This is a corollary to the model of human need I posted in response to my idea for the moth ( that is could satisfy its dream of light and heat beyond its wildest ambition yet without killing or burning itself by simply figuring out how to wake during the day). After some thought I realized that each of the levels I gave below in my evolution of need in human life and culture could also loosely correlate to various aspects of the thinking mind of the human and the human individual, as opposed to what we seem to think about animal consciousness, plant consciousness, or the consciousness of a person not yet born or dead. The correspondence between these modes of consciousness and the needs in the earlier article are really not the point. They exist in some way but are not nessecary and are not especially solid or meant to be serious. In fact, the model of need represents development while this model of forms of attention is elastic with movement between all levels occurring at many times for many individuals.
I am using numbers both to suggest some sort of outward movement from a conceptual center and to represent the endless bifurcation of a frame of mind as it divides ideas of activity, self-consciousness, identity and the like. As in the hierarchical model of needs earlier, these numbers increase, their complexity increases, as one moves away from the more instinctual mode inherent at birth, and through normal development acquires a more specialized consciousness and tools or habits for working with attention. Again, this (as the other model earlier) is just an example of ways of organizing something, a personal view for the purpose of determining, like the moth, how to take what is in front of one, to realize one’s dreams beyond belief without burning to death first.
The “space” represented by this model is a conceptual space only, not intended to be an analogue of physical space, but who knows.
and so consider some levels of awareness to be:
0. null: unborn, no separation from anything. no nothing.
1. unity: unaware of self, no separation between an individual and an environment
2. duality: beginning awareness of self, or skin at least. separation between environment and one’s own self
3. trinity: continued separation. now there is a separation between mind and body within the individual in addition to the separation of the individual and the environment.
4. instance/moment: the discovery of time, frames of time and how these interact with individual attention further divide the environment, which now begins to re frame itself infinitely in the mind of the individual which sometimes includes its own body in this environment and sometimes does not.
5. purpose: the further awareness of these frames of reference, or of information about the mind, the body, or other aspects of “environment” provide for the individual to interact with the environment meaningfully on many levels, but as a separate entity. People move meanings, build houses, but as separate people operating in an environment not as a unity energy moving aspects of itself around. Individual consciousness reinforces this separation but also affords one the power of movement within this environment.
6. void: similar or identical to 1. a tabula rasa.
External to experience, a field of possibility. Is the movement discussed in 5 an illusion? What are the limits of reason/knowing? this is the mystic’s return to the indivisibility of consciousness. Its outside the frame but aware of it if it chooses to be.