The Challenge of Comprehending Consciousness

The Challenge of Comprehending Consciousness

I know that there is a connection between my inner world and the world without. Subjectively, it is clear to me that this is the case, and I am confident that the statements I make, the theories I embrace and put forward, are a reflection of my genuine knowledge—the genuine results of my experience.  I do not question them personally, except in those moments when I must, for whatever reason, articulate some aspect of them, and then I am forced to acquiesce to the cultural norm and attempt description. 

I often struggle to accurately describe objectively what I feel subjectively; it doesn’t always translate well.  The certainty for me personally in some cases might be beyond a doubt, but I am very mindful that my subjective understanding may not be shared by others.

I appreciate the dilemma that others have, and in particular, those who are uncertain about the true nature of the whole experience of being alive—the experience of existing as a human person is frequently ambiguous, tedious, and inexplicable in some way or another, and we cannot always process it or absorb it. We cannot translate it into something comprehensible.  It is the quintessential human dilemma. And yet, for whatever reason, it seems that it has become my task to attempt this translation, and to clarify—to bring into understanding—those things which I experience subjectively and know to be true for me, and attempt to articulate them objectively.

If there ever was a task of Hercules that was more difficult than this, I do not know which it could be.  All of his challenges were basically temporal, and while these also can be quite daunting, I do not envy anyone who shares this task with me, which is to articulate objectively what I have subjectively experienced, and which I frequently assert here, with a fair amount of confidence at least.  Absolute certainty in these matters is elusive, and I would not suggest otherwise.

It’s not just me who has this dilemma.  It’s anyone who is profoundly aware of the content of their subjective awareness—thoroughly in touch with their inner world, knowing that there is an aspect to our human nature that is not substantial—that is completely “within us.”

Even the phrase, “within us,” is only a metaphorical reference point we use to describe our subjective awareness; it doesn’t have anything to do with an actual physical location. There is no locus for awareness; there is no locus for consciousness; there is no locus for our attendance to our inner world.  The phrase “our inner world,” is used as a means to describe something as being not outward—not external.  “Internally,” in temporal terms, is where my organs are located—my heart, my lungs, my brain, all my bones, my sinews and muscles and cells—everything physically within me can be considered internal, and the world outside—the trees—the sky—the world out there—is external to me physically, but it is also part of me and I am also part of it, so in a sense our awareness of an “external world” is a very limited objective view, and my internal dialog, my subjective awareness of my inner world, is only available subjectively for me.  Unless we can figure out a way to articulate it in a manner that other people can understand, it couldn’t be said to exist in any meaningful way for others.

Since this is true, I must always mitigate the expression of my certainty by acknowledging this gap between what I experience subjectively and what others can only objectively relate to in some way as I describe them.

Because of this gap, I have to recognize that when I say, everything is connected; everything is related; everything is inseparable from everything else; I must also take into consideration that the experience of the world for others may differ from mine in some manner.  That one phrase, “in some manner,” places even the shared experiences I have with others as being possibly external to me, and I appreciate that I don’t necessarily share the exact same experience that others have. 

There have been plenty of experiences that others have had that I have never experienced, and so they are also, in an important way, external to me and objectively, from my viewpoint, when I look at that person’s experience, it leads me to say, “that’s outside of my experience.”  It’s external to me, but as Carl Jung posited in his collected works, there is also a “collective unconscious” that exists, which we inherit simply as a consequence of being a human person, and that we share on a basic level, certain “archetypes,” which inform our experience of the world.  Jung was the one who illuminated this in a way that was so profoundly informative for those who pay attention to such things, and I am one of those who pay attention to such things.

Jung’s explanations—his intimations of his own experiences—and his willingness to accept the subjective nature of them as objectively real, give me, and I’m sure many others, the confidence to suggest that he was trying to tell us something about our experiences by revealing his own.  For him to say that his subjective experiences had a quality about them that was objectively real—and some of them are quite unusual—not common at all—pushes the boundaries of what most people generally have experienced. 

Jung’s experiences became something more—technically available subjectively only to him—but he felt compelled by his observations of the world to decide that these things need to be brought out into the open; this “collective unconscious,” the subconscious, the archetypes of the unconscious, which are all mostly going on below the surface, often escape our direct notice, but are, nonetheless, an integral part of our experience.  It is also important to note that some people refuse to acknowledge these aspects out of fear or confusion about them, or they reject them because it conflicts with the current understanding that they have already, and they can’t reconcile these unfamiliar aspects with their present understanding.

I am currently engaged in some very important personal endeavors, which touch upon the very foundations of my understanding generally, and if you have been following along here lately, you have noticed that my efforts to illustrate and express my understanding have expanded into video presentations, many of which contain my earnest interest to share what I have come to understand.  It is very challenging to organize these presentations to include some kind of video evidence of my subjective experiences, but I continue to try. 

My next video in the series will appear here shortly and I encourage my readers and visitors to be patient with me as I navigate these difficult subjects as an earnest, but amateur producer of such content.