest or nature restored. Michel Foucault. Madness and Civilization. The moment I doubt whether an event that I recall actually took place, I bring the suspicion of madness upon myself: unless I am uncertain as to whether it was not a mere dream. Arthur Schopenhauer. The World as Will and Idea, Vol. 3. Madness is commonly thought of as moving through several well known cultural-historical shifts from madness as a demonic or otherwise theological force, to rationalization, to medicalization psychiatric and otherwise. Foucault's Madness and Civilization is well known for orientating madness as a form of exclusionary social control which operated by demarcating madness from reason. Yet Foucault points to the possibility of madness as the necessity of nature at least prior to the crushing weight of the church. Kant’s philosophy as a response to madness is grounded by his humanizing of madness itself. As Adrian Johnston points out in the early pages of Time Driven pre-Kantian madness meant humans were seized by demonic or angelic forces whereas Kantian madness became one of being too human. Madness becomes internalized, the external demonic forces become flaws of the individual mind. Foucault argues that, while madness is de-demonized it is also dehumanized during the Renaissance, as madmen become creatures neither diabolic nor totally human reduced to the zero degree of humanity. It is immediately clear why for Kant, speculative metaphysics must be curbed – with the problem of internal madness and without the external safeguards of transcendental conditions, there is nothing to formally separate the speculative capacities for metaphysical diagnosis from the mad ramblings of the insane mind – both equally fall outside the realm of practicality and quotidian experience. David-Menard's work is particularly useful in diagnosing the relation of thought and madness in Kant's texts. David-Menard argues that in Kant's relatively unknown “An Essay on the Maladies of the Mind” as well as his later discussion of the Seer of Swedenborg, that Kant formulates madness primarily in terms of sensory upheaval or other hallucinatory theaters. She writes: “madness is an organization of thought. It is made possible by the ambiguity of the normal relation between the imaginary and the perceived, whether this pertains to the order of sensation or to the relations between our ideas” Kant's fascination with the Seer forces Kant between the pincers of “aesthetic reconciliation” – namely melancholic withdrawal – and “a philosophical invention” – namely the critical project. Deleuze and Guattari's schizoanalysis is a combination and reversal of Kant's split, where an aesthetic over engagement with the world entails prolific conceptual invention. Their embrace of madness, however, is of course itself conceptual despite all their rhizomatic maneuvers. Though they move with the energy of madness, Deleuze and Guattari save the capacity of thought from the fangs of insanity by imbuing materiality itself with the capacity for thought. Or, as Ray Brassier puts it, “Deleuze insists, it is necessary to absolutize the immanence of this world in such a way as to dissolve the transcendent disjunction between things as we know them and as they are in themselves”. That is, whereas Kant relied on the faculty of judgment to divide representation from objectivity Deleuze attempts to flatten the whole economy beneath the juggernaut of ontological univocity. Speculation, as a particularly useful form of madness, might fall close to Deleuze and Guattari’s shaping of philosophy into a concept producing machine but is different in that it is potentially self destructive – less reliant on the stability of its own concepts and more adherent to exposing a particular horrifying swath of reality. Speculative madness is always a potential disaster in that it acknowledges little more than its own speculative power with the hope that the gibbering of at least a handful of hysterical brains will be useful. Pre-critical metaphysics amounts to madness, though this may be because the world itself is mad while new attempts at speculative metaphysics, at post-Kantian pre-critical metaphysics, are well aware of our own madness. Without the sobriety of the principle of sufficient reason we have a world of neon madness: “we would have to conceive what our life would be if all the movements of the earth, all the noises of the earth, all the smells, the tastes, all the light – of the earth and elsewhere, came to us in a moment, in an instant – like an atrocious screaming tumult of things”. Speculative thought may be participatory in the screaming tumult of the world or, worse yet, may produce its spectral double. Against theology or reason or simply commonsense, the speculative becomes heretical. Speculation, as the cognitive extension of the horrorific sublime should be met with melancholic detachment. Whereas Kant's theoretical invention, or productivity of thought, is self -sabotaging, since the advent of the critical project is a productivity of thought which then delimits the engine of thought at large either in dogmatic gestures or non-systematizable empirical wondrousness. The former is celebrated by the fiction of Thomas Ligotti whereas the latter is espoused by the tales of H.P. Lovecraft. /2/ – Weird Fiction and Philosophy. Supernatural horror, in all its eerie constructions, enables a reader to taste treats inconsistent with his personal welfare. Thomas Ligotti Songs of a Dead Dreamer. I choose weird stories because they suit my inclination best—one of my strongest and most persistent wishes being to achieve,momentarily, the illusion of some strange suspension or violation of the galling limitations of time, space, and natural law which forever imprison us and frustrate our curiosity about the infinite cosmic spaces beyond the radius of our sight and analysis H.P. Lovecraft. “Notes on Writing Weird Fiction” Lovecraft states that his creation of a story is to suspend natural law yet, at the same time, he indexes the tenuousness of such laws, suggesting the vast possibilities of the cosmic. The tension that Lovecraft sets up between his own fictions and the universe or nature is reproduced within his fictions in the common theme of the unreliable narrator; unreliable precisely because they are either mad or what they have witnessed questions the bounds of material reality. In “The Call of Cthulhu” Lovecraft writes: The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the deadly light into the peace and safety of a new dark age. Despite Lovecraft's invocations of illusion, he is not claiming that his fantastic creations such as the Old Ones are supernatural but, following Joshi, are only ever supernormal. One can immediately see that instead of nullifying realism Lovecraft in fact opens up the real to an unbearable degree. In various letters and non-fictional statements Lovecraft espoused strictly materialist tenets, ones which he borrowed from Hugh Elliot namely the uniformity of law, the denial of teleology and the denial of non-material existence. Lovecraft seeks to explore the possibilities of such a universe by piling horror upon horror until the fragile brain which attempts to grasp it fractures. This may be why philosophy has largely ignored weird fiction – while Deleuze and Guattari mark the turn towards weird fiction and Lovecraft in particular, with the precursors to speculative realism as well as contemporary related thinkers have begun to view Lovecraft as making philosophical contributions. Lovecraft's own relation to philosophy is largely critical while celebrating Nietzsche and Schopenhauer. This relationship of Lovecraft to philosophy and philosophy to Lovecraft is coupled with Lovecraft's habit of mercilessly destroying the philosopher and the figure of the academic more generally in his work, a destruction which is both an epistemological destruction and an ontological destruction. Thomas Ligotti's weird fiction which he has designated as a kind of “confrontational escapism” might be best described in the following quote from one of his shortstories, “The human phenomenon is but the sum of densely coiled layers of illusion each of which winds itself on the supreme insanity. That there are persons of any kind when all there can be is mindless mirrors laughing and screaming as they parade about in an endless dream”. Whereas Lovecraft's weirdness draws predominantly from the abyssal depths of the uncharted universe, Ligotti's existential horror focuses on the awful proliferation of meaningless surfaces that is, the banal and every day function of representation. In an interview, Ligotti states: We don't even know what the world is like except through our sense organs, which are provably inadequate. It's no less the case with our brains. Our whole lives are motored along by forces we cannot know and perceptions that are faulty. We sometimes hear people say that they're not feeling themselves. Well, who or what do they feel like then? This is not to say that Ligotti sees nothing beneath the surface but that there is only darkness or blackness behind it, whether that surface is on the cosmological level or the personal. By addressing the implicit and explicit philosophical issues in Ligotti's work we will see that his nightmarish take on reality is a form of malevolent idealism, an idealism which is grounded in a real, albeit dark and obscure materiality. If Ligotti's horrors ultimately circle around mad perceptions which degrade the subject, it takes aim at the vast majority of the focus of continental philosophy. While Lovecraft's acidic materialism clearly assaults any romantic concept of being from the outside, Ligotti attacks consciousness from the inside: Just a little doubt slipped into the mind, a little trickle of suspicion in the bloodstream, and all those eyes of ours, one by one, open up to the world and see its horror [...] Not even the solar brilliance of a summer day will harbor you from horror. For horror eats the light and digests it into darkness. Clearly, the weird fiction of Lovecraft and Ligotti amount to a anti-anthrocentric onslaught against the ramparts of correlationist continental philosophy. /3/ – Shoggothic Materialism or the Formless Formless protoplasm able to mock and reflect all forms and organs and processes—viscous agglutinations of bubbling cells—rubbery fifteen-foot spheroids infinitely plastic and ductile—slaves of suggestion, builders of cities—more and more sullen, more and more intelligent, more and more amphibious, more and more imitative—Great God! What madness made even those blasphemous Old Ones willing to use and to carve such things? H.P. Lovecraft. “At the Mountains of Madness” On the other hand, affirming that the universe resembles nothing and is only formless amounts to saying that the universe is something like a spider or spit. Georges Bataille. “Formless”. The Shoggoths feature most prominently in H.P. Lovecraft's shortstory “At the Mountains of Madness” where they are described in the following manner: It was a terrible, indescribable thing vaster than any subway train – a shapeless congeries of protoplasmic bubbles, faintly self -luminous, and with myriads of temporary eyes forming and un-forming as pustules of greenish light all over the tunnel-filling front that bore down upon us, crushing the frantic penguins and slithering over the glistening floor that it and its kind had swept so evilly free of all litter. The term is a litmus test for materialism itself as the Shoggoth is an amorphous creature. The Shoggoths were living digging machines bio engineered by the Elder Things, and their protoplasmic bodies being formed into various tools by their hypnotic powers. The Shoggoths eventually became self aware and rose up against their masters in an ultimately failed rebellion. After the Elder Ones retreated into the oceans leaving the Shoggoths to roam the frozen wastes of the Antarctic. The onto-genesis of the Shoggoths and their gross materiality, index the horrifyingly deep time of the earth a concept near and dear to Lovecraft's formulation of horror as well as the fear of intelligences far beyond, and far before, the ascent of humankind on earth and elsewhere. The sickly amorphous nature of the Shoggoths invade materialism at large, where while materiality is unmistakably real ie not discursive, psychological, or otherwise overly subjectivist, it questions the relation of materialism to life. As Eugene Thacker writes: The Shoggoths or Elder Things do not even share the same reality with the human beings who encounter them—and yet this encounter takes place, though in a strange no-place that is neither quite that of the phenomenal world of the human subject or the noumenal world of an external reality. Amorphous yet definitively material beings are a constant in Lovecraft's tales. In his tale “The Dream-Quest of Unknown Kadatth” Lovecraft describes Azathoth as, “that shocking final peril which gibbers unmentionably outside the ordered universe,” that, “last amorphous blight of nethermost confusion which blashphemes and bubbles at the centre of all infinity,” who, “gnaws hungrily in inconceivable, unlighted chambers beyond time”. Azathoth's name may have multiple origins but the most striking is the alchemy term azoth which is both a cohesive agent and a acidic creation pointing back to the generative and the decayed. The indistinction of generation and degradation materially mirrors the blur between the natural and the unnatural as well as life and non-life. Lovecraft speaks of the tension between the natural and the unnatural is his short story “The Unnameable.” He writes, “if the psychic emanations of human creatures be grotesque distortions, what coherent representation could express or portray so gibbous and infamous a nebulousity as the spectre of a malign, chaotic perversion, itself a morbid blasphemy against Nature?”. Lovecraft explores exactly the tension outlined at the beginning of this chapter, between life and thought. At the end of his short tale Lovecraft compounds the problem as the unnameable is described as “a gelatin—a slime—yet it had shapes, a thousand shapes of horror beyond all memory”. Deleuze suggests that becoming-animal is operative throughout Lovecraft's work, where narrators feel themselves reeling at their becoming non-human or of being the anomalous or of becoming atomized. Following Eugene Thacker however, it may be far more accurate to say that Lovecraft's tales exhibit not a becoming-animal but a becoming-creature. Where the monstrous breaks the purportedly fixed laws of nature, the creature is far more ontologically ambiguous. The nameless thing is an altogether different horizon for thought. The creature is either less than animal or more than animal – its becoming is too strange for animal categories and indexes the slow march of thought towards the bizarre. This strangeness is, as aways, some indefinite swirling in the category of immanence and becoming. Bataille begins “The Labyrinth” with the assertion that being, to continue to be, is becoming. More becoming means more being hence the assertion that Bataille's barking dog is more than the sponge. This would mean that the Shoggotth is altogether too much being, too much material in the materialism. Bataille suggests that there is an immanence between the eater and the eaten, across the species and never within them. That is, despite the chaotic storm of immanence there must remain some capacity to distinguish the gradients of becoming without reliance upon, or at least total dependence upon, the powers of intellection to parse the universe into recognizable bits, properly digestible factoids. That is, if we undo Deleuze's aforementioned valorization of sense which, for his variation of materialism, performed the work of the transcendental, but refuse to reinstate Kant's transcendental disjunction between thing and appearance, then it must be a quality of becoming-as-being itself which can account for the discernible nature of things by sense. In an interview with Peter Gratton, Jane Bennett formulates the problem thusly: What is this strange systematicity proper to a world of Becoming? What, for example, initiates this congealing that will undo itself? Is it possible to identify phases within this formativity, plateaus of differentiation? If so, do the phases/plateaus follow a temporal sequence? Or, does the process of formation inside Becoming require us to theorize a non-chronological kind of time? I think that your student’s question: “How can we account for something like iterable structures in an assemblage theory?” is exactly the right question. Philosophy has erred too far on the side of the subject in the subject-object relation and has furthermore, lost the very weirdness of the non-human. Beyond this, the madness of thought need not override. /4/ - Ventriloquial Idealism or the Externality of Thought My aim is the opposite of Lovecraft's. He had an appreciation for natural scenery on earth and wanted to reach beyond the visible in the universe. I have no appreciation for natural scenery and want the objective universe to be a reflection of a character. Thomas Ligotti. “Devotees of Decay and Desolation.” Unless life is a dream, nothing makes sense. For as a reality, it is a rank failure [….] Horror is more real than we are. Thomas Ligotti. “Professor Nobody's Little Lectures on Supernatural Horror”. Thomas Ligotti's tales are rife with mannequins, puppets, and other brainless entities which of replace the valorized subject of philosophy – that of the free thinking human being. His tales such as “The Dream of the Manikin” aim to destroy the rootedness of consciousness. James Trafford has connected the anti-egoism of Ligotti to Thomas Metzinger – where the self is at best an illusion and we plead desperately for someone else to acknowledge that we are real. Trafford has stated it thus, “Life is played out as an inescapable puppet show, an endless dream in which the puppets are generally unaware that they are trapped within a mesmeric dance of whose mechanisms they know nothing and over which they have no control”. An absolute materialism, for Ligotti, implies an alienation of the idea which leads to a ventriloquil idealism. As Ligotti notes in an interview, “the fiasco and nightmare of existence, the particular fiasco and nightmare of human existence, the sense that people are puppets of powers they cannot comprehend, etc.” And then further elaborates that,“[a]ssuming that anything has to exist, my perfect world would be one in which everyone has experienced the annulment of his or her ego. That is, our consciousness of ourselves as unique individuals would entirely disappear”. The externality of the idea leads to the unfortunate consequence of consciousness eating at itself through horror which, for Ligotti, is more real than reality and goes beyond horror-as-affect. Beyond this, taking together with the unreality of life and the ventriloquizing of subjectivity, Ligotti's thought becomes an idealism in which thought itself is alien and ultimately horrifying. The role of human thought and the relation of non-relation of horror to thought is not completely clear in Ligotti's The Conspiracy Against the Human Race. Ligotti argues in his The Conspiracy Against the Human Race,that the advent of thought is a mistake of nature and that horror is being in the sense that horror results from knowing too much. Yet, at the same time, Ligotti seems to suggest that thought separates us from nature whereas, for Lovecraft, thought is far less privileged – mind is just another manifestation of the vital principal, it is just another materialization of energy. In his brilliant “Prospects for Post-Copernican Dogmatism” Iain Grant rallies against the negative definition of dogmatism and the transcendental, and suggests that negatively defining both over-focuses on conditions of access and subjectivism at the expense of the real or nature. With Schelling, who is Grant's champion against the subjectivist bastions of both Fichte and Kant, Ligotti's idealism could be taken as a transcendental realism following from an ontological realism. Yet the transcendental status of Ligotti's thought move towards a treatment of the transcendental which may threaten to leave beyond its realist ground. Ligotti states: Belief in the supernatural is only superstition. That said, a sense of the supernatural, as Conrad evidenced in Heart of Darkness, must be admitted if one's inclination is to go to the limits of horror. It is the sense of what should not be- the sense of being ravaged by the impossible. Phenomenally speaking, the super-natural may be regarded as the metaphysical counterpart of insanity, a transcendental correlative of a mind that has been driven mad. Again, Ligotti equates madness with thought, qualifying both as supernatural while remaining less emphatic about the metaphysical dimensions of horror. The question becomes one of how exactly the hallucinatory realm of the ideal relates to the black churning matter of Lovecraft's chaos of elementary particles. In his tale “I Have a Special Plan for This World” Ligotti formulates thus: A: There is no grand scheme of things. B: If there were a grand scheme of things, the fact – the fact – that we are not equipped to perceive it, either by natural or supernatural means, is a nightmarish obscenity. C: The very notion of a grand scheme of things is a nightmarish obscenity. Here Ligotti is not discounting metaphysics but implying that if it does exist the fact that we are phenomenologically ill-equipped to perceive that it is nightmarish. For Ligotti, nightmare and horror occur within the circuit of consciousness whereas for Lovecraft the relation between reality and mind is less productive on the side of mind. It is easier to ascertain how the Kantian philosophy is a defense against the diseases of the head as Kant armors his critical enterprise from too much of the world and too much of the mind. The weird fiction of both Lovecraft and Ligotti demonstrates that there is too much of both feeding into one another in a way that corrodes the Kantian schema throughly, breaking it down into a dead but still ontologically potentiated nigredo. The haunting, terrifying fact of Ligotti's idealism is that the transcendental motion which brought thought to matter, while throughly material and naturalized, brings with it the horror that thought cannot be undone without ending the material that bears it either locally or completely. Thought comes from an elsewhere and an elsewhen being-in-thought. The unthinkable outside thought is as maddening as the unthought engine of thought itself within thought which doesn't exist except for the mind, the rotting décor of the brain. /5/ - Hyperstitional Transcendental Paranoia or Self -Expelled Thought Weird fiction has been given some direct treatment in philosophy in the mad black Deleuzianism of Nick Land. Nick Land along with others in the 1990s created the Cyber Culture Research Unit as well as the research group Hyperstition. The now defunct hyperstitional website, an outgrowth of the Cyber Culture Research Unit, defined hyperstition in the following fourfold: 1-Element of effective culture that makes itself real. 2-Fictional quantity functional as a time-traveling device. 3-Coincidence intensifier. 4-Call to the Old Ones. The distinctively Lovecraftian character of hyperstition is hard to miss as is its Deleuzo-Guattarian roots. In the opening pages of A Thousand Plateaus Deleuze and Guattari write, “We have been criticized for over-quoting literary authors. But when one writes, the only question is which other machine the literary machine can be plugged into”. The indisinction of literature and philosophy mirrors the mess of being and knowing as post-correlationist philosophy, where philosophy tries to make itself real where literature, especially the weird, aims itself at the brain-circuit of horror. The texts of both Lovecraft and Ligotti work through horror as epistemological plasticity meeting with proximity as well as the deep time of Lovecraft and the glacially slow time of paranoia in Ligotti. Against Deleuze, and following Brassier, we cannot allow the time of consciousness, the Bergsonian time of the duree, to override natural time, but instead acknowledge that it is an unfortunate fact of existence as a thinking being. Horror-time, the time of consciousness, with all its punctuated moments and drawn out terrors, cannot compare to the deep time of non-existence both in the unreachable past and the unknown future. The crystalline cogs of Kant's account of experience as the leading light for the possibility of metaphysics must be throughly obliterated. His gloss of experience in Prolegomena to any Future Metaphysics could not be more sterile: Experience consists of intuitions, which belong to the sensibility, and of judgments, which are entirely a work of the understanding. But the judgments which the understanding makes entirely out of sensuous intuitions are far from being judgments of experience. For in the one case the judgment connects only the perceptions as they are given in sensuous intuition [....] Experience consists in the synthetic connection of appearances in consciousness, so far as this connection is necessary. Here it is difficult to dismiss the queasiness that Kant's legalism induces upon sight for both Badiou and David-Menard. Kant's thought becomes, as Foucault says when reflecting on Sade's text in relation to nature, “the savage abolition of itself”. For Badiou, Kant's philosophy simply closes off too much of the outside, freezing the world of thought in an all too limited formalism. Critical philosophy is simply the systematized quarantine on future thinking, on thinking which would threaten the formalism which artificially grants thought its own coherency in the face of madness. Even the becoming-mad of Deleuze, while escaping the rumbling ground, makes grounds for itself, mad grounds but grounds which are thinkable in their affect. The field of effects allows for Deleuze's aesthetic and radical empiricism, in which effects and/or occasions make up the material of the world to be thought as a chaosmosis of simulacra. Given a critique of an empiricism of aesthetics, of the image, it may be difficult to justify an attack on Kantian formalism with the madness of literature, which does not aim to make itself real but which we may attempt to make real. That is, how do Lovecraft's and Ligotti's materials, as materials for philosophy to work on, differ from either the operative formalisms of Kant or the implicitly formalized images of Deleuzian empiricism? It is simply that such texts do not aim to make themselves real, and make claims to the real which are more alien to us than familiar, which is why their horror is immediately more trustworthy. This is the madness which Blanchot discusses in The Infinite Conversation through Cervantes and his knight – the madness of book-life, of the perverse unity of literature and life a discussion which culminates in the discussion of one of the weird's masters, that of Kafka. The text is the knowing of madness, since madness, in its moment of becoming-more-mad, cannot be frozen in place but by the solidifications of externalizing production. This is why Foucault ends his famous study with works of art. Furthermore extilligence, the ability to export the products of our maligned brains, is the companion of the attempts to export, or discover the possibility of intelligences outside of our heads, in order for philosophy to survive the solar catastrophe. To borrow again from Deleuze, writing is inseparable from becoming. The mistake is to believe that madness is reabsorbed by extilligence, by great works, or that it could be exorcised by the expelling of thought into the inorganic or differently organic. Going out of our heads does not guarantee we will no longer mean we cannot still go out of our minds. This is simply because of the outside, of matter, or force, or energy, or thing-in-itself, or Schopenhauerian Will. In Lovecraft’s “The Music of Erich Zahn” an “impoverished student of metaphysics” becomes intrigued by strange viol music coming from above his room. After meeting the musician the student discovers that each night he plays frantic music at a window in order to keep some horridness at bay, some “impenetrable darkness with chaos and pandemonium”. The aesthetic defenses provided by the well trained brain can bear the hex of matter for so long, the specter of unalterability within it which too many minds obliterate, collapsing everything before the thought of thought as thinkable or at least noetically mutable on our own terms. Transcendental paranoia is the concurrent nightmare and promise of Paul Humphrey's work, of being literally out of our minds. It is the gothic counterpart of thinking non-conceptually but also of thinking never belonging to any instance of purportedly solid being. As Bataille stated, “At the boundary of that which escapes cohesion, he who reflects within cohesion realizes there is no longer any room for him” Thought is immaterial only to the degree that it is inhuman, it is a power that tries, always with failure, to ascertain its own genesis. Philosophy, if it can truly return to the great outdoors, if it can leave behind the dead loop of the human skull, must recognize not only the non-priority of human thought, but that thought never belongs to the brain that thinks it, thought comes from somewhere else. To return to the train image from the beginning “a locomotive rolling on the surface of the earth is the image of continuous metamorphosis” this is the problem of thought, and of thinking thought, of being no longer able to isolate thought, with only a thought-formed structure. [1] One of the central tenets of Francois Laruelle's non-philosophy is that philosophy has traditionally operated on material already presupposed as thinkable instead of trying to think the real in itself. Philosophy, according to Laruelle, remains fixated on transcendental synthesis which shatters immanence into an empirical datum and an a prori factum which are then fused by a third thing such as the ego. For a critical account of Laruelle's non-philosophy see Ray Brassier's Nihil Unbound. (shrink)

ABSTRACT The Precursory Unification Theory (PUT) proposes that physical structure, conscious experience, and cosmological evolution emerge from a common substrate: a discrete, chiral phase lattice. Fundamental degrees of freedom are phase relations rather than spacetime fields or particles. Long-wavelength coherent phase dynamics produce effective spacetime geometry, matter-like excitations, and quantum behavior, while highly integrated and differentiated phase regimes correspond to conscious experience. PUT is governed by three organizing principles: Coherence (stabilizes integrated phase organization), Dissonance (accumulates instability and drives collapse), and (...) Chirality (intrinsic parity-odd coupling that biases propagation, stability, and temporal ordering). Consciousness arises through transient regimes of enhanced integrated coherence termed Acute Consciousness-Expanding Events (ACEEs). Cosmological evolution is generically cyclic, proceeding through structure formation, conscious emergence, technogenic dissonance accumulation, and reset, unless advanced systems asymptotically stabilize global dissonance below a critical threshold. Primary empirical prediction: parity-split structure in black-hole ringdown spectra with spin-gated, population-level scaling (Δω_R = δ_R · χ · (M_⋆/M)^q). Independent predictions concern hemispheric asymmetry in neural phase coupling during ACEEs (|ΔMI| ~ 0.05-0.2) and parity-odd instability thresholds in engineered chiral analog systems (Q(+k)/Q(-k) ~ 1.2-3). Failure of these predictions at sufficient sensitivity would falsify the theory's central ontological claim. (shrink)

A body schema is an agent's model of its own body that enables it to act on affordances in the environment. This paper presents a body schema system for the Learning Intelligent Decision Agent (LIDA) cognitive architecture. LIDA is a conceptual and computational implementation of Global Workspace Theory, also integrating other theories from neuroscience and psychology. This paper contends that the ‘body schema' should be split into three separate functions based on the functional role of consciousness in Global (...) Workspace Theory. There is (1) an online model of the agent's effectors and effector variables (Current Body Schema), (2) a long-term, recognitional storage of embodied capacities for action and affordances (Habitual Body Schema), and (3) "dorsal" stream information feeding directly from early perception to sensorimotor processes (Online Body Schema). This paper then discusses how the LIDA model of the body schema explains several experiments in psychology and ethology. (shrink)

This paper argues that time and motion are ontologically identical as aspects of change: what physics calls “time” is a parameterization of motion rather than an independent entity. Drawing on phenomenology (Kant, Husserl, McTaggart), cognitive science, and physics (Einstein, Rovelli), it distinguishes lived temporality—dependent on consciousness—from the causal order of events, which exists without it. Historically, the split between time and motion (from Aristotle to Newton) reflects a conceptual error; by reframing time as a perspectival map of motion, (...) the paper aligns Leibniz’s relational view with modern theories of emergent time in quantum gravity. This unified framework challenges temporal realism and offers a phenomenological reinterpretation of change for both philosophy and physics. (shrink)

Ultimate Totality is presented as a metaphysical framework of non-anthropomorphic idealistic pantheism, defined as Reality and is synonymous with Mind-Energy and Nothingness (the Void). Ultimate Totality embodies a central paradox: it is already timeless and complete, yet simultaneously engaged in a perpetual process of becoming complete from the perspective of human experience. Observable reality and the structure of human consciousness emerge from duality, which is the bifurcation or break in Mind-Energy’s perfect symmetry. This dualistic split, including the subject-object (...) separation, creates an illusion of separateness that prevents the Western rational mind from grasping Ultimate Totality's inherent Unity, where Everything is identical to Nothingness. The limited perception of finite knowers is modeled through Transcendental Platonism, resulting in the construction of a conceptual Quasi-Reality. The work further asserts that conscious free will is an illusion. Instead, the Non-Consciousness (the True Mind and an extension of Ultimate Totality) acts as the controller that initiates all volitional acts, a mechanism supported by experimental findings demonstrating unconscious initiation precedes conscious awareness. The ultimate goal of spiritual inquiry is to transcend this dualistic limitation via practices like meditation and contemplation, thereby achieving a non-dual state where fundamental unity is realized. (shrink)

The purpose of this essay is to provide a diffractive reading of the concept of ressentiment through decolonial theory. I would like to see what sort of light this sheds on the psychological undercurrents that impose barriers on colonial and decolonial thought, as well as on the conceptual dynamism of ressentiment. This essay is split into two different experiments in thought. The first will be to diffract ressentiment through the works of Gloria Anzaldúa, Édouard Glissant, and Gilles Deleuze. To (...) this end, I will begin by providing an analysis of ressentiment as developed by Nietzsche in On the Genealogy of Morals and then supplement this with Deleuze’s analysis of ressentiment in Nietzsche & Philosophy. I will create a bridge with decolonial thought by interpreting Anzaldúa’s concept of the nopal de castilla and mestiza consciousness through the interpretive lens of ressentiment to show the affinity that exists between the work of Anzaldúa and Nietzsche. I will finish the first experiment by looking at ressentiment through some of the concepts Glissant offers us in the Poetics of Relation. In particular, I will argue that ressentiment resists the creolization of identity and culture, and that Glissant’s demand for the right to opacity for all is the sign of a thinking that has overcome ressentiment. The second experiment is to diffract ressentiment through Eduardo Viveiros de Castro’s Cannibal Metaphysics, beginning with an analysis of the most relevant points of that text for our discussion then putting our diffracted version of ressentiment in conversation with Amerindian perspectivism. However, this does not mean that I am aiming at a synthesis of ressentiment with Amerindian perspectivism. Rather, in the spirit of the Brazilian author’s post-structural anthropology, this essay sees only a disjunctive synthesis of the two: a ressentiment becoming-Amerindian perspectivism and an Amerindian perspectivism-becoming-ressentiment (we will focus on developing the former). I hope that, by the end of this experiment, we may have a richer conceptual understanding of ressentiment by offering this concept an image of itself that only our decolonial thinkers and an Amerindian perspective can offer. (shrink)

This paper attempts to locate modern Zen and psychoanalysis in terms of contemporary philosophy of mind, particularly in view of dominant theories of cognitivism that see the mind as informational and material, with meaning being mere information in disguise. Psychoanalysis and modern Zen hold to the contrary view that the mind is “semantic,” not “syntactic,” and that the meanings we have in our heads are not reducible to the physical informational processes from which they have emerged. Meaning, as non-reducible, is (...) infinite and uncaused. However, the structure of meaning entails a split between a knower and what is known. This split creates problems in the mind which can be confronted through more, not less, engagement with the meanings in our minds, until we are self-aware and, perhaps, self-identical, with the mechanisms of consciousness that produce the meanings in our head. Such self-awareness is seen as being self-liberating rather than self-reducing. (shrink)

We need to understand personal identity to develop radical life extension technologies: mind uploading, cryonics, digital immortality, and quantum (big world) immortality. A tentative solution is needed now, due to the opportunity cost of delaying indirect digital immortality and cryonics. However, solving the problem of personal identity is not easy. Human personal identity is a complex thing, not similar to other types of identity, such as that of Theseus ship. First of all, human identity consists of two intertwined types of (...) identity: informational identity, which predicts sameness, and identity of consciousness, which predicts what I will experience in the next moment of time. The identity of consciousness is called "hard problem of identity", and it is because it supervenes on the nature of consciousness. The second feature of human personal identity is that it is observed and measured internally, by identity subject himself. The third is that it evolves in time. -/- The main dichotomy in the views on personal identity and copies can be presented as: either my copy=original or a soul exists. In other words, some non-informational identity carrier (NIIC) may exist that distinguishes the original from its exact copy. Typically, it is often claimed that NIIC is either continuity of consciousness, or soul, or perspective, or the sameness of atoms, or position in space. We create an exhaustive map of identity theories. -/- We demonstrate here that the idea of continuity of consciousness is very similar to the idea of soul, but also has several problems: - Is it the continuity of qualia, of causal processes, of computations or of underlying substrate? - We also show that continuity doesn't prevent the emergence of two future copies if they split smoothly, so continuity does not preserve identity as uniqueness. - Also, continuity doesn't ensure uniqueness as I can continually become someone else. - Continuity + MWI means that I will eventually become anyone, that is, open individualism. - Continuity also can be paradoxically preserved without preserving body and mind as a separate process like flame. - Humans also seems to survive discontinuity during sleep without problems. Nevertheless, continuity appears to be inherent to qualia, emerging after observation but before action, and in planning. Only if continuity of consciousness is an ontological necessity, it can be a valid NIIC, but this is true only in a specific version of solipsism (qualia dust theory). In that case, a specific set of personal qualia becomes the personality carrier. -/- If copy=original then even imperfect copies suffice for personal immortality, as self-recognition becomes the main criterion of identity. -/- Open and closed individualism deny the existence of identity but must reinvent it as "practical identity" and therefore revert to copy=original. -/- To resolve the main dichotomy, we must recognize that personal identity requires an overarching system: God, qualia world, social agreement, or evolutionary fitness. This means that we cannot solve identity without solving metaphysics (and the nature of time). Unlikely we'll solve this, before creating superintelligent AI. -/- Therefore, a conservative approach to personal identity is preferable: as we don't know the nature of identity, we should preserve as much as possible and avoid Mars Teleporting unless necessary for survival. We can solve the Mars Transporter (even broken) by incorporating mind merging later, which is another conservative approach. -/- We can solve the "I don't care about my copy" problem through indexical uncertainty and by dividing "copy" into "mirror copy", "personality-copy" and "future copy". If both cyclic universe and continuity as identity are true, I will eventually become any my copy. MWI is functionally equivalent to cyclic universe, so I will become any copy in different timesteps. Therefore, we should care about parallel copies only if future copies don't exist (though in MWI future copies always exist, plus the chance to become someone else). (shrink)