Active Reason: Pleasure and Necessity, the Truth Behind Hedonism

Pleasure and Necessity

Introduction

Reason has identified itself with the element of life, and is now active. Reason lives actively. Active Reason is the second shape of Reason. It experiences and lives life, yet its purpose is at a level above and beyond the previous shapes of self-consciousness. What I mean to say is that since self-consciousness is still a biological animal, it must eat, drink, and reproduce. Active Reason, like natural self-consciousness before experiencing the fear of death in the life or death struggle for recognition, is pure desire. It has absconded with the self-control it produced as the stoic. This shape of self-consciousness, further, has the experience of the struggle for recognition behind it, as well as the experience of lordship and bondage. Unlike natural self-consciousness, active Reason is not merely satisfied with satisfying its desire. It is concerned with verifying its certainty of being the universal substrate of all reality. This certainty is the result of a reconciliation of the unchangeable and changeable aspects of consciousness. The fear of death has compelled self-consciousness to restrain its desire, work, produce finished products, and think.

The natural self-consciousness prior to that struggle also had this certainty of self-consciousness being the basis of all reality, however, it was an instinctive, fragile, certainty. The fragility of this certainty was revealed when the entire being of self-consciousness quaked at the fear of death. As active Reason, identifying its essence with the fluid essence of life, infinity, self-consciousness has regained this certainty of self-consciousness being the basis of all reality. The satisfaction of its desire is coupled with its drive to demonstrate both to itself and other self-consciousnesses the truth of its self certainty. Active Reason, as was revealed by Reason observing the laws of psychology, lives in a world of other self-consciousnesses with personality traits. The drive of active Reason to satisfy its desire, combined with its desire to raise its certainty of its own self-consciousness as being the basis of all reality, i.e. its self-assuredness, for itself and other self-consciousnesses is a drive to seek social status. In this unshakeable self-assured search for personal advantage, at the expense of others, Reason acts in its own self-interest. Thus, active Reason is rationally self-interested.

The lord that emerged from the life and death struggle for recognition did not have this self-assuredness that active Reason now has. The bondsman has elevated himself to the status of lord, in theory. He acts in a rationally self-interested manner to convert his elevated view of himself as lord, his intention, and make it into reality, an accomplished deed.

The experience of observing, or passive, Reason has given self-consciousness an exhaustive and intuitive view of nature, organic and inorganic. Even though Reason failed to establish its certainty of being the basis of all reality by passively observing nature, and seeking to observe itself as a thing, Reason has learned how to distinguish inner and outer. Reason knows the difference between inner purpose and the outer action necessary to externalize that purpose; Active Reason knows the difference between intention and deed. Its pursuit of pleasure and social status is, therefore, a cerebral pursuit.

This shape of active Reason is the lowest shape that any self-consciousness that has experienced Western history, alive at the time of this writing, can assume. Thus, this most elementary shape is commonly referred to as a degenerate; a prevalence of degenerate self-consciousnesses in a society is a sign of that society's collapse and decay. However, as we shall see, beginning with this article: the degenerate active Reason is the outward appearance of decay that contains the inner principle of rebirth.

The dual pursuit of pleasure and social status is a fundamental activity necessary for the functioning of a well ordered state. The shapes of active Reason, starting with self-consciousness that seeks pleasure and finds necessity, will all learn from the touchstone of experience that they are fundamentally incomplete. Self-consciousness will be unable to actualize its purpose, the rational self-interest that motivates each shape of active Reason to act, into an accomplished deed. Its intentions will conflict with the nature of objective reality, as well as the very nature of self-consciousness itself. Active Reason will overcome the impasse it encounters by assuming a new shape. Each shape will pull active Reason further and further from the isolated, selfish pursuits of the individual, and closer and closer to the integrated, selfish pursuits of the member of a family, and by extension, the citizen of the state. The Ethical State is the missing piece that completes active Reason.

The journey that transforms the isolated, rationally self-interested individual that pursues pleasure and social status into the member of the family and citizen of the state, i.e. self-consciousness as Spirit, begins here. Every individual self-consciousness in the shape of active Reason treads this singular path, each believing that it is pursuing its own peculiar individual path without knowing that all roads lead to Rome. Spirit is the Milliarum Aureum, erected by Augustus Caesar, towards which active Reason marches, and whence it came.

Rational Self-Interest Seeking Pleasure and Status

Having identified its self-certainty with the essence of life, Reason sets pleasure, and the social status derived from being seen to enjoy the riches of life, as its primary teleological purpose. As self-conscious Reason, the elevation of its certainty that self-consciousness is the universal substrate of all reality is also its primary teleological goal. Thus, active Reason identifies these two primary teleological goals; it is engaged in the egoistic pursuit of maximizing the pleasure it feels from its self-satisfaction.

Self-consciousness knows itself inwardly to be reality. This inward, self-reflecting knowing, no longer has an object to which it can be correlated. Sense certainty correlated the certainty of its senses to the objective immediacy of being, perception to the thing and its properties, the understanding to the unconditioned, intelligible universal, natural self-consciousness to the infinity of life, observing Reason to itself as objective Category, i.e. the self as a thoughtform that could be objectively observed, which turned out to be the skull. Active Reason identifies itself to the essence of life, infinity, as did natural self-consciousness. Thus, following the pattern of natural self-consciousness, active Reason finds the objective correlate to its inward self-certainty in another self-consciousness.

Active Reason is certain that this other self-consciousness is in principle already itself. Therefore, active Reason does not desire to self-negation, i.e. servitude, of another self-consciousness, but rather the other's overt display of recognizing active Reason's inward certainty. It seeks social status, its egoistic pursut is constrained by what other self-consciousnesses approve. It will satisfy its animal desires, and feel pleasure from that satisfaction only if others at the very least approve of its actions. Since it seeks status, self-consciousness seeks the esteem of others.

In principle, the independent otherness of other self-consciousnesses is an empty show, a performance, devoid of essence and actuality. In principle, self-consciousness and the others are not many, but one. Active Reason need only act, and its truth will, without resistance, reveal itself. The actualization of this unity that exists in principle is for self-consciousness the enjoyment of pleasure. It gains the esteem of others, becomes one with them in principle, i.e. makes friends, and gains social status. 

For active Reason, true actuality is merely the being which is the actuality of the individual self-consciousness. Thus, it leaves behind the objective knowledge, and theory, as a grey shadow which is in the act of passing out of sight. Reason plunges into life and indulges to the full the pure individuality in which it appears. The shadowy existence of science, laws, principles, which alone stand between active Reason and its true actuality, individual self-consciousness, vanishes like a lifeless mist which cannot compare with the certainty of its own reality.

The pleasure it attains from the esteem of others, for having satisfied its own desires, is the most fundamental binding agent that unites at least two, and therefore many, self-consciousnesses. They are united, in principle, but in fact they remain distinct individuals. Each self-consciousness is divided from the other by virtue of having different thoughts. Self-differentiated, they are unified. The same inward unified self-differentiated reality of self-consciousnesses has become externalized, distributed among many self-consciousnesses. Self-consciousness has formed a clique, and is certain that every self-consciousness is, thinks, behaves, and acts like itself, despite the differing and colorful displays of many kinds of personalities.

The clique self-consciousness has form is the inward activity of self-consciousness, self-differentiated unity, exteralized into objective reality. The formation of this clique is for self-consciousness its accomplished deed. Its internal intention, its purpose, i.e. the rationally self-interested pursuit of pleasure and social status, has been actualized. Reason has attained the godlike and robust tranquil freedom of ataraxia. Dionysus is lead by a troop of strong sober wild tigers, accompanied by his clique, most importantly by his companion and tutor, drunken Silenus, riding a weakened drunk donkey. 

Self-Interest Confronting Necessity

Reason engages in the revelry of the Now. The irresistible and imperturbable march of time does not cease. Even the most self-assured rationally self-interested self-consciousness must confront decay and perish. The absolute unyieldingness of individual existence is pulverized on the equally unrelenting but continuous flux of objective actuality. 

In forming its clique, self-consciousness has externalized itself as a differentiated self-unity. This externalization of self, its purpose and intention, challenges the unyielding flux of nature. Both self-consciousness and nature are expressions of the infinite flux of life. Its clique is composed of many individuals, yet has raised itself to universality. The clique has not transcended the finite particularity that defines each member. Thus, over time, this beautiful unity must dissipate. Friends drift apart, either in life or in death.

Through the pleasurable externalization of self-consciousness, active Reason confronts a lifeless necessity. Neither the clique, nor the rationally self-interested individuals that compose it, can withstand the iron will of infinity, the law of fractal self-similarity, that unfolds and underlies the objective and immortal order of nature. 

The transition from living pleasure to lifeless necessity is an unmediated, irresistible, inversion. In successfully attaining the pleasure of satisfying its desires and acquiring the esteem of another for doing so, there is no purpose or end beyond that same acquisition. With age, the desire dissipates, and along with it, the esteem of others. Any friends that remain remain only due to the memory of youth. They long to return to those days, yet cannot, since time flows only from present to future. Those who did not belong to the clique are indifferent to this self-consciousness' externalized, and verified, certainty of being the basis of all reality.

The infinite flux of nature, the irresistable flow of the law of fractal self-similarity, is the law of necessity. Self-conscious active Reason too derives its essence from the infinite flux of life. Thus, the law of necessity is the law of its own heart. Active Reason assumes a new shape, which can called the law of the heart.

Reason Observing Self-Consciousness as Thing: On Action, Deeds, And Pseudoscience

Reason Observing The Relation of Self-Consciousness to its Immediate Activity

Introduction

Self-consciousness has reached a milestone. In observing itself, a systematic account of self-consciousness has emerged. The seed began as the sense-certainty of a single self-consciousness has transformed, by logically following through each shape, encountering contradictions, and reconciling them, producing a new shape, and repeating said process. Each new shape presumes the totality of all that was explored in the previous shapes. In particular, we have reached a stage where self-consciousness is rational. It has reconciled its own individual changeable particularity, being confined to a finite physical body, with its universal unchangeability. This reconciliation has produced self-consciousness's instinct certainty of being the basis of all reality; a certainty that must be objectively and empirically verified by the passive observation of nature, and the passive observation of the interaction between self-consciousness and nature. The milestone reached is the following: self-consciousness observes the interaction between one self-consciousness and another. It discovers that self-consciousness is a social being.

In the previous shapes of self-consciousness, beginning as desire, developing into sexual relationshiops, proceeding to the relation between lord and bondsman, whence the stoic, skeptic, and unhappy consciousness emerged, self-consciousness too was social. Yet, this sociality was a negative relationship. It was primarily driven by self-preservation, i.e. fear. In particular, the sociality of self-consciousness in the previous shapes was driven by the fear of death. The fear of death is a desire for something to not occur. Self-consciousness does not want to die, and since it is confined to a finite body that dies in the flux of appearances, it views the objective flux of appearances as something utterly distinct from itself, since the flux of appearances can never perish.

Nature cannot die - it is unchangeable. This unchangeable aspect of nature is first discovered by self-consciousness as the stoic. By immersing itself in thought, and restraining its outward show of emotion, due to the fear of death, self-consciousness experiences the infinite, inexhaustible tranquility of thought. At this stage, self-consciousness cannot identify its own unchangeable, inner tranquility with the unchangeable tranquility of nature. Nature is dangerous; it may bring about the death of self-consciousness. This unchangeable being, that does not surrender in the struggle for recognition, and becomes lord, is also another self-consciousness. Self-consciosness fears nature and other self-consciousnesses, for both can bring about its death.

Nature, since it is a fluctuation of a play of forces, also changes. As skeptic, self-consciousness is pure change. Still, since self-consciousness fears death, it fears nature as a changeable thing, as well as other self-consciousnesses, for both can still bring about its death. As unhappy consciousness, self-consciousness is social, yet this sociality is a necessity. Self-consciousness cannot reconcile its changeable and unchangeable aspects, i.e. escape its unhappiness, without the help of others. The reconciliation of the two poles of unhappy consciousness cannot occur without the mediator, i.e. another self-consciousness.

Self-consciousness desires to reconcile both poles, for it learns not to fear another self-consciousness, but to unite with it. Thus, when the unchangeable incarnates into a physical body, the self-consciousnesses who witness this incarnate are engulfed in absolue fear in the presence of this divinity, yet are able to lay aside their fear because this divinity is universal thought, logos, made flesh. The unhappy consciousness learns not to fear other self-consciousnesses, and through work, not to fear nature. Laying its fear aside, self-consciousness emerges as Reason, being fascinated by the otherness of nature, and other self-consciousnesses.

Thus, self-conscious Reason has emerged as a social being which participates in life with other self-consciousnesses not because of a fear of death, but voluntarily. Further, when self-consciousness observes other self-consciousness, it observes itself. Thus, at this stage, self-conscious Reason seeks itself as an objective thing, which at this point is a fluctuating ebb and flow of deviant and conformist individuals presenting themselves to each other and themselves as individual self-consciousnesses with personality traits.

The personality derives its traits by means of its interaction with nature, i.e. the environment, and other self-consciousnesses. Each individual engages in a show of self, furnish those personality traits that others approve, and personality traits others do not approve. The self is thus a product of its interaction other individuals and nature; it is the social life of all ossified into the conscious experience of a single individual with personality traits. All individuals have personality traits. Those that identify the self with their personality traits become conformists. Those that recognize themselves as being more than their changeable personality traits become deviants, either criminals or reformists.

Self-consciousness is not engaging in probabilistic reasoning. It has achieved a view of itself and its relation to society that approaches certainty. Self-consciousness, however, is rational. Amidst this ebb and flow of conforming individuals with personality traits, with their source and sink in the deviant individuals, self-consciousness still seeks to verify its own certainty of being the basis of all reality by the use of universalizable, necessary, schematizable laws. Its primary concern is to establish this certainty by finding a law that identifies self-consciousness with itself, other self-consciousnesses, and nature (organic and inorganic).

The object that self-consciousness confronts is a society, an interaction of personality types both deviant and conforming. It includes both deviance and conformity in its objective analysis of society because it wants to remove contingency. An individual may choose to conform or deviant from the finite set of acceptable personality traits that a society may adopt at any given time. By removing contingency, it seeks necessity, it seeks to schematize this necessity, and universalize that necessary schema to find a law that relates single individuals to the collection of individuals in society. By finding this law, self-consciousness will be able to verify its own certainty of being the basis of all reality.

Individuals develop specific personality traits in accordance with two constraints. On the one hand, individuals refer to the approval or disapproval of other individual self-consciousnesses with personality traits. However, it need not take the approval or disapproval of others seriously, it may be a deviant. Regardless, it develops its own personality traits via imitation or innovation. The collection personality traits which it imitates, or those that it can derive from innovation, is limited. It can either draw from others, or from its own previous experiences and shapes of self-consciousness that transcend the limits of a single lifespan. We have seen that the kinds of personality traits that self-consciousness can possess are constrained by the environment, i.e. nurture.

The nature of the physical body that self-consciousness finds itself confined in is the second constraint to the kind of personality self-consciousness can develop. The personality of self-consciousness is constrained by its genetics, and thus is a product of law of fractal self-similarity. By finding a law that identifies the law of fractal self-similarity, which is the basis of nature, with a law that determines how an individual self develops its personality traits, it will find a union between self-consciousness and nature. Being certain that it, as self-consciousness, is the universal substrate of all reality, it expects to find the inverted law, i.e. that like becomes unlike, and unlike becomes like, demonstrating with certainty that self-consciousness is the basis of all reality.

Self-consciousness expects to find itself by observing the interaction between individuals and other individuals in society. Since every individual with personality traits, whether deviant or conformist, is a product of the genetics of nature, or the approval or disapproval of others, and since self-consciousness is confined to a finite physical body, making it impossibe to observe all society at once, it follows that self-consciousness observes society ossified into the personality of a single individual self-consciousness.

Self-consciousness Observing the Individual

The individual self-consciousness is confined and immersed in a physical, organic, and finite living body in the flux of appearances. Though he is confined in this finite space, it is not determined by it - it has independent free will. It interacts with other self-consciousnesses, also confined and immersed in finite physical bodies, yet are independent. An individual that has a real existence, i.e. the physical body to which its self-consciousness is confined and immersed, and is a self-consciousness exists in and for itself. It exists in itself  because it has an original, self-generated, determinate being of its own, i.e. its physical body. It exists for itself because it is a self-relating, independent, infinite, self-consciousness. Since it exists for itself, it exists for another, as was explored in the section on perception. The conformist exists for another, the deviant for itself. Regardless, as we saw in perception, being for self is being for another; thus, both conformist and deviant are in essence a free self-consciousness that have chosen to be one or the other.

Reason seeks to establish a lawful link between self-consciousness as a free activity and the physical body to which it is confined. This individual has a set of personality traits derived from its interaction with other self-consciousnesses; the society in which the individual spends its lifetime is ossified into the personality of the individual. However, no two individuals from the same society have the same personality. There is a third element present that these two individuals have in common, yet allow both to differentiate themselves from the other.

As a free activity of self-consciousness, each individual chooses to adopt a certain set of personality traits over others. The personality of an individual is a unique product of the individual's choices. Reason finds that a lawful link between the free self-conscious activity of the individual and his physical body can be established through observing the products of the individual's free choice: his personality, its interaction with his free self-conscious activity, and its physical body. Indeed, one of the choices which the individual engages in is what kinds of foods it will eat, and what kinds of physical activity, and in what amounts, it will engage in. The individual's choices has a direct effect, as far as its genes permit, on the shape of its physical body:

"His body is the expression of himself which he himself has produced; it is at the same time a sign...through which the individual only makes known what he really is, when he sets his original nature to work."

The body is a sign that points to the fact of the individual's free self-conscious activity. The formation of the physical body, which is an observable outer whole, belongs to and results from the inner activity of the free self-conscious individual. Once again, a distinction between inner and outer emerges, and once again, Reason seeks another lawful link between inner and outer. This time, the link involves self-consciousness as a free activity on the one hand, and its physical body on the other.

This link, if it is to be exhaustive, and if it is to avoid any further distinctions into major and minor premises requiring the presence of yet another middle term, must be expressed, once again, as follows: the outer is an expression of the inner. The inner activity of the self-conscious individual exhibits itself to observing Reason through the observable outer body. The exhibition of the inner activity of a self-conscious individual through the observable outer body of the individual is action.

The inner attains externality, it becomes empirically observable, through the outer by engaging in action. The outer acts only as an organ through which the inner is made visible. The personality of the individual can only be expressed for others to see by the actions of the individual. The different kinds of activity in which the individual wishes to exhibit his inner activity is alloted to different organs. The speaking mouth, the working hand, and, if you like, the legs too are the organs of performance and actualization. An individual's personality can be inferred by the actions he engages in.

The action of an individual is observed by other free, self-conscious individuals; how they are affected by said action, whether they will react in one way or another, cannot be known by the originator of the act. The action as a reality becomes separated from the individual who originated it; for example, the speech is heard by others, and each interprets the speech differently. In a word, the inner escapes the confines of the individual's body and is left at the mercy of someone or something other than itself. The personality of an individual, as it is in reality, and as the individual himself knows it to be, is lost when interpreted by others.

Once exhibited to other self-consciousnesses through the organs of the author of the action, the action puts itself at the mercy of another being, whether it be another self-consciousess or an object, that is immersed in the fluctuating play of forces. The spoken word and accomplished acts are susceptible to being twisted to mean something other than what was originally intended by the author. The speaking and acting irresistibly and immediately becomes the spoken and done, since every Now irresistibly and immediately becomes not-Now. Every action becomes a deed.

Reason finds that the deed, like the action whence it originates, is an outer externalization of the free inner activity of a single individual self-consciousness that is distinct and indifferent to the inner. The individual loses control of what the deed is supposed to represent. The deed no longer is a sign that points to the inner activity of the individual. Every action must become a deed, yet no deed expresses the inner activity of the individual who originated it. The outer is not the expression of the inner, and thus no lawful and necessary link can be found between the inner self-conscious activity of the individual, and his actions.

Yet, the actions of the individual must be expressed by means of the individual's physical body. The physical body is a product of the individual's choices. Further, the physical body cannot assume a shape that is distinct and indifferent from the inner activity of the individual self-consciousness. Reason is able to hold on to its conviction that the outer is an expression of the inner. The physical shape of the individual's body is an expression of the individual's free self-conscious inner activity. Reason engages in Physiognomy.

Reason Observing the Relation between Self-Consciousness and its Body, especially the Face: Body Language and Physiognomy

First, a word about physiognomy. 

Physiognomy is any attempt to infer the inner character and personality of an individual by observing his outer appearance, especially his face. Traditionally, specific personality traits are associated with specific features of the face. Two opposing spheres, the inner activity of self-consciousness and the outer shape of the body, in particular an organ such as mouth or hand, are related by a lawful link. Observing Reason, from the start, has been attempting to find a universalizable, schematizable, necessary link between two opposing spheres. The very act of observation is such a link, bringing together reconciled changeable and unchangeable character of self-conciousness with changeable and unchangeable nature, self-generated by the law of fractal self-similarity. Its observation is empirical and objective. Data is gathered from the observation of recurring patterns, distinguishing marks, are brought together by probabilistic inductive reasoning, and so on, all while being related to the universal rationality of self-consciousness - its certainty that it is the fundamental substrate of all reality. 

The same underlying dynamic is occuring when Reason engages in physiognomy. Thus, it appears to be authoritative and scientific. Reason relates inner and outer, and seeks to establish the lawfulness of this relation. The organ links the inner activity of self-consciousness with its deed. Both self-consciousness and the deed are active, yet the organ is in itself a passive shape that engages in subtle movements expressing the activity of the inner self-conscious activity of the individual, translating this inner unseen activity to an outer deed, which can be seen. The organ is both a passive and active being. Self-consciousness influences the organ. The inner activity of self-consciousness causes the organ to move, whether it be the mouth to speak, or the hand to work, or some other action set into motion by the organ that turns into a deed. 

The deed, as we have seen, separates from the individual inner activity of the individual self-consciousness once it is externalized. The organ stays with the individual; the mouth does not drift away from the face in the act of speaking. Yet, the organ is part of the living body of self-consciousness, and not self-consciousness itself. The former is distinct from the latter. The individual self-consciousness has a specific nature and an innate peculiarity, determined by the genetic material that fundamentally underly his physical body, as well as the result of the kind of cultivation and education he has experienced. The inner expression of this peculiar inner activity begins to make its external appearance with a mouth, hand, voice, handwriting, etc., that are peculiar to this individual. The individual, however, is not his mouth when be speaks, for example. Yet, the speech is an expression of the inner activity of the individual. There is a complicated relation between the inner activity of the individual and his outer expression.

In regards to the face, certain features of the face point to certain personality traits of the individual. The same organs which the individual uses to engage in actions and deeds, to express the inner activity of the individual, exhibit personality traits that the individual may not wish to exhibit. The face, just like the rest of self-consciousness' physical body, is a product of self-consciousness' inner activity. While the individual can choose to deceive others, and exhibit personality traits that he wishes them to see, the face cannot deceive. As the picture above shows, a deceitful individual can be found out just be examining his face.

However, the organ is distinct from the deed. A deceitful mouth is distinct from deceitful speech. The deed may originate from the organ, but once the deed is externalized and circulated in other self-consciousnesses, the organ through which the deed originated remains with the individual. Further, the organ, e.g. the mouth, is involved in movements, as in facial expressions or gestures, not at all involved with the action itself.

The individual observes and controls these subtle movements, and also reflects upon them. The thoughts that are produced from this self-reflection of his organ's movements may be distinct from the deeds produced by this organ. An individual with a deceitful face may engage in sincere speech. An individual with a deceitful face may engage in deceitful speech that appears to be sincere because he knows how to make his face look sincere. Conversely, a sincere individual, through reflecting on the subtle movements of his mouth and other facial expressions, may produce sincere speech that nevertheless appears to be deceitful - however odd this may seem. In sum, an individual can wear a mask; the countenance of the individual need not express the true inner activity of the individual.

The being for self of the inner activity of the individual is expressed for another through the organ. Yet, the relation between the two cannot be expressed lawfully. The individual may use his mouth to speak sincerely, deceitfully, or not at all; his free will allows him to choose which kind of action he will engage in. It is not possible to express free will using deterministic laws - both are mutually exclusive. The inner activity of the individual, therefore, cannot be observed by examining the external physical characteristics of the individual. The character of the individual is indifferent to his countenance.

The individual can freely choose what he will do, and how he will do it. Once the deed is done, however, it cannot be undone. The individual self-consciousness is an inner activity that expresses itself through action, which becomes a deed, regardless of how he looks like. The deed is accomplished by an individual. It is the stamp of his inner activity expressed for the all to see. Yet, the individual engages in a specific particular action - he cannot engage in universal action, since every individual is confined to a finite particular living body. Every deed emerges from a particular action, which in turn emerges from a particular intention of the individual.

The unobservable intentions of the individual becomes an observable deed through action. When the individual acts, his peculiar intention, recognized only by that same individual, becomes a univesal deed, recognized by all. The deeds of the individual, since they are observable, are regarded as the true inner activity of the individual externalized. After all, he did it. Therefore, he must have intended to do it. If the individual fancies that he intended to do something other than what the deed shows that he did, he merely deceives himself. An individual's true intentions is always expressed by the deed. There is a definite, necessary, universalizable, schematizable connection between the inner intention of the individual, and the external deed that expresses this intention.

Reason has found a lawful relationship between inner and outer. The individual intends to engage in some kind of action, and does. Now, observing Reason must show how the individual causes this transition from inner intention to outer deed. The inner activity of the individual must produce an effect on the outer body, qua cause, to enact a deed in accordance with his intentions. In order for a cause to produce an effect, both cause and effect must be made of the same substance. Since the effect is the movement of a corporeal organ, the cause, i.e. the inner activity of the individual, must also be corporeal.

The inner activity of the individual self-consciousness is infinite, self-differentiating while remaining in identity, movement. In other words, it is an unobservable self-relatedness that produces an objective effect, namely, a deed. At the same time, it is a corporeal self-related inner movement. This infinitely self-related inner movement must be located in a biological organ that causes other organs to move in subtle ways that allows the individual to engage in activities and produce deeds. Reason finds that the organ it is looking for that satisfies these requirements is the brain and spinal cord of the central nervous system.

All voluntary and involuntary actions are an effect produced by the brain and spinal cord, the cause, through the central nervous system. The brain, however, is not immediately observable without the help of technology. The brain is the seat of self-conscious activity. The seat of the brain is the skull. The brain, and thus self-consciousness, exhibits its inner character through the characteristics of the skull. Reason observes the skull, and in observing the skull, it observes the true essence of the self. Reason is engaged in Phrenology.

Reason Observing the Skull: Phrenology

Reason has arrived at phrenology, the science of character divination, faculty psychology, and what has been called "the only science of mind." It is based on the concept that the brain is the organ in which self-consciousness is seated, and that localized areas of the brain have specific functions. Aspects of an individual's personality can be empirically observed by observing the shapes of specific areas in the skull. The areas of the brain press against the skull and give the skull its objective shape. 

The brain is the inner being for self, the activity of self-consciousness, causally producing the activity of the individual. It is through the brain that the individual is able to translate intention into deed, and it is through the brain that the skull attains its shape. Reason establishes a link between the inner activity and intentions of the individual to the outer shape of the skull, the being for another of the activity of self-consciousness. The shape and size of the skull is determined by the shape and size of the brain, which in its turn is determined by the inner activity, the intentions, of the individual.

For every intention, there is a deed. Thus, Reason must be able to infer the deeds of the individual by examining the skull, just as it is able to infer the intentions of the individual by examining the skull. By examining the skull, Reason is supposed to be able to determine whether the individual is a poet, a murderer, thief, or any other kind of individual. All action, therefore, originates from the intentions of the individual determined by the rigid, inert skull.

The thoughts of the mind and the passions of the soul are ossified into the dead bone. Self-consciousness is thus no longer a fluid living movement, but a dead inert Thing. Reason confronts the self as a Thing in objective reality. Its intention was to establish its certainty that self was the universal substrate of all reality by relating the sphere of self-consciousness and the sphere of objective reality bereaved of self-consciousness, i.e. nature with laws. This law was supposed to be universalizable, schematizeable, and necessary. Reason found that nature was self-generating by the law of fractal self-similarity, and indeed, the skull too is self-generated by the law of fractal self-similarity. 

The skull points to the inner activity of self-consciousness, the brain; Reason can infer the personality traits and deeds of self-consciousness by passively observing, perhaps even measuring, the regions of the skull and brain. The skull is the perfect expression of the lawful union of self-consciousness and nature; observing Reason has found what it was looking for. Having arrived at phrenology, it has accomplished an activity - it has produced a deed that began as an intention. The intention was to empirically verify its certainty that the self is the universal substrate of all reality. All reality, the product of all the individual's thoughts, deeds, personality traits, indeed even the society in which he lives, as well as organic nature, inorganic nature, and the law of fractal self-similarity is gathered and ossified into the self-consciousness of the individual brain expressed by the skull.

There are no more gaps to fill. Observing Reason, qua observing Reason, having externalized its intention to itself, confronts itself as a dead thing, an empirical, observable, objective skull. The rigid certainty it sought is death. All fluidity, life, and activity has been lost. The skull has no independence, no free will. It is dead. Yet, it is the seat of the brain, i.e. self-consciousness. The skull bears the marks of the individual's living activity and his deeds. The skull also bears the marks of death. In uniting life and death, self-conscious Reason only finds death.

In confronting the rigid and inert skull, self-conscious Reason confronts its own rigid and inert certainty that self-consciousness is the universal substrate of all reality. In gazing upon the skull, an external expression of the inner activity of self-conscious Reason, Reason learns that its life of passive, empirical observation of nature is a living death. The life of a scientist is the life of a dead man who lives. Rather than find tranquility and satisfaction in this absolute self-communion, which all along it has sought, Reason finds itself in inner turmoil and dissatisfaction; Reason finds that it has not yet attained happiness. 

By observing the skull, Reason does in fact observe its own inner nature, the sum of its deeds, and the society in which it lives. It is dead. Yet, the skull is another  that Reason confronts. It is a thing with many properties. Reason learns that a self-consciousness is not a dead thing, but an infinitely living fluid movement, the essence of life. This essence, in and for itself, is utterly unobservable; nevertheless, the essence of life is knowable. The essence of life is, moreover, immediately knowable. Self-consciousness, in virtue of being a living Thing, not a dead Thing, is immediately aware of itself as a living Thing. The essence of life dwells immediately within self-consciousness. 

Reason finds that its certainty is not a passive, rigid, dead conviction of being all reality, but a living, fluid, active conviction. The essence defining self-conscious Reason's activity is no longer passive. Self-consciousness has assumed a new shape. It is active Reason.

Reason Observing Self-Consciousness: The Truth Behind Logic and Psychology

Reason Observing Self-Consciousness

Introduction

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. 

Yet, nature is bereaved of all self-conscious activity. Reason is certain that self-consciousness is the basis of all reality, that nature is rational, i.e. nature operates like self-conscious Reason in accordance to universal, necessary, schematizable rules. Reason seeks to verify that this certainty is truth. It has discovered through empirical observation that nature imitates self-conscious Reason. Further, the law of fractal self-similarity expressed by the relation between gene, cell, and organism reveal that it is the teleological purpose of all organic life in nature to exhibit itself. The exhibition of traits is necessary for the survival of organic nature; since organisms are free and independent of mechanistic laws that govern the inorganic matter in their environments, the presence of consciousness in organisms is necessary for the evaluation of this exhibition. In order to complete its search for the truth of its certainty, Reason now turns to observe itself as self-conscious activity, and to verify whether indeed self-consciousness imitates 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:

1. Everything that is, exists.
2. Nothing can simultaneously be and not be.
3. Each and every thing either is or is not.
4. 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:

(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]

"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. 

The multitude of fixed and inert patterns of logical thought which self-conscious Reason finds by observing itself is a formal structure when considered relative to the content which observing Reason senses in nature. When self-conscious Reason ignores the content that nature exhibits, and considers the multitude of fixed and inert patterns of thought without any reference to its content, the formal structure of thought becomes a content. This content is the patterns of thought which Reason objectively observes, and explains by means of the unifying principles, the laws of thought, that apply to any kind of thought.

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.

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.