Mindstructures » Consciousness

Three Subconscious Levels

Annemieke — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 09:23:18 +0000

In Three Levels of the Mind I used three signs, to symbolise the primordial, individual and universal mind.

In that context, all three together represent the conscious mind.

In my previous post, Subconscious or Psyche, three other signs represent the subconscious mind.

That part of all knowledge that is not consciously known, but largely influences all of our actions and thoughts.

On the page Unconscious Mind I collected some different views on that part of our ‘consciousness’.

In my previous post I also explored some different words to decide which one would be best to use in the context of this blog. For the moment I will choose ‘subconsious’ to see how that works.

Besides that, I am using my basic model to name the areas for each subconscious part.

Cancer (4) falls in the ‘primordial‘ part, but also in a part that can be called ‘personal inside‘.

The next sign, Scorpio (8), falls in the ‘individual‘ part, but besides that, in a part that can be called ‘collective inside‘.

And finally the last sign, pisces (12), falls in the ‘universal‘ part and also in the part ‘collective outside‘.

4. Primordial Subconscious (personal inside)

Nurturing, support, emotional bonding, belonging, roots, source. Ground of your being. The unconscious, feelings, emotion, first emotional attachments to the world. Mothering, emotional and physical nurturing.

Experiences and imprinting during infancy and childhood. Family, ancestors, heritage, relationships to the past. Belonging, feeling at home, caring.

Feeling supported, that needs are provided for. Insecurities and fears if your needs haven’t been fulfilled.

8. Individual Subconscious (collective inside)

Transformation, change, ego-death, rebirth, transcendence. Intense emotional involvement with the process of personal growth. Movement from individual certainties to the mysteries of life. Spirit breaking through the limitations of the individual ego.

Intense, passionate, brooding, magnetic, unyielding, driven by emotions. Stands up for self, usually covertly, manipulates power. Understands deeper layers of the psyche beyond the ego, unable to communicate this well leading to misunderstandings.

Intrigued by the dark side of life. The underground, people whose job involves going beneath surface appearances. Breaking free of illusory limitations. Self-mastery.

12. Universal Subconsious (collective outside)

Surrender to the universe, to higher goals, ego sacrifice. Compassion and empathy, selfless work. Seeing the unity of all things. The end of cycles, forming seeds for the next cycle of growth.

Mysticism, fails to make normal distinctions. Laziness, victim, martyr, servant. Tends to escapism. Fantasy, drugs, alcohol, religion. Very receptive, sensitive, even psychic. Co-dependency, care-taking.

Psyche, Shadow and Collective unconscious

Somehow I think the first two (4 and 8) are what Freud and Jung would call the ‘psyche’, the second (8) what Jung would call the ‘shadow’ and the last (12) what Jung would call the ‘collective unconscious’.

Subconscious or Psyche

Annemieke — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 15:08:11 +0000

I was going to write about the different forms of subconscious. But before I could get anything done, there was this very first problem already.

Should I use the word subconsious, or is it better to use the word unconscious? What is actually the difference?

Then I thought, okay what do I mean to describe?

Again that led me back to the whole mind versus matter issue. And the very basic thoughts about that from Jean Carteret, that I put on the page Language and Psyche.

Carteret uses the words language and psyche to describe the opposites of matter and energy. And according to him, language is to the psyche what matter is to energy. With one difference, energy is active where the psyche is passive.

But like energy has another side of the coin (matter), the psyche also has another side (language).

So Carteret uses language, but I had been thinking if maybe I could better use the word concepts. I am going to investigate that further in another blogpost, but here in this post I want to find a word for the psyche (or unconscious or subconscious) part of the model.

Maybe psyche would be a good word, but that word is mainly used for the individual inner life. And that was only part of what I mean to describe.

I also mean, what Jung calls, the collective unconscious. And that might not be covered by the word psyche.

And I mean the emotions in our childhood that actually belong to others. Maybe they also could be called psyche, but it is that what is not our own at first, what we picked up as a child from the environment.

I could call them primordial, individual and universal psyche (according to the zodiac signs cancer, scorpio and pisces) but I am not sure if that would cover the whole of subconscious (or unconscious).

So I was wondering if there was a word that would cover it all better. I have been using soul which worked rather well. But somehow it does not seem to be the best word.

In a recent discussion someone used the word information and somehow that seemed perfect. I do not know exactly why yet, because information is used in many ways but not when someone means unconscious, subconscious, psyche or emotion.

But together with concepts, it seems to fit well. It is only that information in this sense is just that, all the information that is out there and all the information that is within each of us. Nothing packaged, just being there to be intepreted.

And that is what the concepts are for. Concepts as packages of information. The packages that can be communicated with others.

But before that it is just information. Information that translates into emotions. That translates into the psyche. And that also translates into dreams.

That what lays beneath every form of consciousness.

Debate or Dialogue

Annemieke — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 14:19:19 +0000

After my previous post about different types of discussions I got to think there have to be some differentiations already. But they are likely not just all called discussion. So what other forms of discussion are there?

After some searching I found that the most characteristic forms are debate and dialogue.

I was not sure what exactly the difference was between them, so I decided to take some existing definitions (here and here) and put them together in this post. That way I can compare them and see what I like and dislike about each.

Polarising or Collaborating

Debate is competitive and or oppositional, two or more opposing sides try to prove each other wrong.

Dialogue is collaborative, cooperative, multiple sides work toward a shared understanding.

Counter or Listen

In debate one listens to find flaws, to spot differences, and to counter arguments.

In dialogue, one listens to understand, to make meaning and to find common ground.

Closed or Open

Debate creates a close-minded attitude, a determination to be right.

Dialogue creates an open-minded attitude, an openness to being wrong and an openness to change.

Defend or Reflect

In debate one submits one’s best thinking and defends it against challenge to show that it is right.

In dialogue, one submits ones best thinking, expecting that other people’s reflections will help improve it rather than threaten it.

Invest or Suspend

Debate calls for investing wholeheartedly in one’s beliefs.

Dialogue calls for temporarily suspending of one’s beliefs.

Belittle or Respect

Debate rebuts contrary positions and may belittle or deprecate other participants.

Dialogue respects all the other participants and seeks not to alienate or offend.

One or Many

Debate assumes a single right answer that somebody already has.

Dialogue assumes that many people have pieces of answers and that cooperation can lead to a greater understanding.

Convergent or Divergent

Debate is convergent.

Dialogue is divergent.

Winning or Common ground

In debate winning is the goal.

In dialogue, finding common ground is the goal.

Critique or Introspect

Debate causes critique of the other position.

Dialogue causes introspection on one’s own position.

Own or Other

Debate defends ones own position as the best solution and excludes other solutions.

Dialogue opens the possibility of reaching a better solution than any of the original solutions.

Conclusion or Open-end

Debate demands a conclusion.

Dialogue remains open-ended.

Flaws or Strenghts

In debate one searches for flaws and weaknesses in the other position.

In dialogue, one searches for strengths in the other positions.

Disapprove or Concern

Debate involves a countering of the other position without focusing on feelings or relationship and of the belittles or deprecates the other person.

Dialogue involves a real concern for the other person and seeks to not alienate or offend.

It is already getting more clear what I do and do not like so much about each. Actually I quite like debates. I like to differentiate further if necessary. And from the dialogue I especially like the suspending of a belief.

But there are several things I absolutely do not like about debates. But there are also several things I do not like so much about dialogues. At least about the definitions as they are stated here.

So I think I would like a form which combines both. The open mind and respect of the dialogue combined with the critical and opposing nature of the debate.

Consciousness Discussions

Annemieke — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 15:18:20 +0000

These last days I have been discussing consciousness. I really like to discuss that. What is consciousness, how is it created, are animals conscious? Just one of my favorite subjects to discuss.

But also one of the most difficult ones. Because in order to discuss something we need consciousness itself. We need some level of consciousness to be able to discuss something.

So maybe it is an idea to look at discussions instead of at consciousness itself. And instead of exploring if there are different kinds of consciousness, to see if there are different kinds of discussions.

First there are discussions that just can interact about everything. Using the language we learned at schools, got from books and read in the newspaper. We can discuss the weather, discuss what is happening in the world and so on.

At that point no one needs strong opinions, just use what we learned, heard or just read somewhere. All that needs is information that we got delivered in packages by others.

Lets call the consciousness that is needed for this kind of discussions consciousness A.

The second kind of discussions are those that DO involve opinions. I will call the consciousness that is needed for that kind of discussion consciousness B.

If there is as discussion that involves opinions, there immediately emerges an huge problem. Where does that opinion come from. As long as we define it clearly as being an opinion it does not have to be a problem.

But the biggest problem with opinions is that people have the idea that their opinion has a certain truth to it. Which might make this kind of discussions, the ones with consciousness B, very heated at times. Because at some point they touch upon the worldview of the participants.

And have no other way then getting stuck at some point.

So this is where consciousness C comes in. Which I would call ego consciousness. Which is different from the other forms because it can not leave out personal experience.

It is a consciousness where the individual combines internal and external information, personal experience with universal knowledge.

So maybe that asks for a fourth kind of discussion, lets call that a discussion with consciousness D, a discussion that seperates universal and personal knowledge, but does not find one more important than the other.

Just uses other measurements to value both.

Collective Unconscious

Annemieke — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 14:07:30 +0000

Just now I looked at my previous post Individual Language again and I suddenly realised something.

I mentioned several theories and ever so many people that came up with those theories. But no matter how important those theories are (in general, but especially in the purpose of this blog) there is one theorie that is even more essential.

Well, maybe it is more than one theory, but if so, they are all from one person. Someone who has become so essential for my thinking that I even forgot to mention him. All his theories and concepts are so integrated in my thinking, that I just forgot to mention his name.

Maybe because all the people I did mention (Maslow, Bohm, Wilber, Carteret) are themselves so largely influenced by him, that I did not think about writing about him separately.

That man, who came up with the concepts that all others are talking about. Concepts like Self, Ego, Consciousness, Collective Unconscious, Archetypes, Shadow and so on.

His name is Carl Jung.

Actually all those concepts he introduced, are those I constantly use in my working with the Zodiac. I think all those concepts have some place in the Zodiac and in this blogpost I want to start with one of those concepts.

One that is very important but not very well recognised. One that is very controversial because it is not measurable and therefore more or less denied.

It is called Collective Unconscious.

Just as all humans share a common physical heritage and predisposition towards specific gross physical forms, so do all humans have innate psychological predispositions in the form of archetypes, which compose the collective unconscious.

This Collective Unconscious that is very similar to the last sign of the Zodiac, pisces.

The Zodiac is divided in a Primordial, Individual and Universal part. And each of them has, what can be called, a Conscious and Unconscious part. The airsigns can be seen as mind or Consciousness. A primordial mind (gemini), individual mind (libra) and a universal mind (aquarius).

But the watersigns can be seen as Unconsious or soul.

Emotions
There is a Primordial Unconscious that can be translated with feelings or emotions that arise in childhood. It is similar to the sign cancer.

Psyche
Then there is the Individual Unconscious that can be seen as the psyche. The repressed part of the Self, the part that is not always well known. That part that might not seem to be part of the individual and is projected on the outside world. That what also can be called the Shadow.

That part is similar to the sign scorpio.

Myths
And finally there is the Universal part that can be seen as some kind of Unconscious that is seen in myths, stories, fairytales and dreams. That everyone recognises although it might not be part of their own experience.

That part is similar to the sign pisces and can also be seen as, what Jung calls, the Collective Unconscious.