Editorial notes:
The article begins with a comparison between the ‘self’ and the ‘soul’. The ‘self’ is a term usually used in psychological dissertations and is the subject of several developmental theories. The ‘soul’, however, is a theological/philosophical term that is not subjected to the same pattern of developmental changes. As far as the ‘positivist identifier” and ‘legalistic in its shape’, it seems likely that they are mentioned in the article in a psycho-philosophical and not a theological-philosophical context.
Two associations come to mind when reading this article:
1. Jean-Paul Sartre – one of the key figures in the philosophy of existentialism and phenomenology – famously coined the term “Existence precedes essence”, meaning that, unlike inanimate objects whose potential is known even before they exist in reality, Man has the potential for change and development, based on experiences, study, effort and going out of one’s comfort zone.
2. Jorge Luis Borges – an Argentine short-story writer, essayist, poet and translator, and a key figure in Spanish-language and universal literature – stated that a book that has not been opened, is just an object. Only when the book is being opened, when it is connected with someone reading it, a new reality is formed. Moreover, any time one reads a book, even the same book, produces a different experience. The book is changing because we are changing (like Heraclitus’ observation that “We both step and do not step in the same rivers. We are and are not”, meaning that we can’t step into the same river twice. This is because the river is constantly changing). The text of the book is forever dynamic and does not have a fixed meaning or interpretation. The meaning is created while reading and is bound to change over time.
In the context of the above two associations, my understanding of Shai’s thoughts on ‘changes to our soul’, are as follows:
The ‘self’ is influenced and impacted by the experiences the ‘self’ is exposed to (what Shai refers to as ‘materials of our experiences’). The perceived quality of the experiences, as seen by the ‘self’ is determined and influenced by the developmental stage of that ‘self’ (what Shai refers to as ‘our quality of perceiving those experiences’). And indeed, the same experience and the same exposure can be felt differently by the ‘self’ in different points of reference, based on the ‘self’ place in its developmental journey (what Shai refers to as ‘some send of magnitude or scope of that perception). This is identical to the impact reading a book can have on the ‘self’ in different points of reference, as determined by different developmental stages or varying mental states[ES].
** Thank you to Eitan Sarig for his analysis of the essay below **
The soul, whatever it is exactly, correlates with the self that is experienced. There are different ways to delineate this self. Commonly we refer to our memories as proof of a singular narrative, composed by an individual, also known as, the self. This is a problem because memories fade or are confabulated, while the self continues to exist, undoubted. When that interpretation is dismissed, among the options remaining is that of reverting to a self that is akin to the religious soul more than the positivist identifier, which by some attempts becomes almost legalistic in its shape.
Whatever this soul is, it is different from the body (which means at least that it can be differentiated from the body), and it is involved in our experiencing of the world. But while we’ve ensured that the soul is singular (or at least, parallel to our unitary lives), that does not mean that it doesn’t change or modify over the course of experience. Changes to our soul include the materials of our experiences, our quality of perceiving those experiences, and some sense of the magnitude or scope of that perception. I’d like to skip analysis to the third of those changes, namely some quantity of resolution of experience.
I’m not sure how many categories can be said to apply to that description, but here and now, I am referring to the level of consciousness of experience. It feels as if this measure fluctuates over the normal course of any period of our lives. It also feels like there are experiences that involve rapid or large and acute jumps atop that fluctuation. The example I have in mind here is the experience of mania (as standardly associated with bipolar conditions).
When I visualize the manic condition, consciousness is like a violin string whose waveforms apex depends on the amount of consciousness, and during mania that maximum increases. The utility of that imagery is very limited, but it continues (and is broken down) in the next analogy. The amount, size, magnitude, or whatever, of consciousness, is a quantum value. More or less; like electrons in the atomic shell model, which can only vibrate (relatively) slightly in their orbits, and can only undergo (relatively) large changes by jumping between discrete shells.
In this analogy, the electron shells are also violin strings. And their waveforms describe the music of consciousness. The range of that song can be extended, or it can be played all together at a higher range.
The whole point of mentioning higher ranges is the implication that there is maybe higher consciousness, or the potential for one. So does that mean that I have a higher consciousness, playing on a string above my own, but orbiting the same centre?
Let’s leave this train of thought with the statement that I, at least so far and within the realm of my recollections, have had no experience of my higher self, as such. But: what experiences have I had that would lead me to these plains at all? To be continued?
