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.

Truthfulness. The Consciousness that Creates Reality

Claus Janew

Authentic

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 online (using Play Books)

Order the book

Code of Trust

"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

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.

Differences between the philosophy of Claus Janew and the phenomenology of Edmund Husserl

Edmund Husserl's phenomenological descriptions* show many similarities to my own considerations, for example, when he speaks of a "halo," a "horizon of mental processes" (awareness), or a "central point of unity" (neutral center point). Nevertheless, he does not consistently take the omnipresence of the center-periphery structure further to the infinitesimality structure.

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.

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.

The perception of any object is a unique whole, the summit of an individual maximized in a vanishingly small center, and it is only through the transition into its own until then subconscious that an individual reaches another whole (another object). The transition can entail an effect after all, something of the preceding object, and the way back, a retroaction. In this way, a new individual, a new summit, is circumscribed – one that is conscious of the two earlier ones differently, or not at all.

Center, Horizon, and “Taking a Stand”: A Phenomenological Map of Decision Episodes

This paper offers a phenomenological description of conscious decision episodes in which agents experience themselves as facing a live choice and “taking a stand.” It also argues that such a description supplies a structural supplement to existing accounts of decision and self-commitment, especially Moran’s account of avowal and Chang’s account of hard choices. Moran shows why deciding is not merely reporting an antecedent psychological fact; Chang shows why some choices are not settled by the balance of given reasons and may involve will-based reasons. What both accounts leave underdescribed, I argue, is how an agent can encounter a practical question as already determinate enough to be this decision now while the outcome remains open enough to require commitment. Drawing on Husserl’s object–horizon structure, Gurwitsch’s theme/field/margin, and James’s focus/fringe, I describe such episodes as instantiating an i-structure: a center–horizon pattern whose focal node gathers “this situation” as a unified whole while its horizon encodes considerations, constraints, and possibilities. I distinguish two gradients across this structure: identity-determinacy, concerning how settled “what this is” is, and affordance-determinacy, concerning how settled “what I can still do” is. Their divergence marks a crossing phase, whose resolution I call authored resolution: a commitment experienced as my doing, neither mandated by reasons alone nor random or alien.

Objecthood as Alternation: Dynamic Existence and the Infinitesimal Center

This paper develops a phenomenological ontology of objecthood centered on alternation. Existing accounts of horizonality, embodiment, affordance, Gestalt organization, and sensorimotor availability have shown that objects are given through profiled and transformable modes of access rather than as complete self-present units. The remaining problem is how such transformations become transformations of one object rather than a succession of appearances or a loose plurality of capacities. I argue that objecthood requires alternation: returnable transition among distinguishable phases. Such transitions condense around what I call an infinitesimal center: the unity-function through which a differentiated manifold is gathered as one object. The phenomenological thesis is that an object appears as one only through structured alternation within and between standpoints. The ontological thesis is that objecthood, as objecthood, is best understood as dynamic relational individuation rather than static self-presence. The resulting view, dynamic existence, accepts the realist force of object-resistance while rejecting static givenness as an explanation of object-unity. Objectivity is not viewlessness, but stabilized transposability among standpoints.