Reason has uncovered the universal, necessary, schematizable law that circumscribes self-conscious activity, organic nature, and inorganic nature, bringing them together, while keeping them apart. The fundamental unit by means of which this law operates is the complex number; this law is the law of fractal self-similarity. Nature is a complex structure that emerges by way of simple, repetitive, self-same applications of the same rule. This rule is expressed in organic nature by the internal purpose positing, and external goal-oriented, purpose driven behaviour of the gene; the gene controls the growth and division of cells. Cells form the basis of all organic life. The purposes for which an organism lives are predicated upon the imperatives set for it by the gene: to survive, reproduce, and exhibit itself, i.e. make itself observable. Genes are composed of inorganic matter, and are subject to the same mechanistic laws that govern the movements of all inorganic matter.
We have also seen that self-consciousness is a complex structure that emerges by way of simple, repetitive, self-same applications of the same rule, starting with the axioms: (i) the knower is distinct from the known, and conversely, the known is distinct from the knower, (ii) the knower is identical to itself, as is the object identical to itself, and (iii) the knower and known are situated in spacetime. From these simple axioms, analogous to a seed, sprouted sense-certainty, perception, the understanding, self-consciousness, desire, the stoic, skeptic, unhappy consciousnes, and Reason. However, even though nature is by definition bereaved of all self-conscious activity, it can be said that self-consciousness grows in accordance to the same law of fractal self-similarity as nature.
Reason Observing Self-Consciousness in its Purity
Self-conscious Reason is a function of an organism whose consciousness has evolved to self-consciousness, to self-conscious Reason, according to the law of fractal self-similarity, in the same way that the rational organism evolved from the simplest single celled life-form. The life of this organism is finite. It must die. It took a longer time for the organism to evolve its complexity from a single-celled organism than the time that one organism is alive. Thus, no organism with the capacity to be self-conscious and rational has observed the totality of that evolution.
Self-conscious Reason arrives at the inference that it is the product of an evolution driven by genes according to the law of fractal self-similarity through the empirical observation of recurring patterns and distinguishing marks in nature. Here, Reason is not concerned with the actual objects in nature which it observes in nature; Reason is concerned with the manner in which it as self-conscious Reason behaves as a pure activity of self-consciousness as a result of these observations. Observing Reason observes self-consciousness bereaved of all natural activity. Reason has become a pure thinking, like the stoic, that observes its own thinking, and correlates that thinking to universal, necessary, schematizable laws. If it finds that these laws are identical to the law of fractal self-similarity that underlies and drives nature, Reason will have verified its certainty that self-consciousness is the basis of all reality.
Now, as a result of particular empirical observations, Reason reasons inductively to arrive at a conclusion that is true of all members of a class to which those empirical observations belong - it reasons inductively from particulars to universals. For example, every swan which Reason observes have the quality of being white. Reason reasons inductively that all swans are white. The problem behind this kind of reasoning, i.e. the existence of black swans, reveals the problem behind inductive Reason. It is not possible for Reason to observe every swan due to its finite life.
Self-conscious Reason seeks the law that allows it to make an inference about universals it cannot observe, predicated on particulars it does observe; Reason seeks the principles of valid reasoning. In other words, Reason seeks the Laws of Thought, the very foundations that make all rational thought possible. All laws of thought are found by means of introspection. Self-conscious Reason, i.e. Arthur Schopenhauer, writes the following:
"The laws of thought can be most intelligibly expressed thus:
- Everything that is, exists.
- Nothing can simultaneously be and not be.
- Each and every thing either is or is not.
- Of everything that is, it can be found why it is."
In other words, everything that is, is. All that is, is itself. Nothing can simultaneously be and not be, i.e. that which is itself is not another. Of everything that is, it can be found in spacetime why it is or is not. These are the same axioms whence self-conscious Reason itself emerged. To show that these four laws of thought are the foundation of all Reason, Schopenhauer provides the following explanation:
"Through a reflection, which I might call a self-examination of the faculty of reason, we know that these judgments are the expression of the conditions of all thought and therefore have these as their ground. Thus by making vain attempts to think in opposition to these laws, the faculty of reason recognizes them as the conditions of the possibility of all thought. We then find that it is just as impossible to think in opposition to them as it is to move our limbs in a direction contrary to their joints. If the subject could know itself, we should know those laws immediately, and not first through experiments on objects, that is, representations (mental images)."
Self-conscious Reason arrives at the laws of thought by making a distinction between two modes in which it thinks. On the one hand, self-conscious Reason is a self-consciousness that observes something with its senses. In other words, Reason observes a content. That content is a product of nature's exhibition of itself to self-conscious Reason. By relating that exhibited content to itself in a rational manner, Reason arrives at the laws of nature.
By turning to observe itself, Reason finds that self-consciousness exhibits no content of its own. Reason finds instead its own rational thinking, the possibility of which is based on the laws of thought. It attempts to uncover the laws of thought as a reality independent of the external reality of nature. Thoughts are presumed to be objective, formal, structures bound up with a content. For every dog, there is the thought of the dog.
Self-conscious Reason has a collection of thoughts, the sets of mathematical set theory for example, which it connects by means of various relations. Boolean algebra, the logic upon which computer programming is based, is a product of this kind of activity:
"All the signs of Language, as an instrument of reasoning may be conducted by a system of signs composed of the following elements: 1st Literal symbols as x, y, etc representing things as subjects of our conceptions, 2nd Signs of operation (relation), as +, -, x standing for those operations of the mind by which conceptions of things are combined or resolved so as to form new conceptions involving the same elements, 3rd The sign of identity, =. And these symbols of Logic are in their use subject to definite laws, partly agreeing with and partly differning from the laws of the corresponding symbols in the science of Algebra..
"Let us then agree to represent the class of individuals to which a particular name or description is applicable, by a single letter, as z. ... By a class is usually meant a collection of individuals, to each of which a particular name or description may be applied; but in this work the meaning of the term will be extended so as to include the case in which but a single individual exists, answering to the required name or description, as well as the cases denoted by the terms 'nothing' and 'universe,' which as 'classes' should be understood to comprise respectively 'no beings,' 'all beings.'"
"Let it further be agreed, that by the combination xy shall be represented that class of things to which the names or descriptions represented by x and y are simultaneously, applicable. Thus, if x alone stands for 'white things,' and y for 'sheep,' let xy stand for 'white Sheep;'"
Given these definitions Boole now lists his laws with their justification along with examples:
Self-conscious Reason arrives at the laws of thought by making a distinction between two modes in which it thinks. On the one hand, self-conscious Reason is a self-consciousness that observes something with its senses. In other words, Reason observes a content. That content is a product of nature's exhibition of itself to self-conscious Reason. By relating that exhibited content to itself in a rational manner, Reason arrives at the laws of nature.
By turning to observe itself, Reason finds that self-consciousness exhibits no content of its own. Reason finds instead its own rational thinking, the possibility of which is based on the laws of thought. It attempts to uncover the laws of thought as a reality independent of the external reality of nature. Thoughts are presumed to be objective, formal, structures bound up with a content. For every dog, there is the thought of the dog.
Self-conscious Reason has a collection of thoughts, the sets of mathematical set theory for example, which it connects by means of various relations. Boolean algebra, the logic upon which computer programming is based, is a product of this kind of activity:
"All the signs of Language, as an instrument of reasoning may be conducted by a system of signs composed of the following elements: 1st Literal symbols as x, y, etc representing things as subjects of our conceptions, 2nd Signs of operation (relation), as +, -, x standing for those operations of the mind by which conceptions of things are combined or resolved so as to form new conceptions involving the same elements, 3rd The sign of identity, =. And these symbols of Logic are in their use subject to definite laws, partly agreeing with and partly differning from the laws of the corresponding symbols in the science of Algebra..
"Let us then agree to represent the class of individuals to which a particular name or description is applicable, by a single letter, as z. ... By a class is usually meant a collection of individuals, to each of which a particular name or description may be applied; but in this work the meaning of the term will be extended so as to include the case in which but a single individual exists, answering to the required name or description, as well as the cases denoted by the terms 'nothing' and 'universe,' which as 'classes' should be understood to comprise respectively 'no beings,' 'all beings.'"
"Let it further be agreed, that by the combination xy shall be represented that class of things to which the names or descriptions represented by x and y are simultaneously, applicable. Thus, if x alone stands for 'white things,' and y for 'sheep,' let xy stand for 'white Sheep;'"
Given these definitions Boole now lists his laws with their justification along with examples:
(1) xy = yx [commutative law]
"x represents 'estuaries,' and y 'rivers,' the expressions xy and yx will indifferently represent" 'rivers that are estuaries,' or 'estuaries that are rivers,'"
(2) xx = x, alternately x2= x [Absolute identity of meaning]
"Thus 'good, good" men, is equivalent to 'good' men".
(3) y + x = x + y [commutative law]
(3) y + x = x + y [commutative law]
"Let x represent 'men,' y, 'women' and let + stand for 'and and 'or'. Thus the expression 'men and women' is . . . equivalent with the expression 'women and men'."
(4) z(x + y) = zx + zy [distributive law]
Let z = European, x = men, y = women. Then, European men and women = European men and European women
(5) x - y = -y + x [commutation law: separating a part from the whole]
"All men (x) except Asiatics (y)" is represented by x - y. "All states (x) except monarchical states (y)" is represented by x - y
(6) z(x - y) = zx - zy [distributive law]
(7) Identity ("is", "are") For, example, x = y + z, "stars" = "suns" and "the planets"
Boole observes that the only two numbers that satisfy x2 = x are 0 and 1. He then observes that 0 represents "Nothing" while "1" represents the "Universe" (of discourse).
Boole defines the contrary (logical NOT) as follows (his Proposition III): "If x represent any class of objects, then will 1 - x represent the contrary or supplementary class of objects, i.e. the class including all objects which are not comprehended in the class x." If x = "men" then "1 - x" represents the "universe" less "men", i.e. "not-men".
Armed with his system, Boole derives the principle of non-contradiction, one of the principle laws of thought along with the law of identity and law of the excluded middle, starting with his law of identity: x2 = x. He subtracts x from both sides, yielding x2 - x = 0. He then factors out the x, giving x(x - 1) = 0, as required. So we have the "Law of Non-Contradiction"; for example, if x = "men" then 1 - x represents "NOT-men", then the statemen given by x(x-1) = 0 would read: there exists nothing in the universe that is both men and NOT-men.
Boolean algebra is but one example of a logical system that can be developed. Others include Aristotelian syllogistic logic, the propositional logic of the stoics, predicate logic, quantificational and modal logic. There exist differences between these systems of thought that exhibit the laws of thought by means of written signs, as well as similarities.
Essentially, self-conscious Reason observes the laws of thought as a motionless set of relations. We have an aggregate of distinct, by the law of non-contradiction, disjoint, by the law of the excluded middle "literals" denoted by an inert sign usually designated as x, y, or z, which serve as placeholders for any kind of content whatsoever. These inert and motionless signs are related by inert and motionless operators, +, -, =, or any other sign that is defined to be an operator. Thus, Reason uncovers patterns and fixed commonalities that can apply to any kind of thinking about any kind of object.
By observing the recurring patterns of thinking, Reason has found the principles that make rational thought possible; from these principles it finds a manifold of fixed and inert patterns that apply to any kind of thought. This multitude of fixed and inert patterns are discovered as objective givens. They are not deduced from a single, self-replicating principle, i.e. they do not exhibit the same character as the law of fractal self-similarity that underlies nature. The patterns of thought are found via introspection, from utterances of another self-conscious Reason preserve as fixed and inert signs in a book, etc.
Thought, when considered by itself in its purity, independent of its relation to nature, is pure content. However, when considered in relation to nature, Reason finds that thoughts serve as an organizing principle. Thought is a formal structure when it thinks about something that is not a thought, i.e. anything in organic/inorganic nature. When thought thinks itself, it becomes a content for itself. When it thinks about nature, an external reality bereaved of all self-conscious activity, including thought, thought is a formal structure for another.
Thoughts do not have a formal structure for thought itself. Thus, there is nothing about the laws of thought that necessitates a unique, self-determined ordering of thoughts. The laws of thought are fixed and do not undergo movement or alteration. Self-consciousness as an activity, as we have seen, does undergo movement and alteration. The very act of thinking is a movement from one concept to another. It is not, however, self-generated. It is self-consciousness, which is an activity distinct from thought, since it may or may not involve actual thinking, that determines the direction in which thoughts will go, and in what way they will be altered.
Recall that nature undergoes a self-generated, self-determining movement and alteration according to the law of fractal self-similarity. The law of fractal self-similarity is not distinct from nature. By observing self-consciousness, Reason has not affirmed that self-consciousness imitates nature. Nature is a self-generated, self-determining movement that exhibits a content. Thought is a collection of fixed and inert essences that have no unifying principle that points to their being a self-generated, self-determining movement.
Reason discovers that it cannot find a universal law analogous to the law of fractal self-similarity for thought by observing self-consciousness in its purity, for in doing so it loses the formal structure that necessitates a unique, self-determined ordering of thoughts that imitate nature. It loses this structure because when considered in its purity, thought becomes nothing but content. This is the essential freedom that underlies all mathematical and logical thinking. This unifying structure, the set of all sets, is nowhere to be found because it does not exist. But thought is essentially a formal unifying structure of the content that nature exhibits to observing Reason.
That formal unifying structure cannot be lost sight of, or else Reason no longer observes itself as rational thinking. Without this unifying structure according to which thought must adhere to in order to be rational at all, thougnt cannot be rational. But the thought which Reason observes is rational. Therefore this unifying structure exists. In order to preserve this formal unifying structure, reason must observe itself thinking in relation to a content that is distinct from the activity of self-conscious Reason. Thus, Reason observes self-consciousness as it relates to external actuality, i.e. organic nature, inorganic nature, and self-consciousness, whether it be its own or of another organism capable of rational self-consciousness. Reason seeks the Law of Psychology.
Reason Observing Self-Consciousness in its Relation to External Actuality
Reason observes rational self-consiousness and its relation to inorganic nature, organic nature, and self-consciousness, whether it be its own or of another. Nature has a unifying structure, where it generates itself and determines its own content independent of the activity of self-consciousness. When nature is observed in its purity, independent of the activity of self-consciousness, that structure is not lost. It exists. When thought is observed in its purity, independent of its relation to the exhibitions of nature, the unifying structure of thought that would be analogous to fractal self-similarity is lost. It is lost because such a structure does not exist.
This unifying structure that underlies all of nature is the universal substance of external actuality. It is a simple form that generates a complex array of content by repeated iterations of the of its manifested content on itself; it is a self-coding code. This is the law of fractal self-similarity. The content of nature which is exhibited to self-consciousness determines the contents of the thoughts of that self-consciousness. Since self-conscious Reason is a function of an organism that lives for a finite amount of time, the totality of nature's infinite content cannot be observed by a singular organism. Only a finite fraction of that content can be observed by any single self-conscious and rational organism. The content which that organism does observe determines the formal structure of thought that allows it to think about and relate to external actuality. This formal structure is the rationally self-conscious organism's personality.
There exist a wide range of content that a single individual organism cannot observe, however, there exist a multiplicity of rationally self-conscious organisms that do observe the content which exhibits itself to each. Further, each content is exhibited to each organism in a manner where no two organisms will observe the same, identical, content. Thus, distinct forms of thinking will arise for each rationally self-conscious organism, due to the distinct content which nature exhibits to each. Each individual self-conscious organism will have its own, distinct, personality.
A personality is a set of habits, customs, ways of thinking, and emotions that self-consciousness acquires in its relation to external actuality. This set is the content that defines a personality. There exist a wide array of possible content for personality, i.e. habits, customs, ways of thinking, emotions, etc., from which self-consciousness selects only a portion to define its own unique personality. The selection is driven by the idiosyncratic inclinations and desires of the individual self-consciousness.
The content of personality selected from a larger array is finite in size, as is the larger array. The kinds of habits, customs, ways of thinking, emotions, etc. which self-consciousness can select from, based off its own inclinations and desires, is bound by the general actuality in which self-consciousness finds itself. Further, notice that self-consciousness is not its personality. Since self-consciousness as Reason is a reconciliation between the changeable and unchangeable, self-consciousness has both changeable and unchangeable aspects. Its personality may change, over time, however, there is something about self-consciousness that does not change over time. That unchangeable aspect is the essence/core of self-consciousness, i.e. the object that self-consciousness is certain of being the basis of all reality.
Observational psychology records the general permutations of personality, and the content that defines it. Every self-consciousness is said to have personality traits. Like the laws of thought, Reason considers these personality traits as inert, unchangeable qualities that define an individual, not restless movements that may change over time. Nothing can be said about the specific circumstances, i.e. the specific character of the individual's environment, whence these traits emerge. Every individual is a contingent medley of personality traits lumped together like a things in a sack.
Two opposed sides emerge: on the one hand, we have an actual individual who exists in spacetime, with changeable and unchangeable aspects. The changeable aspects of the individual are its observable personality traits, the unchangeable aspect of the individual is its unchangeable essence. On the other hand, we have an inert unity of observable personality traits - again, we see the re-emergence of a thing, the individual, and its determinate properties, its personality traits. Reason now has to find a law to describe how the individual as an unchangeable being interacts with its personality traits.
There exist two possibilities that result from the interaction between the individual and his personality traits. The individual may, first of all, sink into its personality traits. For it, there is no difference between what it fundamentally is and its personality. The individual conceives himself to be his personality, and thus acts accordingly. Personality, like genes, is exhibited for others to see. Thus, this individual is concerned with engaging in performance. Thus, what emerges is an individual engaged in a persentation of self, being nothing more than what it presents to the external world.
This individual, by fully immersing itself in a show of self, loses awareness of its own inner core. It is not dependent on other self-consciousnesses fluctuating standards of approval or disapproval for what it may or may not exhibit, and thus, for what it may or may not be. This individual loses its individuality, and becomes a conforming, universal individual.
Otherwise, the individual may regard itself as something absolutely distinct from its personality traits; it resists sinking into its personality traits, and is therefore indifferent to the show that the conformist is immersed in. This individual retains its awareness of his own essential, unchangeable, infinite core, and steadfastly clings to it. Rather than be altered by the flux of the world's standards of approval or disapproval, the individual alters the world of other self-conscious personalities. He may do so with or with an alternative in mind. If he alters the world of other self-consciousnesses with an alternative in mind, he is a reformist, or revolutionary. If he alters the world without such an alternative, he destroys it, and is thus a deviant, or criminal.
There can be no deterministic, mechanistic law that would decide whether an individual conforms to the world, or deviates from it. One would think otherwise, since the personality traits of the individual control the individual; the individual does not control its personality traits, not even their acquisition, since its inclinations and desires are genetically determined, and the actuality in which it is immersed that provide an array of personality traits to choose from is limited in scope. There must be a law that determines how an individual chooses its personality traits and interacts with them. Yet, since the fundamental infinite core of the individual self-consciousness is fundamentally for itself, i.e self-determining and independent, or as the stoic would say, free, the free choice of the individual to either conform or deviate from its personality traits, and the world of other self-consciousnesses with personality traits, precludes the possibility of such a law existing.
Reason abandons its search for a universal, necessary, schematizable law that relates the individual and its personality traits; the free will of the individual absolutely prohibits the existence of such a law. Thus, Reason turns to a new object that has emerged where no such choice is possible. This new object, like the previous, has two opposing sides. On the one hand, there is the individual and his personality traits. Reason is indifferent to how the individual interacts with its personality traits; the possibility of choice is no longer an obstacle for Reason's search for a link between the individual and external actuality. Opposed to the individual and his personality traits, there exists a fluctuating world of individuals with their own personality traits.
The array of personality traits that the individual chooses from to determine his own personality originates from this world. The conformist individual gets lost in this world and flows along with the fluctuating ebbs and flows of approval and disapproval, and constructs its personality to attain maximum approval and minimum disapproval. The deviant individual is indifferent to its own personality traits, and indeed constructs its own, drawing from a secret well of infinite scope to define its own personality. It is the Byronic hero, who by altering itself from this infinite well alters the world of other self-consciousnesses with personality traits. This individual turns out to be a fount from whence the collection of all personality traits that ebb and flow in the world of many self-consciousnesses with personality traits emerges. It is also the sink into which that same ebb and flow disappear into oblivion. Thus, "the individual allows free play to the stream of the actual world flowing in upon it, or else breaks it off and transforms it."
The individual self-consciousness is inseparable from the world of self-consciousnesses with personality traits. The free will that defines self-consciousness defines the world of self-consciousnesses. The conformist loses the free will that dwells at its fundamental core, and is carried adrift by the fluctuating ebbs and flows of approval and disapproval of the world of self-consciousnesses with personality traits. The deviant retains his free will, and serves as the very source and sink of those very same personality traits.
The personality traits of the individual, therefore, is what its world is. The world, conversely, turns out to be nothing but a collection of individuals, each with their roles of deviants and conformists, to be experienced and to produce more individuals with personalities. To observe an individual, furthermore, is to observe the world in ossified form. Reason observes the relation of self-consciousness to its immediate activity.
Recall that nature undergoes a self-generated, self-determining movement and alteration according to the law of fractal self-similarity. The law of fractal self-similarity is not distinct from nature. By observing self-consciousness, Reason has not affirmed that self-consciousness imitates nature. Nature is a self-generated, self-determining movement that exhibits a content. Thought is a collection of fixed and inert essences that have no unifying principle that points to their being a self-generated, self-determining movement.
That formal unifying structure cannot be lost sight of, or else Reason no longer observes itself as rational thinking. Without this unifying structure according to which thought must adhere to in order to be rational at all, thougnt cannot be rational. But the thought which Reason observes is rational. Therefore this unifying structure exists. In order to preserve this formal unifying structure, reason must observe itself thinking in relation to a content that is distinct from the activity of self-conscious Reason. Thus, Reason observes self-consciousness as it relates to external actuality, i.e. organic nature, inorganic nature, and self-consciousness, whether it be its own or of another organism capable of rational self-consciousness. Reason seeks the Law of Psychology.
Reason Observing Self-Consciousness in its Relation to External Actuality
Reason observes rational self-consiousness and its relation to inorganic nature, organic nature, and self-consciousness, whether it be its own or of another. Nature has a unifying structure, where it generates itself and determines its own content independent of the activity of self-consciousness. When nature is observed in its purity, independent of the activity of self-consciousness, that structure is not lost. It exists. When thought is observed in its purity, independent of its relation to the exhibitions of nature, the unifying structure of thought that would be analogous to fractal self-similarity is lost. It is lost because such a structure does not exist.
This unifying structure that underlies all of nature is the universal substance of external actuality. It is a simple form that generates a complex array of content by repeated iterations of the of its manifested content on itself; it is a self-coding code. This is the law of fractal self-similarity. The content of nature which is exhibited to self-consciousness determines the contents of the thoughts of that self-consciousness. Since self-conscious Reason is a function of an organism that lives for a finite amount of time, the totality of nature's infinite content cannot be observed by a singular organism. Only a finite fraction of that content can be observed by any single self-conscious and rational organism. The content which that organism does observe determines the formal structure of thought that allows it to think about and relate to external actuality. This formal structure is the rationally self-conscious organism's personality.
A personality is a set of habits, customs, ways of thinking, and emotions that self-consciousness acquires in its relation to external actuality. This set is the content that defines a personality. There exist a wide array of possible content for personality, i.e. habits, customs, ways of thinking, emotions, etc., from which self-consciousness selects only a portion to define its own unique personality. The selection is driven by the idiosyncratic inclinations and desires of the individual self-consciousness.
The content of personality selected from a larger array is finite in size, as is the larger array. The kinds of habits, customs, ways of thinking, emotions, etc. which self-consciousness can select from, based off its own inclinations and desires, is bound by the general actuality in which self-consciousness finds itself. Further, notice that self-consciousness is not its personality. Since self-consciousness as Reason is a reconciliation between the changeable and unchangeable, self-consciousness has both changeable and unchangeable aspects. Its personality may change, over time, however, there is something about self-consciousness that does not change over time. That unchangeable aspect is the essence/core of self-consciousness, i.e. the object that self-consciousness is certain of being the basis of all reality.
Observational psychology records the general permutations of personality, and the content that defines it. Every self-consciousness is said to have personality traits. Like the laws of thought, Reason considers these personality traits as inert, unchangeable qualities that define an individual, not restless movements that may change over time. Nothing can be said about the specific circumstances, i.e. the specific character of the individual's environment, whence these traits emerge. Every individual is a contingent medley of personality traits lumped together like a things in a sack.
Two opposed sides emerge: on the one hand, we have an actual individual who exists in spacetime, with changeable and unchangeable aspects. The changeable aspects of the individual are its observable personality traits, the unchangeable aspect of the individual is its unchangeable essence. On the other hand, we have an inert unity of observable personality traits - again, we see the re-emergence of a thing, the individual, and its determinate properties, its personality traits. Reason now has to find a law to describe how the individual as an unchangeable being interacts with its personality traits.
There exist two possibilities that result from the interaction between the individual and his personality traits. The individual may, first of all, sink into its personality traits. For it, there is no difference between what it fundamentally is and its personality. The individual conceives himself to be his personality, and thus acts accordingly. Personality, like genes, is exhibited for others to see. Thus, this individual is concerned with engaging in performance. Thus, what emerges is an individual engaged in a persentation of self, being nothing more than what it presents to the external world.
Otherwise, the individual may regard itself as something absolutely distinct from its personality traits; it resists sinking into its personality traits, and is therefore indifferent to the show that the conformist is immersed in. This individual retains its awareness of his own essential, unchangeable, infinite core, and steadfastly clings to it. Rather than be altered by the flux of the world's standards of approval or disapproval, the individual alters the world of other self-conscious personalities. He may do so with or with an alternative in mind. If he alters the world of other self-consciousnesses with an alternative in mind, he is a reformist, or revolutionary. If he alters the world without such an alternative, he destroys it, and is thus a deviant, or criminal.
There can be no deterministic, mechanistic law that would decide whether an individual conforms to the world, or deviates from it. One would think otherwise, since the personality traits of the individual control the individual; the individual does not control its personality traits, not even their acquisition, since its inclinations and desires are genetically determined, and the actuality in which it is immersed that provide an array of personality traits to choose from is limited in scope. There must be a law that determines how an individual chooses its personality traits and interacts with them. Yet, since the fundamental infinite core of the individual self-consciousness is fundamentally for itself, i.e self-determining and independent, or as the stoic would say, free, the free choice of the individual to either conform or deviate from its personality traits, and the world of other self-consciousnesses with personality traits, precludes the possibility of such a law existing.
Reason abandons its search for a universal, necessary, schematizable law that relates the individual and its personality traits; the free will of the individual absolutely prohibits the existence of such a law. Thus, Reason turns to a new object that has emerged where no such choice is possible. This new object, like the previous, has two opposing sides. On the one hand, there is the individual and his personality traits. Reason is indifferent to how the individual interacts with its personality traits; the possibility of choice is no longer an obstacle for Reason's search for a link between the individual and external actuality. Opposed to the individual and his personality traits, there exists a fluctuating world of individuals with their own personality traits.
 |
He knew himself a villain—but he deem'd
The rest no better than the thing he seem'd;
And scorn'd the best as hypocrites who hid
Those deeds the bolder spirit plainly did.
He knew himself detested, but he knew
The hearts that loath'd him, crouch'd and dreaded too.
Lone, wild, and strange, he stood alike exempt
From all affection and from all contempt
|
The array of personality traits that the individual chooses from to determine his own personality originates from this world. The conformist individual gets lost in this world and flows along with the fluctuating ebbs and flows of approval and disapproval, and constructs its personality to attain maximum approval and minimum disapproval. The deviant individual is indifferent to its own personality traits, and indeed constructs its own, drawing from a secret well of infinite scope to define its own personality. It is the Byronic hero, who by altering itself from this infinite well alters the world of other self-consciousnesses with personality traits. This individual turns out to be a fount from whence the collection of all personality traits that ebb and flow in the world of many self-consciousnesses with personality traits emerges. It is also the sink into which that same ebb and flow disappear into oblivion. Thus, "the individual allows free play to the stream of the actual world flowing in upon it, or else breaks it off and transforms it."
The individual self-consciousness is inseparable from the world of self-consciousnesses with personality traits. The free will that defines self-consciousness defines the world of self-consciousnesses. The conformist loses the free will that dwells at its fundamental core, and is carried adrift by the fluctuating ebbs and flows of approval and disapproval of the world of self-consciousnesses with personality traits. The deviant retains his free will, and serves as the very source and sink of those very same personality traits.
The personality traits of the individual, therefore, is what its world is. The world, conversely, turns out to be nothing but a collection of individuals, each with their roles of deviants and conformists, to be experienced and to produce more individuals with personalities. To observe an individual, furthermore, is to observe the world in ossified form. Reason observes the relation of self-consciousness to its immediate activity.
