I. The visual field becomes more concentrated on the objects existing in their realtime position i.e., x existing in its absolute essence– the anxiety unfolds the heightening of the essences of the object existing in real time. The visual field becomes cognizant of the sharpness of the objects existing within the compounds of the immediate external stimuli.
II. The melting dimensions of the immediate external reality brings forth a distorted sense of reality with no realisation of time while ascending towards the ego-loss phenomenon. The geometric cubes around the visual fields unveils an expanded sense of atom-composed reality i.e., to be able to harness reductionism in order to denounce the world being reduced to the tiny materialist particles.
III. With the geometric distortions, comes the revelation of the link-image which is the knot between the emerging imaginary and the symbolic. The dissolution of the dynamic patterns within the geometric visual field encompassed with mild auditorial hallucinations harnesses the united unconscious and the conscious sentience as a projection onto the perceived hallucination.
IV. The potency of the Open-Eye Hallucinatory state along with the Closed-Eye Hallucinatory state is able to reproduce a closely-parallel visual-mental dimension distinct from the sense of the presence within the fundamental dimension. The replication of the OPVs onto CEVs, and vice-versa produces the sense of existing within an alternate visual dimension along with a strong mental psychedelic state.
V. Ego-loss within an out-of-body experience induces the insemination of the conception of the ALL is Mind– the unity- the ultimate individuality. The dimensional perceptual awareness and sentience-sense become unified and the entire sense of sentience reduces to one eso/exoteric body.
VI. Hypnagogic hallucinations can be divided into three rough stages- a) Geometric-pattern Visuals, b) Tetris Effects (Working memory and Symbolism from Long-term memory) and, c) An amalgamation of a) and b).
SARTREAN COGITATIONS V : REFLECTIONS ON THE SKETCH FOR A THEORY OF EMOTIONS
(Jean-Paul Sartre, 1962)
The classical theories that investigate the theory of emotions more or less lets us understand emotions within the boundaries of our conscious experience, at least according to the early theories devised by William James. Hence, devising a model wherein the states of consciousness can be divided as physiological and psychological phenomenon.
(i) It is within the very physiological phenomenon that holds the capacity to produce psychosomatic conscious states, as the consciousness is struck by the physiological projections. It is the very extension of the relatedness and associative elements of consciousness that combines the psychic world and the external reality. Hence, this peripheric theory of William James exerts that the physiological disturbances are either directly or indirectly discernible.
The individual can therefore can sum up their conscious states, in objective terms as their systems of behaviour.
(ii) One must recognise and analyse their emotions in a functional order of comprehending emotion via its significance. Gestalt psychologists, like Janet & Wallen would emphasise that the synthetic arrangement of behaviour would evoke elements of the unconscious or consciousness within the realms of psychoanalysis and hence offer a psychoanalytic theory of emotional finality.
However, emotional manifestations are an intrinsic combination of the psychic and behavioural aspects of the human condition. And therefore, negative emotional manifestations like that of anger or fear usually arise from the human sub-conscious and unconscious as a powerful urge towards attaining the symbolic satisfaction for the release of the intentional and insufferable tension.
(iii) Consciousness generated via the symbolic realisations only offers what it deems to offer as a desire. Within the psychoanalytic interpretations, there’s an established notion that the conscious phenomenon is presented with the symbolic realisation of a particular desire which is furthermore repressed by the censor within the different realms and depths of human consciousness.
Yet the desire is not intrinsically connected with the symbolic realisations as the very presence of the symbolic realisation further delicately fabricates the rise of emotions through the physilogical imperatives of human desires.
(iv) The symbolic realisations requires the renunciation of the Cartesian Cogito and conducting the consciousness as a passive and secondary phenomenon. It is the very acknowledgement that consciousness comprises itself into a meaning whilst being unaware of its very constitution of the meaning derived.
However, if the Cartesian Cogito is possible, then the consciousness itself becomes the very fact, the signification as well as the signified.
(v) The conscious fact of the consciousness becomes symbolical of the desire it expresses i.e., of the expressed complex, in Sartrean notions. Hence, the symbolic character is constitutive of the expressed complex of the symbolical.
Therefore, the innate desire for an inner signification is the precursor for the consciousness that makes itself known (or conscious).
(vi) In Sartrean terms, emotional consciousness is the introductory consciousness of the world. We can construct a meaning of this emotional consciousness initially through its non-reflective structure, and upon its very plane it should be noted that it cannot be aware of its own consciousness, hence, it requires the non-positional reflective mode in order to act as the precursor to the consciousness of the external reality.
Therefore, it is the very perception that connects the emotion to its representative signal. It becomes easy to view the action as the non-reflective consciousness of the constructed instrumental world and the emotive anger as the non-reflective consciousness directed towards the cruel essence of the world as action transforms into anger in psychosomatic-emotive consciousness.
(vii) The nature and structure of my writing is always and forever a product of my conscious state of consciousness as opposed to my unconscious state because an activity comprises a succession of particular objects in this probable world. The probable world is only considered probable due to futuristic realities, yet is also deemed certain as the Sartrean potentialities of the world.
Therefore, like Sartre, my writing is always and forever exigently remnant due to the decisive manner I procure my thoughts in my creative headspace. These thoughts are indeed realised potentialities that generate its exigence objectively through the subjective creative art forms.
(viii) There is an inherent distinction between unreflective activity and unconscious activity as they are non-thetically conscious of the self and the very process of being conscious of the same allows for the transcendence and apprehension onto the external reality posing as the qualia of objects. Therefore, in Sartrean notions, intellect here would be the very noetic correlate of the activity undertaken or conceived by the individual.
However, fear as an emotion has a consciousness whose target is the very negation of the external reality by means of what Sartre would call a magical behaviour. This would further allow the annihilation of the emotive-consciousness as a preliminary step towards the annihilation of the objects present in external reality. This emotional catastrophe allows for the exile of responsibility as the magical exaggeration and sufferings of the world excruciate the consciousness.
Therefore, negative conscious emotions like that of fear and sadness are irreducible to this Sartrean constitution of a magical world wherein the objects that are bodies act as instruments of enchantment. In every possible situation, the subject matter might differ and so would the human behaviour, however, in order to trust this Sartrean magical behaviour, one must manifest physical perturbation.
SARTREAN COGITATIONS IV – THE TRANSCENDENCE OF THE EGO
(i) Transcendence, a meta-ontological phenomenon- wherein the metaphysics and ontology are bound by the phenomenological study of its very essence and being.
Sartre here attempts to bend transcendence as a meta-ontological phenomenon i.e., within the boundaries of Husserl’s transcendent phenomenology and Sartrean line of thought i.e., as an apodictic and intuitive experience of the immersive arrival of the perceptive other.
The Sartrean idea of Consciousness is that “consciousness cannot be limited but by itself”.
(ii) Intuition is the mode of inquiry for the transcendental and meta-ontological phenomenon that evokes the realization of the presence of the other (consciousness).
Hence, the Husserlian idea is ruled out in the presence of the Sartrean transcendental I as the epochē or apodictic experience wherein the phenomenon appears and manifests itself.
(iii) Consciousness is always conscious of the other, it finds itself as another part of itself i.e., consciousness discovers its ‘child’ in the other part of the consciousness. The perceptual experience attempts to scrutinize the conscious object, therefore reducing it to representations that are experienced as the reality of the ‘I think’. Hence, providing consciousness its unique unity and individuality while also forming a Husserlian constitutive consciousness.
Consciousness can therefore be understood as a phenomenological experience wherein the appearance and existence are coincident.
(iv) A transcendent object qualifies so because it reflects the consciousness of a transcendent object as consciousness manifests as an absolute inwardness. This Sartrean reflected consciousness is a medium of a consciousness directed towards consciousness. In contrast, the unreflected consciousness manifests as a non-thetic consciousness. The ‘I’ is manifested through its reflected consciousness.
(v) The French aristocrat, Duc François de la Rochefoucauld’s psychological aphorisms in Maxims, explores psychological reflection which reflects on the ego. So, I think consciousness can also be described as a cosmic series of our reflected consciousness as a whole through the integration of the noematic and its incidental unity.
The ego can therefore be understood as the union of the transcendental states and the actions that remain innate.
(vi) The psychology of the inert can be understood in terms of its relation to the psychical states and spontaneities of the inert within the transcendent unity of the infinity of consciousness. Hence, here within the domains of certainty and doubt, this effusion merely links together the consciousness to its psychical passivities.
This noematic unity of spontaneities and its unity of objective passivities, therefore, manifests a potentiality in the relation of actualization or a kind of virtuality that may transform into actuality. Hence, a psychical element within the transcendental object is the very reflective consciousness- as Sartre would establish that reflections have de-facto & de-jure limits.
(vii) The ego is a psychical element as opposed to a psycho-physical element that rests in psychical objects of consciousness. The ego correlates to a sense of poiein, or creation. Therefore, as the creator of its own psychical states sustaining conserving spontaneity, the ego is affected by its approaching passivities while remaining a poetic production wherein the subtlety of creation varies.
Hence, the ego also relates to its irrational synthesis of transcendence and inwardness (or the inert).
(i) Knowledge constitutes the framework of the rendition of image produced through signification via imaging knowledge in the consciousness. Sartrean intentionality lies in recognizing the consciousness of the image which manifests from gnosis- hence, consciousness is key characteristic and an extension of knowledge of an imaged object x. Knowledge of imaged object xextends and manifests consciousness which further assists in constituting a mental image of x. Thus, extension of knowledge as consciousness is an essential element in structuring an image in the imaging-consciousness.
(ii) Through desire in reflection, an affective consciousness is invoked wherein the passion is posited in the affective structure of the imaged object. However, the absence within the very presence of the imaged object is realized only on the terms of its affectivity in cognition i.e., an imaged object x will produce its affectivity only because it extends in space and time with desire. Thus, affectivity manifests in the consciousness of an imaged object based on the value of its knowledge in affective form as transcendence.
(iii) Figurative-Motor Awareness in kinaesthetic or mnemonic movements begin with Husserl’s protention-retention synthesis of the impression, and end in the birth of an imaging consciousness. The visual structure manifested through kinaesthetic movement constitutes the analogon of the imaged object in reality. Although, this analogon doesn’t posit the exact knowledge of the imaged object. For example, mathematical calculations through kinaesthetic movements wherein the knowledge, as well as the image consciousness, is derived in time through the movements and cognition itself i.e., it doesn’t render an instataneous image in the imaging consciousness.
(iv) The comprehension, in Sartrean Imaginary, is realized through the assembling of schema in the imaging consciousness which further results in the manifestation of the imaged object. However, comprehension consciousness is only essential when the image is symbolic as it the verys symbolic that is comprehended through its traits. Thus, the barrier between the comprehension consciousness and imaging consciouness is the symbol.
(v) Perception induces the principle of infinity on the very condition of the disintegration of perception, wherein an object perceived within a series of objects is isolated in imaging consiousness as an independent object. Through these very acts of disintegration in perception, and manifestation in the imaginary, these elements of consciousness actuate psychic activity.
In Sartrean terms, the intention evokes the object of the image-consciousness, a representation of the very absence of the object which is an accumulation of matter of worldly things and of the mental-world i.e., external and psychic elements of matter.
(i) It is the coming together of the imaginary and real-world with intentionality of the object that posits creation for an artist. Through imagination of the aesthetic psychic elements, the artist gives its creation the uniqueness, as the external element of the creation simply posits where the creation was positioned.
(ii) The absence of the physical object is harnessed as a quasi-matter of absence in an artists’ imaging-attitude. However, a quasi-matter is different from a ‘sign-consciousness’ even though they both render the matter as absent. A quasi-matter renders the physical-object as absent but also as present when summoned, hence, eliminating the illusion of immanence through quasi-phenomenon dependent on its non-thetic emanation into the image-consciousness of the artist.
(iii) A critique of arts, in time, would examine the imitation-consciousness of a given portrait at a museum wherein the imitated-image consciousness would induce its affectivity through the physiognomy of the imaged-synthesis i.e., a product of the whole of image-consciousness. This combination of the signified and imaged consciousness through the imitated-consciousness allows the critique to possess the object of the portrait in order to assess and critique it.
(iv) A structure’s study requires a certain knowledge of its vectorial essence within the symbolic movement wherein it evolves as consciousness. The knowledge of this structure evokes a corrupt image-consciousness of this structure’s vectorial aspects through the reflexive eye-movements of the observer.
(v) A look at the I-Ching symbol on wall tapestry, allows the sensory manoeuver to subsume the knowledge of yin-yang’s continual cosmic changes of polarity. Therefore, it is the very symbolic-manoeuvrism that posits knowledge of the tapestry’s structure which further fabricates its image-consciousness.
(vi) Hypnagogic imageries are essentially non-thetic phantasmic images that posit imprecision in details of the Tetris effects exhibiting spontaneous knowledge. The temporal aspect allows the manifestation of the knowledge of the object-focus of the image-consciousness, which ceases to exist in hypnagogic imagery as hypnagogia propounds knowledge of its very ontological phenomenon.
(vii) The symbolic movement is born from a signified-intuition and ideational form of knowledge. Hence, it is the gap between the image-consciousness and perceptual-consciousness that entitles the object with knowledge as the imitation (signs) symbolically transcend into intuitive-matter of uniformity for the quasi-observation.
(viii) A mental image exhibits no worldliness or spatial relations, rather only its object-matter posits Sartrean transcendence of the representative. A mental-image’s reflective and representative element differ just like solid and gaseous states of camphor in alchemy i.e., no remnants are left behind during the course of transcendence, therefore, exposing the presence of quasi-matter in psychic data-point particularity.
We may therefore conclude that imagination is not an empirical power added to consciousness, but it is the whole of consciousness as it realizes freedom.
Jean-Paul Sarte’s The Imaginary: A Phenomenological Psychology of the Imagination (1940), outlines the mandatory stage i.e., the inquiry into imagination which carefully discerns nothingness that consciousness fabricates and the consciousness itself i.e., distinguishing being-in-itself from being-for-itself and hence, constituting its ontological phenomenon. When one asks what is imagination? The imagination can be understood as our experience as a whole authorised by consciousness.
On Aesthetics: The aesthetic appreciation excites our sensory experience of the imaginary object. When an object x is presented with distinctive properties like its color, shape, size, etc., its aesthetic comfort excites and captivates our senses while further being appreciated in imagination. So, a great deal of our daily-imaginary acts are a result of the recognition of the aesthetic appeals in our immediate environment for sensory excitement or satisfaction.
On Perceptual-Imaginative Model: The perpetual experience vastly differs from the imaginative experience, as perception requires the scrutiny of the object while imagination demands the confluence of the imaged object’s sketch through conceptual reflection. Therefore, it is our imagination that carefully integrates the sketch of a perceived experience according to our will to alter the original perceptual experience into an appealing one.
On Hallucinations: Hallucinations posits an imaginary stance to the world that designates the discovery of the essence of objects as opposed to aiming to do the same. However, hallucinations differ from perception as it the very imaginary stance that deceives the experiencer regarding the essence of experience itself. Therefore, drug-induced hallucinations alongside dream phenomenon gives the experiencer the will to embrace the imaginary stance.
(i) Accordig to Sartre, the initial goal of phenomenological psychology of imagination is making explicit the act of reflection which is uniform for all while promising an observer the absolute essence of an image. When an observer observes an object, lets say object x, he perceives and reflects on its properties and therefore gains definite knowledge about its essence. The dilemma present amongst thinkers about the ‘variety’ of principles the act of reflection elucidates seem correctly insignificant, as it is quite logical to conclude that the act of reflection guarantees the essence of object x when perceived and reflected upon i.e., the data derived would be certain and absolute as opposed to probable because probability corresponds to the immediate data perceived from the experience while the certainty corresponds to absolute data.
(ii) An illusion emanates via the habitual act of thinking in space and on the conditions of the space i.e., Sartrean ‘Illusion of Immanence’. Originating from Hume’s distinction of impressions and ideas, Sartre concludes that ideas are nothing but images itself i.e., just like imaged-object x might have its different characteristics, the same will be true for its ideas. Following the chain of thought, an idea is a product of reflection that comprises attributes that are its determinants, and therefore, while ideas might be mental images of a said object, they can also be a mental conceptualisation of abstraction, in which it is also an abstract conceptual image.
(iii) The extrinsic-perceived image is when one perceives the photograph of person x through their consciousness obliquely then, person x is what photograph represents, while an intrinsic-perceived image is when the person x is comprehended as the matter of the photograph implicitly. Therefore, a synthetic union i.e., synthetic acts of consciousness lies in relating the explicit with the implicit image wherein the nature of the implicit image perceived through consciousness is the very relation of its explicit image. Hence, the image signifies this relation of consciousness to the object, which in this case is the photograph of the person x.
(iv) An object as imaged is inclusive of the knowledge of its essence. So, the realization of object occurs at the same moment as the object’s intention wherein the intention is the focus of the consciousness which exposes the essence of the object thus revealing and realizing itself simultaneously. Therefore, “the consciousness never precedes the object”. The synthetic act, in the act of consciousness here, is between representative and knowledge elements of the object whereas the unifying aspect is the correlation of the object as absolute and of constituting knowledge at the same time. The realization aspect also plays an essential role in identifying the ‘clear-light’ during an ego-dissolution phase in a hallucinatory-state, as the ‘clear-light’ can only be realized when it is revealed. However, without the intention, the significance of the ‘clear-light’ will remain unrealized and hence, unrevealed.
(v) An intentional object of the imaging consciousness could be understood as an object x imaged, however an imaged-object x doesn’t necessitate that it exists in the perceived consciousness, and therefore, imaged-object x ceases to exist and thus, is non-existent. Hence, imaged-object x doesn’t occupy our spatial-perception, rather its determinations amalgamation can be posited as ‘intuitive-absent’ i.e., imaged-object x is non-existent to the intuition itself. An object’s nothingness of being is the consequence of quasi-observation, in such that the imaged-object manifests a belief within the observer through intuition but the observer’s immediate consciousness renounces the imaged-object as non-existent by recognising its nothingness. Therefore, the essence of imaged-objects from immediate surroundings constitute of nothingness because of its non-thetic consciousness which implies that imaged-objects are non-existent and only a consequence of a creative-thought process.
(vi) It is the aspect of nothingness i.e., the non-thetic consciousness of the imaged-object that produces a spontaneous feeble presence of the perpetuated object as a synthesized transversal imaging consciousness as a creative appearance that doesn’t postulate its creative essence. So, when say an artist has an imaging consciousness of mountain scenery that the artist has perceived couple of times, and now wants to make a painting out of the imaging consciousness of the painting as a creative act- the artist would imagine the imaged object in consciousness as an amalgamation of all the times the artist hs perceived the mountain scenery, and now with the pen and brush, the artist would merely draw and paint the exact same object. The painting would be a product of creative imaging consciousness of the perpetuated mountain-scenery and simultaneously would exhibit the nothingness of imaged scenery as the creative alteration would signify. Therfore, creative pursuits of imaged-objects are always an amalgam of creative uniqueness and nothingness.
An image is not an element of consciousness, rather it is consciousness itself as the image when imaged. It posits a restructuring which renders it as a sui-generis consciousness. It is only a product of a mental-temporal synthetic act i.e., the imaged consciousness aligns itself in association with the imaged-object, wherein the association posits the inertia of the consciousness as part of creative-will. Hence, the object is nothing rather than the consciousness one owns of it i.e., the Satrean phenomenon of quasi-observation. This vagueness of the relation between the object and its image propounds that an imaged-object presents an image’s statics and not its synthetic temporal and spatial locus when imagined at any random given point of time.