A back issue

A question occurs, a way in which this approach could be challenged. Why should experience have conditions attached? Why cannot it simply be, without all the impeti and other devices postulated? Now, I could answer this question by appealing to the impeti themselves, but that would be to fight a challenge to a paradigm from within a paradigm, and thus not fight it at all. There is, however, another route open to me.

If we consider what would be the case if there were no conditions upon awareness, then we instantly see why there must be. If awareness were unbounded, simply obtaining, then it would of necessity be infinite and not temporally bound. In other words, there must be conditions upon our awareness, else it would be limitless. There must be constraints, and my previous work has dealt with the nature of these constraints. Now I aim towards their ultimate satisfaction.

On that subject, it occurs that I should potentially look into the birth of the reflexive awareness itself. This is a murky area, but what seems certain is that when the world is first encountered, it is undivided. It is only when a sense impression is associated with a satisfaction of a drive bound up with a record of that association that something is encountered as an object of awareness. All of a sudden, the world blossoms and our nascent consciousness forms. Its scope is a single impeti and single object, but that rapidly expands, until we become fully aware. But what happens at the reflexion?