How Consciousness Creates Reality - From Perception to Free Will

The Self, Emptiness, and Awareness

In this exploration of self-identity, I argue that the self is not a standalone entity but an integral part of a broader consciousness. Deep meditation reveals the self as a construct beyond egoistic confines, interlinked with the external world and others' experiences. Decisions arise from an awareness that transcends individual ego, suggesting that our sense of self is an inexhaustible center of dynamic consciousness rather than an ultimate emptiness.

This is a chapter of the book Truthfulness. The Consciousness that Creates Reality.

Claus Janew

Can we trace back consciousness, reality, awareness, and free will to a single basic structure without giving up any of them? Can the universe exist in both real and individual ways without being composed of both? This dialogue founds consciousness and freedom of choice on the basis of a new reality concept that also includes the infinite as far as we understand it. Just the simplest distinction contains consciousness. It is not static, but a constant alternation of perspectives. From its entirety and movement, however, there arises a freedom of choice being more than reinterpreted necessity and unpredictability. Although decisions ultimately involve the whole universe, they are also free in varying degrees here and now. The unity and openness of the infinite enables the individual to be creative while this creativity directly and indirectly enters into all other individuals without impeding them. A contrary impression originates only in a narrowed awareness. But even the most conscious and free awareness can neither anticipate all decisions nor extinguish individuality. Their creativity is secured.

"Great Read. Thank you for putting your work out into a conscious space for all. Much appreciated."

Marcel P. Londt, PhD, South Africa

Read sample (60%)
Buy the book

Also in this book:

The Reality of Free Will

The uniqueness of each standpoint, each point of effect, can only be "overcome" by the standpoint changing to other standpoints and returning. In such alternation, which can also appear as constant change, lies the unity of the world. The wholeness of an alternation, however, is a structure of consciousness due to the special relationship between the circumscribing periphery and the infinitesimal center. This process structure unites determinacy and indeterminacy also totally in every place. Therefore, everywhere we are dealing with forms of consciousness with more or less freedom of choice and an increasingly unknown depth. We live in a world of choosing consciousness, or rather awareness. In this respect, our environment expresses a deep truth about ourselves.

"I am impressed by the comprehensiveness of your interdisciplinary approach. There are some major philosophical concepts which you weave very well into a necessary system of reality: potential, the one and the many, alternation, constant change, the reality and uniqueness of oneiric experience and the whole, interdependence, infinity, the mandate of opposites and many more. The combination of these ideas cannot be attributed solely to any other of the established classical and modern thinkers of whom I am aware. I thank you for your enlightenment."

E W Ralph, UK

Claus Janew

The main argument in this book is the undeniable openness of every system to the unknown. And the fundamental question goes: What does this openness produce?

We are a part of the infinite universe and an incorporation of its wholeness. Both for us means an individualized reality, through which the universe expresses itself and on the other hand through which it is built up with. It also means our necessity, importance and indestructibility for the sum of its incorporations. Most connections among ourselves are hardly conscious for us. Meanwhile the infinitesimality structure of all consciousness guarantees not only the logical lack of inconsistency of these connections but also the freedom of choice of every individual.

Our goal by no means can be to decide completely consciously. Responsibility contains spontaneity or rather trust in a meaningful working together of the forces. We increasingly become aware of our role in the entire relationship and we learn to contribute optimally to the value fulfillment of all individuals, ourselves included. Beyond the supposed differences between objective and subjective reality, we at some point of awareness comprehend that we create our reality out of our innermost depths.

"A fabulously good work. Arguments and expositions are coherent. Fascinating!"

Karin Kuretschka, Germany

Read sample (60%)

Buy the book

"Claus Janew's undertaking to put down on paper mental processes and procedures that we cannot always analyze, recognize, or follow with our external senses, and especially the depth with which he treats the subject, is simply admirable."

Ingomar Doering, United States

"Again and again I open it, reread passages, chapters, and follow your thoughts, smile, thank you inwardly that you wrote it, spent years finding words and ways for it, and realize in everything the perfect solution..."

C. I. M., Germany

Claus Janew

Are you tired of feel-good attitudes and really want to solve your problems? This unusual combination of down-to-earth life practice and magic-like creativity focuses on authenticity and seriousness as you learn about love, trust, and higher harmony. The one to two page chapters offer helpful philosophical, psychological and spiritual insights and do not exclude "radical" approaches. In particular, the daily life of truthfulness is linked to the possibility of consciously creating a better reality.

"This book is like a box of good tools. You can put it in a corner and take it out when you need it, but its true value is only revealed when you use the tool. Then you will learn to realize unimaginable abilities and creativity in your life and become a 'real person.'"

Kurt Folwill, Oldenburg, Germany

Read sample (60%)

Buy the book

"The book 'Truthfulness' replaces the psychologist, is even better, at least for me! No waiting time, quick to hand (practical format), no matter when or where: short, effective advice and tips for any life circumstance (fear, disappointment, blockages, finding your true self, etc.) to restore your mental well-being. Those who want to know more about the why will also find answers. As you delve deeper into the book, you can easily immerse yourself in the author's interesting philosophy, written in an easy-to-understand way."

Ulrike M., Leipzig, Germany

Claus Janew

This is the abridged version of the book of the same title, written out of the desire to examine the structure of our reality from a standpoint unbiased by established teachings, be they academic-scientific, popular-esoteric, or religious in nature. It begins with seemingly simple interactions in our daily lives, examines how they originate on a deeper level, comes to understand the essentials of consciousness, and finally recognizes that we create our reality in its entirety. In the course of this quest, the reader will uncover little-heeded paths to accessing the subconscious, other individuals, and that which can be understood by the term "God". And the solution to the classical problem of free will constitutes the gist of the concepts thus revealed.

"There is no book that explains consciousness in such a clear way as it is given in this book."
Rajagopalan Madasami, India

Read sample (60%)
Buy the book

Also in this book:

Omnipresent Consciousness and Free Will

This is not an attempt to explain consciousness in terms basically of quantum physics or neuro-biology. Instead I should like to place the term "Consciousness" on a broader footing. I shall therefore proceed from everyday reality, precisely where we experience ourselves as conscious beings. I shall use the term in such a general way as to resolve the question whether only a human being enjoys consciousness, or even a thermostat. Whilst the difference is considerable, it is not fundamental. Every effect exists in the perception of a consciousness. I elaborate on its freedom of choice (leading to free will), in my view the most important source of creativity, in a similarly general way. The problems associated with a really conscious decision do not disappear by mixing determination with a touch of coincidence. Both must enter into a higher unity. In so doing it will emerge that a certain degree of freedom of choice (or free will) is just as omnipresent as consciousness - an inherent part of reality itself.

Dynamic Existence

What is real? What is creation?
Everything is in motion. "Inertness" arises from (approximative) repetition, that is, through rotation or an alternation that delineates a focus of consciousness. This focus of consciousness, in turn, must also move/alternate (the two differ only in continuity). If its alternation seems to go too far - physically, psychically or intellectually - it reaches into the subconscious. In this way, interconnection is established by the alternation of the focus of consciousness. Therefore, in a world in which everything is interconnected, all focuses must reciprocally transition into each other. "Reality" is a common "goal", a focus which all participants can switch into and which is conscious to them as such, as a potential one. Its "degree of reality" is the probability of its fully becoming conscious (or more simply: its current degree of consciousness). Thus, a reality is created when all participants increase its probability or, respectively, their consciousness of it.

Laws of Form: Why Spencer-Brown is missing the point

Radical constructivism - a hollow shell?

On focus dynamic

The Core

As the core of my philosophy, the well-known unity of opposites can be considered, but applied in a new way and with the greatest possible consistency.

However, it does not seem very helpful to conclude from this point, because every "application" must be (and was) independently justified to prove its validity. Thus, the unity of opposites is itself more of a result and only thereby becomes a "starting point". At least it offers a connection to the philosophical tradition (Hermes Trismegistus, Yin/Yang, Heraclitus, Cusanus, Leibniz, Hegel).

Philosophically versed readers can also try to transition from Alfred North Whitehead, Edmund Husserl, Ernst Cassirer or Structuralism by thinking their basic theses more consistently and synthetically.

A tip for mystics: If you compress the seven hermetic principles into one, you get my infinitesimality structure and thus free will. -Satori

Original version in German here

Nonarguments

Nonarguments raised by some researchers against my book How Consciousness Creates Reality. The Full Version or its German original, and my responses to them:

1. "It is not written in a modern 'scientific' format."

Correct. It is written in a free style, as in the time when great discoveries were made in philosophy.

Primal trust

If we ask for the one cause that repeatedly leads to human misbehavior against our better judgment, we find the lack of a sense of connection with others, with the environment, and with everything higher. If we had it, we would be aware that everything is a single movement of consciousness, that every experience flows into all other experiences and draws from the dynamic balance of a deep wholeness. On the one hand, this comprehensive balance allows us to be flexible with our own mental and social balance without falling into a bottomless pit. On the other hand, flexibility on a smaller scale is a good way to maintain stability on a larger scale.

Higher harmony – fulfilling suffering?

There were times when suffering was considered good because it served a higher purpose, later heavenly happiness. From another perspective, it would be a more comprehensive happiness because it would last much longer. Not illogical, just one-track.

For behind the perceived disharmony of suffering there are also immediate harmonies: Beneath sorrow lies love, financial narrowness cries out for spiritual agility, and in sickness there is the silence to recognize new things. It is only when we do not want to admit it, when we deny the higher harmony of the whole, that we are seized by despair.

Does happiness make sense?

Some people would rather ask what meaning life should have if not the purpose of becoming happy. Really? Is that all there is to it?

As I said, perhaps a clever drug would be enough to give you perfect feelings of happiness until the end of your life. Wouldn't it?

That would be too dull for me too. But what are we looking for instead?

Creating

Creating is an endless game of separating (projecting, that way changing) of inner aspects, so getting a new individuality, which we can rejoin (and re-enjoy) then. One moment later we separate a new form of our infinite inner reality and so on. We integrate all these "objects" in a new manner, while our awareness expands. This awareness also just means going into restricted experiences and coming back to the bigger "picture", that now has become more comprehensive, both consciously and subconsciously.

Opinions

I have been trying to understand how people come to their opinions. Pure logic and impartiality are rare - largely independent of intelligence. Emotions constantly distort thinking in one direction or another. Fear of something in particular does this. Often subliminally, but you can see it very well if you pay attention. In discussions, I can sometimes see, as if under a microscope, how someone fails to think ahead at a particular point, but always turns back to what is pleasant. And, of course, the appearance of rationality has to be maintained.

What has love to do with creativity?

If love is (re)union with one's own potential, then creativity is its realization. If creativity follows the urge to realize oneself, to reflect, expand and harmonize in new ways, then love is the emotional expression of the underlying meaning.

Where does this sense of creative urge come from?

Interaction (exchange) with spiritually and mentally harmonizing beings, consciousness focuses and concepts creates a special awareness. It is characterized by a higher rate of vibration (alternating frequency) and greater involvement of a consciousness close to the essence: The loved one is always on our mind and is important in a subtle or intense way.

Truth, Harmony, and Free Will

The stem of the Reality Funnel summarizes the alternation of the less conscious points of view "perspectively". But if they don't just jump around there, they also have a closer effect on each other and are wound up in places to cores that harmoniously connect many perspectives. (Without harmony, they would fall apart again.)

Such a comparatively harmonious core, such as our inner self, can hold our Awareness (I) together, and from it probably emanate more comprehensively harmonizing impulses for thought and action than from the adjusting roles of our little ego. On the other hand, this ego can often handle everyday situations better. Therefore, it is best if each one devotes itself to its own subject and benefits only from the skills of the other. We can feel such a harmony like a beautiful concert. If, on the other hand, the ego is completely in tune with the inner self, we can speak of unity, but hardly of harmony: The connection is too rigid and the duet probably short.

Is There a Constant Reality?

If we can exist only in the constant change of the point of view (sensory, psychic, mental) and this must apply analogously to every place of effect (hardly has it worked, it is different), how then stability, something constant arises?

Of course, by repeating the alternation: of thought, of way of looking at things, of mutual confirmation, of effect. Quite exactly, the change can be repeated only for an infinitely short moment; then it must already reach beyond the repetition in order not to cancel itself out. That is, it changes altogether and thereby remains open. For stabilization, approximate repetition is sufficient, though. So we believe approximately the same thing for a long time.

Probability Thinking

When we weigh between two alternatives, say between job A and job B, we weigh between their respective priorities. Each job has a certain probability of realization, which can change during the weighing, whereupon the probability of the other job immediately adjusts. That is, if we prefer job B, job A becomes less probable, but remains available in the background for a while. With job B we choose an individual probability hierarchy as such to our reality.

What about the other candidates? They and their choices are also part of our probability hierarchy. They are aspects of our individual Awareness, which as a whole decides for a new individual reality, for a new probability hierarchy. This means in reverse: The other candidates have their own awareness and choose their own probability hierarchies. We all meet in the respective awareness, but we do not merge.

Subconscious - Free or Not?

If we combine the results of Consciousness I and Consciousness II as well as Awareness I and Awareness II, the following picture emerges:

We are aware of what exists for us in the circumscribing alternation of perspectives as their common approximation.
When perspectives slip away from the approximation, we can still be aware of them. They exist as such in constant alternation.
Everything that exists dynamically (i.e., alternately) transitions in a funnel-like manner from the most conscious "opening" through a perspectively "narrowing" stem into an awareness that we can call subconscious.
This subconscious ultimately extends to All That Is.

All That Is – What is Awareness? (II)

If every perspective is individual and if structures arise only from circumscribing alternations, then alternation cannot be limited to the Awareness (I) of a human being. Rather, every point of view, every place of effect must alternate and arise from alternations. (Ultimately, it is the alternation of infinitely small points of an I-structure - defined in What is Consciousness? (I)).

This consequence entails others:

We must basically be able to put ourselves into the individual awareness of other humans (and even non-humans). Indeed, we empathize with others; otherwise we could not communicate with them. We at least repeatedly approximate their points of view and thus converse with persons who are similar to them. If we were to put ourselves completely in their position, our consciousness would quickly be overwhelmed and would have to repress most of it into the subconscious.
Changing a point of view is changing the whole reality (a rearrangement of the Reality Funnel), namely from a foreseen, probable reality to an even more probable one, the present reality. As one reality takes precedence, the others fall into their subordinate position. They become or remain potential, just as the one that now takes precedence was before. But they do not disappear: They are still aware standpoints

The Reality Funnel - What is Consciousness? (II)

In What is Consciousness? (I) we considered the formation of i-structures through circumscription, and in What is Awareness? (I) the alternation of perspective as such. But basically both are one and the same.

Circumscribing movement - consciousness - is of course an alternation of individual points of view. And the perception of an alternation - awareness - also circumscribes a constant center. The difference between emphasized circumscription and emphasized alternation lies in the density of the circumscribed central area. If the circumscribing alternation (for example, between facades) forms an object (a house), the content-dense center symbolizes its unity ("being inside"). If the alternation is perceived more as such, the object character is thin ("Is it several houses or one?").

The maximum of unity is in the intuitive center point, while the maximum of alternation is in the alternation itself. That is, the alternation is authoritative and the circumscription is derived. (Without facades, there is no interior.)

What is Awareness? (I)

The uniqueness of each standpoint, each point of view, can obviously only be "overcome" by changing the standpoint to other standpoints. And returning. In such alternation alone, which can also appear as constant change, lies the unity of the world.

The grasping of this dynamic unity goes beyond mere consciousness, because Consciousness (I) always tends to circumscribing condensation, i.e. to the formation of symbolic, quasi-static objects. In contrast, the change to other points of view - other individual attitudes - is naturally more open. The perception of this alternation is what I call awareness.

How is Freedom of Choice Possible?

The question of whether we can freely choose among several possibilities, without imagining this freedom or confusing it with chance, leads us to the truth about our responsibility. For if we had to answer for something that came from us but was not decided by us, it would be no more than the responsibility of a cloud for its rain.

To find the answer, let us consider the simple choice between two continuations of our day, for example, whether to go to the cinema or to the theater. Actually, we like both equally, although sometimes we feel more like one than the other. Today, however, we really don't care; we could just as well flip a coin. But we don't - that would be too cheap. We think. We put ourselves into the cinema, then into the theater, then back into the present, and so on. In this way we circumscribe the entirety of the decision situation, the present being its center. Strictly speaking, this center is infinitely small, right in the middle of the whole circumscription with all its details. That is, in us.

What is Consciousness? (I)

Whatever consciousness "is" - it must have structure. Even emptiness can only be defined in contrast to fullness and non-duality versus duality (as the word says). Or it is simply "Mu". And that would be the end of this paper - and everything else.

I suggest that we take some time with this and try to start from a consciousness that is as concrete as possible, from a conscious object, say a water glass. We perceive something that we distinguish from ourselves. We also distinguish it from its environment (table, cupboard, room) and determine it in comparison with other known things (table, cup, plate) to what it "is". That is, we circumscribe its existence by comparison. Likewise, it stabilizes itself through external and internal interactions (pouring and drinking, molecular attraction and repulsion).

Individuality and Reality

Your individuality is much more than a little peculiarity. It is a view that nothing and no one has but you. Otherwise it/he/she would be you. Also, you will have changed your perspective - yourself - in the next moment, and you cannot turn back time.

For convenience, we agree on "common" objects that are supposedly perceived by everyone, although everyone is looking at things from his or her own point of view. If you see me rolling a pen across the table to you, you may think it is the same pen that I see. But I see something completely different from what you see. There is not the slightest concord between my perception and yours. Otherwise, I would be sitting in your place, having your thoughts, memories, and feelings, and connecting them to a shape that is rolling toward me.

Wealth and envy

Material wealth does not exist. For wealth is always felt. Even the value of the spiritual.

The materialist identifies with his possessions, the life-experienced person may not need them, and the spiritual seeker may not understand what to do with them. Everything can be more or less in harmony with our soul, more or less deeply or superficially, more or less directly or indirectly. In fact, wealth can be attained without any "detours" through external events or achievements: in meditative silence. Because basically we already have it. We just need to rediscover it.

From the land of milk and honey

A world in which our every wish was immediately granted would obviously not make sense to us, but would simply be arbitrary. We wouldn't even need to have a specific wish, because we could just as easily have any other wish. We wouldn't need to understand our desires, in fact there would be nothing to understand. What we now know about ourselves, and what could serve as the basis for our desires, would have no connection to any more comprehensive reality. So we might as well wish for our dissolution. And why shouldn't we?

What is truth?

Truth is a controversial concept. Some deny its existence altogether – which would be a truth in itself. Others see it as a fundamental belief, call it "knowledge," and have a hard time understanding why others seem to overlook it. But everyone understands that there can be a difference between what one says, what one believes, and what one knows. And which of these takes precedence when it matters.

What matters?

Division by Zero - a playful short discussion

James Anderson* has proposed an obvious definition for the dreaded division by zero...

To ensure consistent formatting, the document is in PDF: Division by Zero

Radical constructivism - a hollow shell?

Radical constructivism was initially formulated by Ernst von Glasersfeld.

Radical constructivists do not speak of creating reality, but of constructing reality. What is the difference?

"Creating reality" ultimately means creating everything, without exception. "Constructing reality" means interpreting external "disturbances" and thus shaping effects.

Thus the constructivist has the lesser claim, but at the price of inconsistency. He cannot avoid including an external cause of effect that essentially determines his construction. In principle, however, he cannot and does not want to know by what this obviously pre-structured effect is exerted. What is important is only what is useful in the context of one's own life, whereby "usefulness" is equally constructed and thus co-determined by this external something, and so on.

Instead, he might well admit that there is an external reality, the effect of which he is only further constructing. But he would not be saying anything essentially new. And once he admits its pre-structuring, he might as well go on to ask what else there is to "pre-recognize". And with that, he abolishes the radicality of constructivism.

Laws of Form: Why Spencer-Brown is missing the point

In his famous book Laws of Form, George Spencer-Brown tries to construct the world from the most simple. He begins with a simple distinction, a circle on a structureless plane for example. He does not say that this is the only way to begin, but makes the reader simply do it and see what is developing. In addition, he gives more handling instructions, which reduces the most possible to the least possible.

I focus on his beginnings – the distinction – and the way how this is interpreted by him (indeed): ”… every duality implies triplicity: what the thing is, what it isn’t, and the boundary between them.” By this the world is digitalized. Subsequently, he examines extensions (“… to recross [the boundary] is not to cross [the boundary]”) and reductions (“What a thing is and what it is not are identical in form”). In any case, the boundary remains only boundary, i.e. distinction.

Individuality and the physical paradigm

The physical paradigm contains serious distortions or inconsistencies:

The Brain is seen as the ultimate "perceiver". But who perceives the brain? The brain again? This is a circle, where my concept of circumscription comes in.
Reality is seen as physical after all, and by "physical" our paradigm is meant. From this a limited view of information derives. Here, my infinitesimality structure suggests a deeper view from which "information" derives.
"Physical" also means "objective", and objectivity is considered to be "not part of the observer" (the term "observer" contains this misunderstanding in itself). So where in this world is the observer? Observed by whom? Or not observed at all?

Reality and creation in a nutshell (dynamic existence)

Everything is in motion. "Inertness" arises from (approximative) repetition, that is, through rotation or an alternation that delineates a focus of consciousness.

This focus of consciousness, in turn, must also move/alternate (the two differ only in continuity). If its alternation seems to go too far - physically, psychically or intellectually - it reaches into the subconscious.

In this way, interconnection is established by the alternation of the focus of consciousness. Therefore, in a world in which everything is interconnected, all focuses must reciprocally transition into each other.

"Reality" is a common "goal", a focus which all participants can switch into and which is conscious to them as such, as a potential one. Its "degree of reality" is the probability of its fully becoming conscious (or more simply: its current degree of consciousness).

Thus, a reality is created when all participants increase its probability or, respectively, their consciousness of it.

Perception of dynamic existence is awareness.
Awareness is infinitesimality-structured.

Focus dynamic

Excerpts from the summarizing chapters of my book How Consciousness Creates Reality - The Full Version. This topic is developed and explained with many examples in the regular chapters of the book and also to a certain extent in its abridged version How Consciousness Creates Reality.

Perception of any object is a unique entirety, the summit of an individual maximized in a vanishing small center, and it is only through the transition into its own until then subconscious, how this individual reaches another entirety (another object). The transition can entail an effect after all, something of the preceding object, and the way back a retroaction. This way a new individual, a new summit is being circumscribed, to whom the two former ones are different or not conscious.

On the four quadrants (perspectives) of consciousness by Ken Wilber

Ken Wilber's system of four quadrants is a workable concept for organizing worldviews, I think. However, the reduction from second person to first person plural ignores the essential quality of dialogue: When I say "you," I do not mean "we," nor do I mean "I" or "he." These are merely aspects of the "you". The main point is the change of perspective as such that creates the dialogue, the perception of another individual as itself and thus the second person view. I change my point of view to the other's point of view (at least partly) and come back to a new own point of view, and so on. Since this change underlies all the other quadrant views (you are only "he" when I am mainly I), it could be the middle quadrant or the big one that underlies/encompasses the others.

Definition of infinitesimality structure

Multitude cannot exist without its oneness and oneness cannot exist without determination by multitude.

Oneness however means identity and identity in its last consequence through all „stages" is a zero point. On the other hand this infinitesimal center needs circumscription by details. So despite the details’ identity in oneness, they as individuals have to find their way into circumscription. And as individuals they contain infinitesimal centers by themselves etc. Hence the circumscription of such a center is the changing between single points.

That means an existing structure includes both extremes, the absolute identity and the absolute separation. Their unity then also has to be constituted by change - now between this common point of identity and being separated. Both are nothing at all without this change by which they are determined only. The unity built that way of oneness and multitude in turn has its infinitesimal center of identity...

The same is valid for every area on every scale. A continuum of this kind is the precondition of permanent objects. Through the omnipresent change between the extremes of identity and separation any point is immediately joined with each other as well as continuously mediated and also apart from the others.