A New "Self-Model": Rapid Alternation of "Awareness" and "Awareness of Awareness"

[Wenge Huang]

1. Whether the self is a mental entity or a dynamic illusion is a very important philosophical question, but it has not yet been proven.

2. Inspired by the empirical materials of Theravada Buddhism, I have proposed a self-consistent self-model in the hope of answering the above philosophical question in a scientific way.

3. This new model is not necessarily correct, but it is a self-consistent one, which is stronger and more concise than other existing arguments or models.

4. This new model can be verified by neuroscientific experiments, i.e., the existence of the mechanism of Rapid Alternation of “Awareness” and “Awareness of Awareness” can be proved by the sequence of activities in the corresponding brain regions.

5. If this model is proved to be correct, it will lead to controversy and discussion on ethical issues such as free will.

6. This model has significant implications for whether and how AI can generate self-awareness.

[Ben JS]

(Not sure if I've ever expressed this)

I think of us as the composition of all that has affected us -
to the degree that is has affected us.
Like a recipe -
and our recipes have the same general ingredients,
but the balance is different among us.

Primarily,
I have access to the senses of a particular body -
a body referenced by the name 'Ben'.
I am aware of Ben's thoughts and actions -
and this awareness persists throughout memories that I am aware of.

The awareness that I infer other's have,
are not aware of these particular things to the degree I am.
Thus, if I am to differentiate myself from other awarenesses,
I would say it is the awareness of 'Ben'.

Now, I am aware of more than just 'Ben'.
Like 'Ben's' immediate family, and life experiences.
These are more unique aspects of awareness, not common among all.

Then there's the more common ground ones:
I am aware of the universe, and different things it is composed of.
I learn about other experiences that I do not directly have,
by communicating with others - or deciphering from partial information.
All the different types of culture one was affected by.

So they are part of my awareness too.
And if I forget, I am the lesser -
though things still leave their mark on awareness' origins,
and can still contribute to us.

We're not always aware, of all that affects our awareness.
We often learn of new things that contribute,
and were contributing before we learned of them.

And the closer the contents of our awarenesses match,
the more similar we are -
as again, we're our awareness and that which affects it.

[Wenge Huang]

“Awareness of Awareness” is not Meta-Cognition.

[Ben JS]

Is 'Awareness of Awareness' not a subtype of awareness?

Could it not be described as -
The contents of awareness include both sensory and conceptual experiences?
'Awareness of Awareness' being a self-referential conceptual experience.

If so, then there wouldn't be rapid alternation -
there'd simply be awareness.

[Wenge Huang]

Is 'Awareness of Awareness' not a subtype of awareness?

Could it not be described as -
The contents of awareness include both sensory and conceptual experiences?
'Awareness of Awareness' being a self-referential conceptual experience.

If so, then there wouldn't be rapid alternation -
there'd simply be awareness.

No.

What you mean is Reflexive theories of consciousness, but mine is similar to Higher-order theories.

This new model is inspired by empirical materials from Theravada Buddhism, and could be verified by neuroscientific experiments, i.e., the existence of the mechanism of Rapid Alternation of “Awareness” and “Awareness of Awareness” may be proved by the sequence of activities in the corresponding brain regions.

[Wenge Huang]

A new idea:

By comparing the response maps of the brain regions in the conscious and unconscious states, it is possible to determine the area where the "Awareness of Awareness" occurs. The reason is that "Awareness" exists in both states, while the difference is whether or not there is "Awareness of Awareness".

After determining the region where "Awareness of Awareness" occurs, it is relatively simple to verify the rapid alternation sequence of "Awareness" and "Awareness of Awareness".

[Wenge Huang]

The newest version for those who are interested in:

Inspired by the empirical evidence of Theravada Buddhist meditation, we develop a new “Self-Model” compared with Metzinger’s Self-Model Theory: the self is the illusion emerging out of the rapid alternation of “awareness” and “awareness of awareness”.

(Note that “awareness of awareness” is distinct from “meta-cognition”.)

This model reveals the principle of “non-self” in Buddhism and demonstrates that mental entity in Western philosophy does not exist simultaneously.

Furthermore, this new model could be verified by neuroscientific experiments (i.e., the existence of the mechanism may be proved by the sequence of activities in the corresponding brain regions.)

https://www.academia.edu/128055045/A_Ne ... Awareness_

https://www.academia.edu/127576855/A_Ne ... s_Diagram_

[Wenge Huang]

Moreover, this new “Self-Model” supports and enhances Metzinger’s Self-Model Theory by offering a detailed dynamic process of how selfhood arises and revealing the mechanism of transparency of his Self-Model.

From another perspective, this model strongly supports “Higher-Order Theories” of consciousness (especially Higher-Order Perception (HOP) theory) and opposes “Reflexive Theories” of consciousness. In addition, this model has solved the infinite regression problem of “Higher-Order Theories”.

[Wenge Huang]

This model could be validated by a series of ingeniously and rigorously designed neuroscientific experiments:

Please note that “awareness of awareness” is distinct from “meta-cognition” and “meta-awareness” because of its spontaneity.

By comparing the neural response maps during a conscious state (e.g., normal wakefulness) with those during a unconscious state (e.g., Alcohol-Induced Blackout) through fMRI, it is possible to pinpoint the region where the “Awareness of Awareness” occurs. The reason is that “Awareness” exists in both states, while the difference is whether or not there is “Awareness of Awareness”.

Once that region is identified, high-time-resolution techniques like EEG or MEG can be used to confirm the hypothesized rapid alternation between “awareness” and “awareness of awareness” under ordinary conditions. Moreover, such techniques could also be used to verify that alternating speed slows down when mindfulness meditators experiencing vipissana.

If it is proved be correct by above experiments, this model not only elucidates the principle of “non-self” in Buddhism, but also demonstrates that mental entity in Western philosophy does not exist.

[Atla]

Furthermore, inspired by Ajahn Brahm’s insightful “fruit salad simile” which describes experiences in Theravada Buddhist meditation, we develop a new “Self-Model” by introducing “awareness of awareness” out of the framework of the five aggregates: contemplating the five aggregates would discern that “awareness of awareness” arises a moment after each aggregate and they do not appear simultaneously.

Don't you think that the idea of the five aggregates is very outdated and limited according to modern science? The human brain/mind is one big interconnected thing. Also outdated is the idea that reality comes in successive moments - it doesn't.

Species like dolphins and elephants and even corvids, also seem to show signs of self-awareness (if that's what you mean by awareness of awareness). And yet they don't quite contemplate the way humans contemplate. So my view is that there has to be something deeper beneath contemplation, that has to do with self-awareness.

[Wenge Huang]

Furthermore, inspired by Ajahn Brahm’s insightful “fruit salad simile” which describes experiences in Theravada Buddhist meditation, we develop a new “Self-Model” by introducing “awareness of awareness” out of the framework of the five aggregates: contemplating the five aggregates would discern that “awareness of awareness” arises a moment after each aggregate and they do not appear simultaneously.

Don't you think that the idea of the five aggregates is very outdated and limited according to modern science? The human brain/mind is one big interconnected thing. Also outdated is the idea that reality comes in successive moments - it doesn't.

This self-model is inspired by empirical insights from Theravada Buddhist meditation: the self is merely an illusion emerging from the rapid alternation between “awareness” and “awareness of awareness”. It could be validated by a series of ingeniously and rigorously designed neuroscientific experiments.

[Wenge Huang]

In our model, “awareness of awareness” is distinct from “meta-cognition” and “meta-awareness” because of its spontaneity. “Awareness of awareness” is not a deliberate, effortful, or analytical reflection. Instead, it’s a direct “knowing” state that immediately follows the occurrence of primary awareness.

While the definitions of “meta-cognition” and “meta-awareness” vary slightly across different studies, they generally encompass broader, more active cognitive activities. Compared to the “awareness of awareness”, these can include evaluating, monitoring, and adjusting one’s own cognitive strategies (meta-cognition), or a more sustained and deliberate monitoring of the contents of one’s stream of consciousness (meta-awareness).

[Eodnhoj7]

Is the self a real entity or merely a constructed illusion?

On the basis of empirical materials from Theravada Buddhism and the scientific mechanism behind Buddhist meditation, I develop a new “Self-Model” compared with Metzinger’s Self-Model Theory: the self is just the illusion emerging out of the rapid alternation of “awareness” and “awareness of awareness”.

According to Aldous Huxley and Ajahn Brahm, we have proposed that the nature of vipassana is enhanced awareness induced in meditation, which makes contemplating the five aggregates possible, just like “watching” a slow-motion film.

According to Thanissaro Bhikkhu, Rupert Gethin, Sue Hamilton and Alexander Wynne, different from the traditional mainstream view that the individual person consists of five ever-changing aggregates, the five aggregates should be regarded as descriptions of the individual’s subjective experience. We further argue that the five aggregates should be viewed directly as a stream of moments of awareness or consciousness.

According to P. A. Payutto, when we regard each aggregate as an “awareness” which is the state of being conscious of something, then contemplating the five aggregates would reveal the existence of “awareness of awareness”. For instance, when one feels happy, one knows that one is happy. (Note that feeling happy is not the same as knowing that one feels happy.)

Furthermore, inspired by Ajahn Brahm’s insightful “fruit salad simile” which describes experiences in Theravada Buddhist meditation, we develop a new “Self-Model” by introducing “awareness of awareness” out of the framework of the five aggregates: contemplating the five aggregates would discern that “awareness of awareness” arises a moment after each aggregate and they do not appear simultaneously.

Thus, it is clear that the notion that there is a constant entity always there knowing or experiencing all aggregates just results from the alternation of “awareness” (or “aggregates”) and “awareness of awareness”, something that under ordinary conditions happens very quickly. (That’s like a torch spinning so fast that it looks like a solid ring of fire exists.)

Obviously, this model reveals the principle of “non-self” in Buddhism and demonstrates that mental entity in Western philosophy does not exist simultaneously.

However, this model would lead to the controversies of free will and ethics.

If the psyche is grounded in this alternation than there are universal principles that make the self as ever present.

If illusion and reality exist by a contrasting relationship that define eachother than they are effectively one and the same by necessity of this relationship. Dually "reality" and "illusion" are relative distinctions where it may be argued simultaneously that "reality" is an illusion from the perspective of illusion as reality, and "illusion" is a reality from the perspective of reality as an illusion.

Selfhood is inseperable from experience as both a justified in some degree by the observation that they occur.

Enough of devil's advocate...very interesting premises for your paper. I hope it does well.

[Wenge Huang]

Is the self a real entity or merely a constructed illusion?

On the basis of empirical materials from Theravada Buddhism and the scientific mechanism behind Buddhist meditation, I develop a new “Self-Model” compared with Metzinger’s Self-Model Theory: the self is just the illusion emerging out of the rapid alternation of “awareness” and “awareness of awareness”.

According to Aldous Huxley and Ajahn Brahm, we have proposed that the nature of vipassana is enhanced awareness induced in meditation, which makes contemplating the five aggregates possible, just like “watching” a slow-motion film.

According to Thanissaro Bhikkhu, Rupert Gethin, Sue Hamilton and Alexander Wynne, different from the traditional mainstream view that the individual person consists of five ever-changing aggregates, the five aggregates should be regarded as descriptions of the individual’s subjective experience. We further argue that the five aggregates should be viewed directly as a stream of moments of awareness or consciousness.

According to P. A. Payutto, when we regard each aggregate as an “awareness” which is the state of being conscious of something, then contemplating the five aggregates would reveal the existence of “awareness of awareness”. For instance, when one feels happy, one knows that one is happy. (Note that feeling happy is not the same as knowing that one feels happy.)

Furthermore, inspired by Ajahn Brahm’s insightful “fruit salad simile” which describes experiences in Theravada Buddhist meditation, we develop a new “Self-Model” by introducing “awareness of awareness” out of the framework of the five aggregates: contemplating the five aggregates would discern that “awareness of awareness” arises a moment after each aggregate and they do not appear simultaneously.

Thus, it is clear that the notion that there is a constant entity always there knowing or experiencing all aggregates just results from the alternation of “awareness” (or “aggregates”) and “awareness of awareness”, something that under ordinary conditions happens very quickly. (That’s like a torch spinning so fast that it looks like a solid ring of fire exists.)

Obviously, this model reveals the principle of “non-self” in Buddhism and demonstrates that mental entity in Western philosophy does not exist simultaneously.

However, this model would lead to the controversies of free will and ethics.

If the psyche is grounded in this alternation than there are universal principles that make the self as ever present.

If illusion and reality exist by a contrasting relationship that define eachother than they are effectively one and the same by necessity of this relationship. Dually "reality" and "illusion" are relative distinctions where it may be argued simultaneously that "reality" is an illusion from the perspective of illusion as reality, and "illusion" is a reality from the perspective of reality as an illusion.

Selfhood is inseperable from experience as both a justified in some degree by the observation that they occur.

Enough of devil's advocate...very interesting premises for your paper. I hope it does well.

This model could be validated by a series of rigorously designed neuroscientific experiments.

Firstly of all, according to “Higher-Order Theories” of consciousness, by comparing brain activities during a conscious mental state (e.g., normal wakefulness) with those during a unconscious mental state (e.g., Flow State or Highly-Practiced Task Execution) through fMRI, it is possible to pinpoint the brain regions or neural networks responsible for “awareness of awareness”. The reason is that “awareness” exists in both states, while the difference is whether or not there is “awareness of awareness” (or higher‑order representation).

Once the relevant regions or networks have been identified, we can contrast neural dynamics in ordinary participants and in mindfulness meditators during vipassana practice (not to be confused with Nondual Awareness) by using high-time-resolution techniques such as EEG or MEG. This approach will allow us to:

Firstly, verify that the alternating speed of “awareness” and “awareness of awareness” slows down during vipissana practice.

Secondly, further confirm the specific brain regions or neural networks underlying “awareness of awareness” because it is easier to distinguish between “awareness” and “awareness of awareness” when the alternating speed slows down.

Thirdly, validate the proposed rapid‑alternation mechanism under ordinary conditions by detecting the sequence of neural activities.

[Eodnhoj7]

Is the self a real entity or merely a constructed illusion?

On the basis of empirical materials from Theravada Buddhism and the scientific mechanism behind Buddhist meditation, I develop a new “Self-Model” compared with Metzinger’s Self-Model Theory: the self is just the illusion emerging out of the rapid alternation of “awareness” and “awareness of awareness”.

According to Aldous Huxley and Ajahn Brahm, we have proposed that the nature of vipassana is enhanced awareness induced in meditation, which makes contemplating the five aggregates possible, just like “watching” a slow-motion film.

According to Thanissaro Bhikkhu, Rupert Gethin, Sue Hamilton and Alexander Wynne, different from the traditional mainstream view that the individual person consists of five ever-changing aggregates, the five aggregates should be regarded as descriptions of the individual’s subjective experience. We further argue that the five aggregates should be viewed directly as a stream of moments of awareness or consciousness.

According to P. A. Payutto, when we regard each aggregate as an “awareness” which is the state of being conscious of something, then contemplating the five aggregates would reveal the existence of “awareness of awareness”. For instance, when one feels happy, one knows that one is happy. (Note that feeling happy is not the same as knowing that one feels happy.)

Furthermore, inspired by Ajahn Brahm’s insightful “fruit salad simile” which describes experiences in Theravada Buddhist meditation, we develop a new “Self-Model” by introducing “awareness of awareness” out of the framework of the five aggregates: contemplating the five aggregates would discern that “awareness of awareness” arises a moment after each aggregate and they do not appear simultaneously.

Thus, it is clear that the notion that there is a constant entity always there knowing or experiencing all aggregates just results from the alternation of “awareness” (or “aggregates”) and “awareness of awareness”, something that under ordinary conditions happens very quickly. (That’s like a torch spinning so fast that it looks like a solid ring of fire exists.)

Obviously, this model reveals the principle of “non-self” in Buddhism and demonstrates that mental entity in Western philosophy does not exist simultaneously.

However, this model would lead to the controversies of free will and ethics.

If the psyche is grounded in this alternation than there are universal principles that make the self as ever present.

If illusion and reality exist by a contrasting relationship that define eachother than they are effectively one and the same by necessity of this relationship. Dually "reality" and "illusion" are relative distinctions where it may be argued simultaneously that "reality" is an illusion from the perspective of illusion as reality, and "illusion" is a reality from the perspective of reality as an illusion.

Selfhood is inseperable from experience as both a justified in some degree by the observation that they occur.

Enough of devil's advocate...very interesting premises for your paper. I hope it does well.

This model could be validated by a series of rigorously designed neuroscientific experiments.

Firstly of all, according to “Higher-Order Theories” of consciousness, by comparing brain activities during a conscious mental state (e.g., normal wakefulness) with those during a unconscious mental state (e.g., Flow State or Highly-Practiced Task Execution) through fMRI, it is possible to pinpoint the brain regions or neural networks responsible for “awareness of awareness”. The reason is that “awareness” exists in both states, while the difference is whether or not there is “awareness of awareness” (or higher‑order representation).

Once the relevant regions or networks have been identified, we can contrast neural dynamics in ordinary participants and in mindfulness meditators during vipassana practice (not to be confused with Nondual Awareness) by using high-time-resolution techniques such as EEG or MEG. This approach will allow us to:

Firstly, verify that the alternating speed of “awareness” and “awareness of awareness” slows down during vipissana practice.

Secondly, further confirm the specific brain regions or neural networks underlying “awareness of awareness” because it is easier to distinguish between “awareness” and “awareness of awareness” when the alternating speed slows down.

Thirdly, validate the proposed rapid‑alternation mechanism under ordinary conditions by detecting the sequence of neural activities.

The validation of this model through neuro scientific experiments is created by the same neurophysiology that seeks to understand neurophysiology...it is a loop. It is like taking a machine made of electrons to study electrons.

Proof is empty.