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

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.

You would be forming the experiments using the very same consciousness you are studying thus the results would be a feedback loop. It would be equivalent to studying electrons with a tool composed of electrons.

Whatever experiment you derive to study consciousness would effectively be a question that already determines the answer. Experiments are how we percieve reality for the time, they are highly relativistic thus making truth conditional.