Arthur put off the cup of tea, faced an inquiring look of sitting opposite him Andrey and, having taken a deep breath in, continued:

   So, let’s back to the point we stopped on last time. Topologically consciousness is a Klein bottle, implemented on a substrate of the Universe. In other words, it’s a four-dimensional self-recreating vortex, which has an outward reality as a conventionally utter side of it, and a subjective perception of the reality as a conventionally inner side. However, it’s impossible, as known, to draw the strict line between the inner and the outer. In other words, the spot where an outer reality ends and a consciousness begins cannot be pointed out confidently. And vice-versa. That exists in the full compliance either with the Buddhist world outlook or implicit ontology of the modern science.

What is the Bottle constituted by? 

Sensory flow, being created for a human by the five senses, constitute the main corpus of a vortex, its outer capacity. That includes, as a part of constantly perceiving sensor flaw, in addition either kinesthetic image of one’s body or even so called “motor exit” – that becomes a motion impulse after the highly complicated processing and starts physical actions of the body, getting out, so to speak, from the other side of the bottle. Yet the most interesting, as usual, lies in-between the sense – and the motor parts.

         In that exact interspace the “outer bottle” is experiencing a quaint twist so that inside of it just out of the bottle side originating the second – the “inner” – one, which is smaller in topology size. This vortex exists as a part of the first one since there is no a border-line between them hence a hypothetical onlooker moving in along the bottles wouldn’t discover impenetrable wall, but for simplifying the description it could be conditionally named as the “inner” side of the second formation.

This part provides consciousness with a basic, on this stage a quite blurry, system of an understanding of the reality through emotions, which have been being considered as the meta-kinesthetic, i.e. senses on senses.  It implies as well conditional division into two parts: the first, consequencing of the sensory, being in charge of a fast self-positioning in an external context, and the second one, forestalling the motoric, producing emotional patterns of response on an situation. This “emotional bottle” exists, obviously, not just in a human being, but in any mammal. In whole, any creature with a limbic brain system has it.

– Can you clarify this in more details, please? I haven’t really understood about two parts. And in particular even more about “positioning” and “responding”.

– Imagine that you’re a chinchilla. How would you be specifying what you should, in a certain life situation, do and in whole: whether you’re living in a right way? Shouldn’t anything be changed in your life strategy?

– Well… I guess, if I were chinchilla, then I would have been doing things in accordance with my instinct.

– I wonder how exactly this instinct is given to you subjectively?

– Well… It’s hard, obviously, to answer for a chinchilla, but probably I would have been correlating what I’d be seeing and feeling with the one I’d like to get. And next, I would act in line with appearing of any distinctions.

– And by means of what you would do it? Member: you’re a rodent; you neither have conceptual thinking or capacity of clearly distinguished and defined objects, have been categorized by a language. I mean totally. There are just sensory stimulus and thus emotions.

– Considering that I have no any idea how to describe that indeed.

– In fact, all have been described already – by the way of emotions. Ponder the issue that emotions, for instance, such as “I’m good” or “I’m scared” is an outstandingly fast and effective way of the comprehensive feedback on the general state of the organism and simultaneously on its position in the formed configuration of an external environment. If there are mostly positive emotions, the chinchilla is more or less handling the life, successing, pretty good breeding, gaining the wished hence – everything is OK, the rodent can be relaxing and not be changing so well adjusted to the environment patterns. If yet emotions mostly negative and limbic system glitches all the time, sending signals of ill-being, then there is a need urgently to get a jerk on that and set the behavioral strategy right. It evokes a discomfort, stress urging the organism onto self-improving.

– In other words, using emotions, the chinchilla create its worldview? Are its sensory signals integrating into an emotional worldview? Either does itself or its prospects on the life rodent perceive exactly in this emotional continuum of the states?

     Yes. It’s probably not that difficult to imagine, because we have a similar emotional circuit. If to have a look on that system from dynamical point of view, through the time: the primary positioning emotions is a reaction on greater or lesser number of contradictions in the current state of the “conscious-reality” system. Those, in their turn, occur secondary emotions, setting how to change the system and controlling the action signal outcome onto motoric. As an example, anger is something close to a blurry decision of a conciseness as a chained system to “break through” an existing life situation by force. Yet a fear is otherwise – “emotional decision” to stay put and be undistinguished wherever it’s possible.

There are two options are possible: contradictions are either few and hence, emotions in the system mostly positive, or numerous and so that negative emotions prevail. There are, indeed, plenty of interesting points, for instance, that dealing with structures of desire, but let’s move on. For the beginning, a holistic sketch of the theory is essential.

There is one more level of a bottle, that a human-being has – the third “vortex”, occurring out of the second, “emotional” bottle wall at the most “intriguing” place of taking decision, which is in between, let’s say, primary positioning emotions, and secondary setting the physical movements patterns emotions. Similar to the previous point, “the third bottle” is not bordered anyhow from the rest and exists as an extension of the whole topological Klein surface.

What is this in fact? It’s a semantic space, having a symbolic nature, being formed by the structure of language and creating world describing.  It is that “third bottle” is an underlying, regulatory one for a human being and, as a result, creating reflexive identity by means of which we are talking right now.

  Interesting. Have I got correctly that every level of nesting is more and more voluntary, in other words allows to implement some new levels of flexible ruling from “inside”?


   Then why is it a language needed to that? It’s even not an innate to a organism and we have to learn it quite some time.

    Because the symbols in contrast to perceptions and emotions are static. They were specially created to set and hold and then to transmit the fixed meaning, which cannot be faced with nowhere in the world of reality things.  Whereby these static formations it is possible to navigate along a semantic space through a language code. Thus, opportunities of coming out of transitory-positioning emotions limits appear. Exactly with this, quite sophisticated and, as you correctly mentioned, an artificial trick extra voluntary achieves. It’s highly relative, undoubtedly, but considerably greater than animals have.

Therefore, a human being as a consciousness resides the biggest part of the life in his world describing, i.e. in “the third bottle”, moreover, in the describing, which has been categorized under the language structure as it was pointed out earlier by Kant. Looking at the world we are not observing perceptions, photons or waves, we see objects and processes: such as people, chairs, stones, tree branches moving.

      I wonder whether there is an unconditionally emotional part in a human being similar to the one a chinchilla has?

      Sure, there is, but it’s not that unconditional in fact. The point is even emotions, composing right at the moment the matter of the “second bottle” for you, are being categorized too. Actually your own desire, and that have been already mentioned by Lacan, is given to a human being through symbols.

         This seems to be true.

         It is indeed, – smiled Arthur, – but let’s go on. What does it compose the matter of the “third semantic bottle”? The worldview.  The system of beliefs, values and the most significant is those resulting categorical “spectacles” through which you are looking at the reality every single moment.

            So, I guess the third bottle contains internal division to the “primary one” and the “secondary one”?

      You’re right. The primary one represents by itself the ways of evidence interpreting, whereas the secondary – thinking through them.

             What is being thought through?

            Anything: actions, scenarios, even emotions.

             And does the most interesting, as usual, place “in between”?

             It looks like that.

            So, what is forming hypothetical rudiments of the “fourth bottle? Awareness?

         To answer this question let’s start with something known as a fact and go further to an introspective experience. Can awareness be focused onto a physiology?

           Easily. Right now I am feeling my leg itching.

 –        Onto emotions? A sphere of conceptual thoughts?

          Of course. I’ve just realized that meanwhile an understanding of the theory my mood is rising with no any obvious reason. The fact is to follow the gallons of being flowed out by you conceptual ideas it needs to be indispensable and constant awareness, – smiled Andrey.

   Thank you, – answered Arthur, – So, every second there are presented either as a figure, or background all three bottles at once: sensory, emotional and mentally-semantic one in the awareness. Is it so?

             It seems to be.

     Well. Let’s follow up how exactly on the steps awareness is actualizing during the time. If we are talking about a voluntary, semantic awareness then beforehand, in order to the right object could have been pointed out of a background, a semantic navigating must be done, in other words: a conceptualizing whereby the inner language. Just to make the distinction onto an object and a background clear and stable enough. And only after this distinctioning awareness percepts an object, focusing on it. What does it correlate with in our scheme?   

            It’s quite hard to say. I guess awareness is a somehow specific outgrowth, allowing a small vortex has been being moved along the big vortex wall?

     Let’s I state the question in other words: there is a difference between an act of awareness and operation of distinguishing figures out of a background? Or just represent it?

    Apparently, there is no any difference. Does it mean you’re telling that a power of attention, its concentration and sustainability are not some selected characteristics of illusive “awareness body”, but the specific features of the bottle surface deformation?

          It seems to be like that indeed. It turns out that a device of attention concentration for a human being consciousness is the whole internal, semantic bottle. I.e.  attention could be conditionally named as a function of redirecting and shifting all the “inner world”, semantic space of depicting reality. And shifting the attention from one object onto another, you in fact are moving all the inner semantic space relatively an emotional, sensory or even itself. The procedure has become totally used to indeed, and you don’t pay any attention to it.

Hence, summing up, it’s possible to say that awareness has levels, such as: perceptional, emotional and semantic attention.  And if to assume existing of the fourth level, then it must differ too. Normally an adult human being, obviously, has semantic one indeed, in other words vulnerable, attention. Besides, it’s a non-stop.

 It follows, that a human being is able to reach an access to the emotional “animal attention”. And even to a primary awareness of «perception». But this requires some restructuring of routine patterns, setting the bottle configuration.

        What will become a candidate to the fourth level of nesting?

      Reflection. If lobotomically continue the upward line and follow what we have, appears that each next level forms from the previous one with an adding “meta”: emotions – are meta-kinesthetic, thoughts – meta-emotions. It’s a natural assumption that the fourth bottle – are meta-thoughts, i.e. thoughts about thoughts, reflection. A kind of semantic mapping of your own consciousness, letting to be aware about exactly happening on different levels as if tracking your location with a some kind of inner Google Map.

         Hence must the handling-with-thoughts principle itself be edited? Shifted to the meta-reflection as a basic way of attention focusing?

       You could say that. But is it really necessary to grow this next level of a complexity right now? What will you get as a result? A system, working with jams and contradictions on the each already exist level – plus a new one put upon the top? Besides, it’s unconventional – non-being supported by the other people – which means, that it’s barely anything can be said about it, at least at the beginning… Isn’t it better to be focused previously on eliminating of the inner contradictions and inconsistences inside of a formed system? Improve the basic emotional state; clear up a worldview from contradictions and ineffective patterns so far?

   Ok, but then it’s sensible to ponder an opposite question:  why even do anything with all that structure?  Some chinchillas are living great and not worrying. They are fine with a current – emotional – worldview. And there is nothing needs to be changed.

     Because of one really simple reason: it won’t exist forever. One day everything will be ended up very simple – by a dying.

In some sense all the structure exists only due to the self-sustaining illusion: ponder over it, a three-dimensional figure acts as a fourth-one. How is that possible? At the expense of time. It lives as long as it lasts, reproducing through time the lacking fourth-dimension. The bottle walls are constantly building up and building up, crossing nowhere. Though one day it all will be ended up – and necks are cut by a moment of death, being splitted to parts. And quite tellingly, they do against each other.

      Yes-yes-yes… That is the most problematical point, because of which they cannot create a fully-fledged Klein bottle in the three-dimension space  – one of the walls anyway runs across a neck, – Andrey jumped up, having been encouraged by the suddenly opened perspective, his eyes were sparkling.

    Yes. That’s why there is a sense to change the structure of the all construction somehow before the end of the life.

        Is it possible?

        We have all the life long. Let’s find out, – smiled Arthur.

© A. S. Bezmolitvennyi, 17.01.2017

Original text in Russian -

Translated by E. Bezmolitvennaya


You have no rights to post comments