by Ingo Swann
20 October 99
The central purpose of this essay is to
BEGIN to bring to light an extremely subtle and hidden situation
that continuously surrounds the essential nature of the superpowers
in an on-going and prevailing cocoon of disinformation.
This situation is so strange, and so seemingly unlikely, that at
first take the following considerations might seem outrageously off
And so I hasten to refer to an ancillary situation that is entirely
credible because it is generally understood to exist, and is broadly
confirmed by relevant and available documentation.
It is a well-known fact that research and discovery regarding the
nature of the superpowers is neither encouraged nor supported within
the workings of the more powerful societal mainstreams.
As a result, organized forms of psychical and parapsychological
research have been left dangling at the fountains of funding and
needed academic interaction. They have been continuously distressed
with regard to any authenticity of their accumulated work over the
last 120 years of the so-called Modern Age.
The exclusion and condemnation of Psi, etc., by the powerful
societal mainstreams is so obvious that it really should be
considered as deliberately purposeful in its general intent.
Obviously, the societal mainstreams do not want constructive
increases in parapsychological knowledge, perhaps especially with
regard to telepathy. If developed into high states of functioning,
telepathy would be considered as invasive of minds. And most
societal power structures depend on power-making secrets being KEPT
There are other considerations about the reasons, some of which have
been partially considered in the essay herein entitled "Remote
Viewing and Its Skeptics."
The foregoing having now been said, it can be pointed up that
societal worries about possible
Psi superpower enhancing have a
history that stretches back anterior in time before the last 120
years of the Modern Age.
In this anti-Psi history, throughout which cognitive development of Psi knowledge has not been wanted, it stands to reason that ANY
knowledge regarding factors that might contribute to its development
must themselves be culturally suppressed or permanently suspended in
There are many subtle, long-term knowledge vacuums that have been
perpetuated to that end.
The term AWARENESS is used all the time, and so it is difficult to
think that information regarding its dynamic and extensive nature is
encapsulated in a knowledge vacuum.
As that may be, however, it is clear that kinds of awarenesses and
the kinds of superpowers are not only ancillary but are
fundamentally interactive with each other.
Thus, if effective knowledge about the superpowers is to be
suppressed, or at least distorted in some counter-productive sense,
then effective knowledge regarding awarenesses must also be treated
To help drive home this point, the term IMPEDE is defined as "to
interfere with the progress of, to block, to hinder."
In this sense, we can think not only in terms of impeded and
unimpeded knowledge regarding the superpowers, but also in terms of
impeded and unimpeded awarenesses.
Suppression of Knowledge About Awareness Faculties
There are two central reasons for entering into the strange topics
of this essay.
First, it can be thought that the superpowers and the spectrums of
awareness are so basically and closely interrelated that it is
virtually impossible to consider them apart from each other.
Second, it is true that the word "awareness" is used all the time.
But if one makes a determined effort to discover the existence of
any in-depth research and accumulated knowledge regarding it, one
might become aware of rather extensive information and knowledge
vacuums in this regard.
Awareness faculties and abilities are exceedingly strategic to the
superlative functioning, and even to the basic survival, of our
species entire, and, of course, to each of its individuals.
Indeed, without what is called AWARENESS we would be little more
than darkened, blind, stimulus-response critters that only react to
stimuli but are unable to discriminate anything.
Because of this strategic importance, knowledge vacuums regarding
the dynamics of awareness really should not exist as such.
Therefore, the existence of the knowledge vacuums regarding
awareness faculties must be seen as representing an invisible, but
profound situation of some kind - one in which a lack of
awareness-knowledge seems to be important and with purpose.
It is broadly understood that scientific and philosophic minds, as
it were, should take active interest in all matters that are of
extreme and significant importance.
But science and philosophy are not independent of the societal
environments in which they occur, so much so that without the
positive support of those environments neither science nor
philosophy can exist very well.
When one speaks of "societal environments," one is of course, and in
the first frame of reference, speaking of societal power structures,
within which power and the maintenance of it always represents the
first order of business.
Speaking in metaphor, then, power structures do not like the
emergence of information and knowledge that might weaken or threaten
their assumed authenticity and realities, and within which societal
power forces are vested.
Thus, determination of what knowledge is to consist of, or not
consist of, is almost always a societal concern before it can be
handed down into scientific and philosophic minds.
And indeed, ever since
Francis Bacon (1561-1626) pronounced his
famous axiom that "Knowledge itself is power," thereby connecting
the two, it can be understood, with some certainty, that various
power structures soon began keeping an eagle eye on emerging
knowledge that might either support or disrupt them.
In other words, societal power structures first, THEN science and
philosophy - provided those two workhorses of knowledge confine
their efforts within societal power guidelines.
Indeed, knowledge is power, or at least can help make and sustain
power to those who have it. Therefore, non-knowledge or lack of it
gives depowerment to those, the powerless, in whom certain kinds of
power-making knowledge are caused to be absent by intent and design.
It is certainly clear enough that awareness is very closely related
to power and to power status. What is not so clear, though, is that
certain kinds of awareness are more power-pertinent than other
To somewhat grok the nature of what is involved along such lines,
one has only to consider what, at the individual level, various
INCREASES of functional awareness might portend in societal systems
and their stratified power structures.
Any competent examination of such power structures quickly reveals
that their continuing existence does depend on maintaining this or
that extent of non-operative awareness factors of the masses.
There are many ways to achieve this, of course, and on many
different levels. But one really efficient way is simply to suppress
and remove the entire topic of awareness from constructive study -
so that, simply put, knowledge of pro-active awareness cannot
dribble down into the depowered intelligences of the masses.
In any event, while much of the information in this Website can be
considered within hypothetical contexts, the direct relationship
between awareness and the superpowers is so obvious that it is cast
in factual cement.
If, however, one wishes to locate information packages relevant to
this factual cement, one will ultimately discover three factoids:
A great deal of information is
available regarding the existence of the superpowers; but
Information regarding awareness is
so scant as to be almost non-existent; and
In the conventional societal
approaches to the superpowers, and via parapsychology itself,
there is no linking of awareness to the superpowers - even
though clairvoyance and telepathy, for example, can be thought
of as different specializing kinds of awareness.
But beyond the parameters of
parapsychology, there is a larger and identifiable reason for this.
At the societal levels, beyond a few rather brief and obviously
truncated dictionary definitions for AWARE and AWARENESS, there are
no in-depth studies regarding their essence, nature, workings, and
multitudinous phenomena in science proper, in philosophy, in
sociology, and even in anthropology.
Thus, the information vacuum regarding the nature of awareness goes
beyond its implications to parapsychology. Indeed, the vacuum is
universally present in all modernist approaches to knowledge, and
especially with regard to endeavors that have anything at all to do
with power and empowerment.
the Superpowers of the Human Biomind
There can be little doubt that in their first or primary instance,
the various kinds of superpowers consist of various kinds of
naturally indwelling "units" that can exist in at least three
impeded, or desensitized
Thus, if one examines to examine the phenomena and functions
regarding the superpowers, but does not examine the awareness
spectrums that intimately go along with them, the end product can
manifest as very little regarding superpower activations.
The whole of this results in two simple equations:
(a) The lack of awareness activation
equates to no superpower recognition or activations.
(b) Organized awareness knowledge and expansions equate to
increases of superpower recognition and activations.
In the light of the above, if a school
or center for superpower development were ever established, its
Basic Course 101 would focus on the nature of awareness, and include
methods for enhancing and expanding not only its spectrums, but its
As it is, then, there are precise reasons for introducing this
subject of awareness into these essays regarding the superpowers of
the human biomind:
The superpowers involve those
biomind awareness-faculties that can transcend the known limits
and physical factors of space, time, matter, and energy
It is entirely difficult to
comprehend how the biomind faculties can achieve the
transcending IF THEY DO NOT INCORPORATE ESSENTIAL AND SPECIFIC
AWARENESSES consisting of a number of kinds and varieties
If one subtracts awareness from the
superpowers, one will NOT have the superpowers
If one discusses and studies the
superpowers as anything other than specific kinds of awareness
modules, the superpowers will not become volitionally active
Those who possess some "natural"
kind of superpower functioning obviously also have a "natural"
activation of the appropriate awareness modules
Unimpeded Awareness Modules
One of the central functions of this present essay is to
hypothetically consider the possible, but very subtle, existence of
three factors. Their existence is of enormous importance to the
superpowers of the human biomind.
The three factors are:
(1) The hypothetical existence of
something that, for lack of more precise terms, might be called
unimpeded or noiseless awareness.
(2) If it can be supposed that unimpeded awareness can or could
exist, then it can be shown that the present compilations of
modern knowledge are constructed in ways that navigate around
it. The result would be that knowledge of it is not only
consistently avoided but obliterated.
(3) In that ways and means must be contrived to avoid knowledge
as well as to discover it, then the use and meaning of the term
CONSPIRACY cannot be disallowed - although the exact sources of
such conspiracy not be entirely groked via conventional
(NOTE: With reference to concepts of
impedance regarding (1) above, one might refer to the essays herein
entitled "Remote Viewing and the Signal-to-Noise Ratio," "Mental
Information Processing Grids and Meaning Transducers," and
"Information Processing Viruses and Their Clones.")
Our Species As
An Awareness Life Form
vs Our Species As a Stimulus-Response Mechanism
Here we might pause to wonder again what our species, and its
downloaded individuals, would be like if it DID NOT possess various
kinds of awareness spectrums each of which may be quite extensive.
Indeed, without its vast arrays of awareness factors, any
palpitating biomind would be not much more than a palpitating blob.
In fact, one could delete the mind part from consideration, ending
up with the bio part being little more than a non-aware
stimulus-response affair, if even that.
Along those lines of thought, efforts to establish that the human is
only a stimulus-response affair are thickly woven into modernist
knowledge packages via which attempts are made to codify what is
knowledge about ourselves and what is not.
Attempts to erect a picture of humans as being only
stimulus-response affairs are grouped together under the general
heading of "behaviorism," or the "behavioristic" sciences and
Definitions of BEHAVIORISM differ slightly, but are nevertheless
consistent in concept.
WEBSTER’S (1967) indicates that:BEHAVIORISM is,
"a doctrine holding
that the data of psychology consist of the observable evidence of
orgasmic activity to the exclusion of introspective data or
references to consciousness and mind."
[I.e., to the exclusion of
As the ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PHILOSOPHY (1967) further indicates:
"...behaviorism, as a
philosophical theory, is as old as reductive materialism [and is
defined as an attempt] to interpret all mental states in terms
of matter in motion."
Additionally, the fifth edition (1981)
of the PSYCHIATRIC DICTIONARY (R. J. Campbell, Ed.) indicates that:
"Behaviorism claims that
‘consciousness’ is neither a definable nor a usable concept,
that it is merely another word for the ‘soul’ of more ancient
times... Classical behaviorism asserted that all behavior is
to be understood in terms of stimulus-response formula; the
organism [i.e., the human being] is thus essentially passive and
can only react to stimulation."
(NOTE: In the context of the above, do
be pleased to remember the use of the words "essentially PASSIVE and
can only react to stimulations.")
In their collective sense, the three definitions above can be
simplified in the following way.
It would be obvious that awareness and consciousness have something
to do with each other. If we substitute AWARENESS for the term
CONSCIOUSNESS, we can conclude that awareness is also "not a usable
concept within the behaviorism model."
It is at least partially legitimate to make this slight replacement,
since consciousness is given as one of the synonyms for awareness,
as we will see shortly ahead.
Beyond behaviorism, an overall, and larger, picture of human history
clearly establishes that smaller and bigger parameters of awareness
frequently have played exceedingly important survival roles, and
continue to do so.
This is highly suggestive of the perfectly logical premise that
however the human "organism" might be explained or conceived
otherwise, it would seem necessary to incorporate the elements of
awareness rather than abolish or trash them.
This is to say, those elements would necessarily need to be
incorporated - if we are to assume a picture of ourselves as
something beyond the stimulus-response states of toilet training and
eating dirt because the stimulus of hunger requires a response.
As a somewhat delicious aside here, it does seem that specific human
specimens suffer from deletions and subtractions of awarenesses -
and which subtractions might be inherent in not a few behaviorists.
Be that as it may, the desirability of enhanced parameters of
awareness is not denied by other specimens - for example those
obtaining to street smarts, etc., and those intent on climbing
Expanded awareness does come in handy. One cannot climb a corporate
ladder solely as a stimulus-response mechanism.
Relationship of Awareness Modules to Human Intelligence
The existence of awareness is assumed to be one of the major
criteria for designating our species as sometimes manifesting rather
impressive attributes of generic intelligence - the functioning of
which is rather dependent on some quanta of awareness however
minimal or minuscule.
It is almost impossible to attempt to consider intelligence without
also considering the NECESSARY attributes of awareness upon which
any form of it can be mounted.
Even the stimulus-response routines of toilet training require a
modicum of intelligence so as to enable continuous
awareness-recognition of certain facilities established for such
Considered this way, it is clear that awareness and intelligence go
hand-in-hand. It is entirely possible that one doesn’t exist without
It is even ethically and rationally possible to suggest that
awareness and intelligence are two sides of the same coin.
In this sense, then, while enormous amounts of cultural,
philosophic, and scientific research during the Enlightened modern
period have been specifically devoted to TRYING to examine the
nature of intelligence, hardly any investigative attention has been
directed to the needed concomitants of awareness (this, of course,
being another knowledge vacuum regarding awareness.)
Avoidance of Awareness Issues
To reiterate, there is an old saying that something can occasionally
be recognized by its voluminous or thunderous absence. The topic of
awareness clearly falls into the category of subtle absenteeism.
As but a few examples of the prolific absenteeism, no reference to
AWARENESS is found in any scientific compendiums or authoritative
The topic of AWARENESS is likewise absent from psychological
compendiums and resources, while the term itself hardly ever appears
in their indexes.
With regard to philosophic theories and studies, the extremely
inclusive ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PHILOSOPHY (1967) does not have an entry
for awareness. However, the term is mentioned five times in the
cumulative index of the Encyclopedia’s eight volumes.
But since the eight volumes taken altogether amount to some 4,000
double columned pages, five mentions of awareness in the index can
only be taken either as evidence of extreme marginalizing or as a
gaping hole in overall philosophical mind-bending.
As another, perhaps somewhat smelly aside, one possible reason for
the absenteeism of AWARENESS in overall philosophical perspectives
is that philosophers, somewhat akin to behaviorists, might not
necessarily need excessive quantities of it.
Returning briefly to the topic of parapsychology and etc., while
much can be said about the many and quite varied topics that have
surfaced in such research, the hidden thread that obviously binds
them all into one unwinding spool are the different forms of
awareness, and their various states and conditions.
And so, here to it can be pointed up that although the various
categories of Psi obviously consist of a variety of awareness
parameters and little else, no entry for AWARENESS is found in any
organized compendium of psychic or parapsychological terms and
What all of this adds up to is that the more intimate concepts of
AWARE and of AWARENESS are so generally taboo that they are not even
mentioned as being taboo.
This, it seems, would more or less equate to a taboo taboo, the
whole of which is ultra-taboo.
Thus, the history of awareness phenomena is almost completely and
consistently marked not only by efforts to deconstruct the topic
itself, but also to condemn, distort, and torture-punish it, and
likewise to deconstruct and erase any organized approach to study of
Existing Definitions of Awareness
In order to move ahead, two factors might be carried in mind in
review of what has already been discussed.
There is almost nothing with regard
to historical studies of awareness to which one might gladly
refer in order to increase in-take of information packages
regarding empowerment of it.
Thus, one is more or less in the
position of attempting to locate relevant information packages
via tugging at one’s own boot straps.
In the sense of the above, tugging
at one’s boot straps can begin by identifying something or
anything about awareness that is obvious.
One obvious element that has tremendous
importance to each specimen of our species is that awareness does
exist in many different formats. Without those formats, discernment
of different things would soon resemble something like a murky soup.
If this tremendous and obvious importance is accepted as
self-evident and unarguable, then it would seem that the nature and
functions of awareness would long ago have been pointed up as one of
our species chief and necessary characteristics.
This, in turn, would mean that awareness would have been submitted
to in-depth, systematic study over time - and that studies specific
to the nature of awareness would ultimately be housed in a hefty
resource library resembling those that accumulate around all other
Well, all we have is the word AWARENESS and its exceedingly brief
definitions. These are interesting enough in themselves.
However, one important factor that will not be immediately visible
(but will be pointed up ahead) is that definitions of the term have,
through time, undergone a curious shift of emphasis.
Most contemporary dictionaries that include mention of a word’s
etymology indicate that our present term AWARE is derived from the
Old German-English GEWAR - the definitions of which are given as
"wary" and "watchful."
The Oxford dictionary of the English language indicates that the
term GEWAR was made up of GE + WAR, and is normally translated as
"to be-become wary" or "to be-become watchful or alert."
However, GE had several nuances, one of which was taken to mean "to
have," but another which was used to indicate "to be with."
Thus, GEWAR most likely meant "with wary," "to be with wariness,"
or, perhaps, "to be within wariness-cum-watchful-cum-alert."
These early definitions imply some kind of active-awareness state.
After these etymological tidbits, it is then indicated in most
dictionaries that the two definitions "wary" and "watchful" are
ARCHAIC - meaning that they are obsolete, and which advisory further
indicates that they should not be used with regard to awareness
unless one wishes to be seen as a retro something or other.
Why "to be wary" and "watchful" in relationship to any definition of
awareness should be consigned to the nomenclature trash bins of
history is something upon which one can meditate.
Indeed, those two definitions are entirely reflective of a vast
spectrum of awareness attributes ranging from street smarts up
through and including all organizational functioning where they are
required in the contexts of economic, military, diplomatic, and
In any event, the modern definitions of AWARE substituted for the
so-called "archaic" ones are:
"Having or showing realization,
perception or knowledge"
"Implying vigilance in observing
or alertness in drawing inferences from what one sees or
hears or learns"
Additionally, modernist dictionary
conventions have established certain synonyms for AWARE:
COGNIZANT - implies having
special or certain knowledge as from firsthand sources.
CONSCIOUS - implies having an
awareness of the present existence of something; it may
suggest a dominating realization or even preoccupation.
SENSIBLE - implies direct or
intuitive perceiving, especially of intangibles or of
emotional states or qualities.
ALIVE - adds to SENSIBLE the
implication of acute sensitiveness to something.
AWAKE - implies that one has
become alive to something and is on the alert.
While the above definitions suffice for
a superficial comprehension of what is involved, they do not result
in deeper understanding.
In the first place, the terms given as synonyms are not exactly, or
are only loosely, the synonyms they are indicated to be.
SYNONYM is defined as "one of two or more words or expressions of
the same language that have the same or nearly the same essential
meaning in some or all senses."
If they are examined closely, the chief distinction between AWARE
and the given synonyms becomes quite clear if one considers that
awareness has to precede the downloading processes of cognizance,
consciousness, sensible, alive and awake.
This is to say that the synonyms are products of awareness. If
awareness did not pre-exist as a prime factor, then the secondary or
downloading manifestations would not take place.
For clarity, one cannot have cognizance of consciousness of
something unless awareness of the constituents that will comprise
the cognizance has first taken place.
And indeed, the definition for COGNITION reflects this arrangement:
"The act or process of knowing
including both awareness and judgment."
Here is an an all-to-frequent example of
utilizing the definitions of secondary manifestations to define the
prime factor involved - and which permits the hidden probability of
mistaking the secondary manifestations as the prime factor itself.
The above discussion is not just splitting semantic hairs - but has
direct reference to the problems of causes and effects. The
foregoing synonyms are describing EFFECTS that download from the
causative state of AWARE, and which effects themselves can be
mistaken as original causes.
Furthermore, if one examines the second modernist definition of
AWARE, then it is possible to conclude that "showing realization,
perception, or knowledge" are, themselves, downloaded secondary
products of awareness.
Another somewhat more precise and therefore more elegant way of
putting all of the above, is that there must exist an awareness
prime principle - and from which are downloaded all of the secondary
products given in the above definitions.
But if this is considered, at least for hypothetical progress, then
we are essentially left WITHOUT a specific definition for AWARE -
unless we again consider the so-called "archaic" definitions of
"wary" and "watchful."
If we elect to consider the archaic definitions, one can begin to
(a) Why or how they achieved
their archaic status; and
(b) Why the secondary definitions have been officially and
culturally substituted for the prime meaning of "watchful"
And it is in pursuit of glimmerings of
understanding for (a) and (b) above that we can begin to encounter
one of the invisible factors that apparently besets our species -
and which invisible factor, if groked to its fuller implications,
is, simply put, shocking.
Conversion of Awareness Definitions From an Active to a Passive Mode
One way of getting into this is to attempt to perceive what the
secondary definitions have in common.
Altogether, there are eight terms that represent the secondary,
downloading manifestations of AWARE. These are:
Please note that "of" and "to" have now been added to those terms,
since all eight of the terms are dependent upon being in some kind
of relationship with something.
In other words, although an undifferentiated state of awareness
might exist, awareness is usually in relationship TO or OF
One of the qualities the eight terms have in common is that their
contours can be thought of as passive awareness formats, and which
can be managed by factors that are external to the experiencer.
In other words, one can be taught, told, guided, educated, with
regard to what is to be perceived, realized, etc. - and also with
regard to what is NOT to be realized as well.
In contrast, "to be wary" and "to be watchful" seem more to be
pro-active in a species generic kind of way. However, the subtle
implication involved here might not be all that visible unless it is
somewhat understood that large numbers of people who are wary and
watchful might not be easy to socially condition this way or that.
If one can consider the existence of an ideal state of to be wary,
or to be watchful, then it is explicit and implicit that that state
would have to be composed of unimpeded awarenesses spectrums.
Indeed, it is difficult to think of active awarenesses themselves
somehow deciding NOT to be aware of this and that. And so "learning"
not to be aware of something can only be a societal artifact,
deliberately installed by social conditioning that depends not on
active awareness but upon passive formats of it.
If one considers the above with patience, and as calmly as possible,
then it is possible to perceive that the eight terms are, in the
first instance, NOT nuances of AWARE. Rather, they are properties of
MIND or of mentation - as which, as most realize, can be conditioned
this way or that by societal forces.
In other words, they are mind properties that can easily be
responsive, in behaviorist terms, to organized formats of social
and/or societal mind-management - this an easily recognized cousin
If there are difficulties groking the above, they quickly clear up
when the definitions of the archaic term WATCHFUL and it’s synonyms
are integrated into the overall picture.
WATCHFUL - "vigilant,
wide-awake, alert, being on the look-out especially for
danger or opportunity."
VIGILANT - according to most
dictionaries, "suggests keen, unremitting, wary
ALERT - "stresses readiness or
promptness in apprehending and meeting danger or emergency
or in seizing opportunity."
WIDE-AWAKE - "applies to
watchfulness for opportunities more often than dangers and
suggests awareness of accurate meaning or of relevant
developments and situations."
With regard to the above terms, it
doesn’t take much imagination to grok that they represent awareness
states or conditions that directly relate to power-making factors.
In THIS sense, then, it would be understandable that
knowledge-managers in the service of societal power structures might
easily view "being alert and keen, watchful and having unremitting
vigilance" as the gravest of all their possible difficulties.
With regard to the watchful, vigilant definition of awareness, it is
possible to connect that definition directly and unambiguously to
various kinds of the superpower faculties.
That definition has to do with being alert, but with special
emphasis on being alert regarding danger or opportunity, and perhaps
other stuff as well, such as stupidity, etc.
Any competent survey of reported occurrences of spontaneous
(natural) ESP, telepathy, precognition, clairvoyance, foreseeing and
intuition easily establishes that a very large percentage of them
have to do with alerts to danger. The remainder usually have to do
with opportunity whether sensed, for instance, via telepathy,
clairvoyance, and intuition. The danger and/or opportunity may be
present or forthcoming.
Thus, it is apparently necessary to establish that some kind of
unexamined situation exists that directly links the
watchful-vigilant-alert definition of AWARE to what might be taken
as two of the major functions of the superpower faculties having to
do with danger and opportunity.
Theoretically establishing the certainty of the existence of those
links is easy enough to do, since much of the available data
regarding spontaneous functions of the superpowers are unambiguous
in this regard.
In that the above statement reflects what abundantly IS the case, it
is surprising that the nomenclature link between aware-watchful and
the superpowers has not ever been clearly identified - and so, of
course, no considerations along that phenomenological line have ever
come into existence.
From the foregoing discussions, it can be seen that TWO definitional
sets exist for AWARE and AWARENESS - i.e., the active set, and the
passive set. For increase of clarity, those two sets should be
AWARE - AWARENESS
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . .
Taken together, there can be no doubt that the elements implicit the
two sets do constitute a bigger picture of whatever is functionally
involved regarding the overall qualities of aware and awareness.
But there are important and informative distinctions to be made
between the two sets.
In the first instance, the archaic set is entirely suggestive of
some inner kind of an ACTIVE state per se.
The second set is suggestive of PASSIVE relationship to outer
situations, information, social conditioning, educational
parameters, and so forth.
At first take, one might think that too much is being read into the
above distinctions. But there are two vital clues available.
The replacement set is suggestive of relationships to conditions
that can be formatted and educationally managed in this or that way
- with the added proviso that one’s mind elements can be equally
To realize or perceive certain kinds
of information - and which would equate to a condition of
limited awareness; and
To NOT realize or perceive other
kinds of information - and which would equate to a conditioned
state of non-awareness or un-awareness.
A substantive question can now be asked:
WHY were correct, vital, direct, and active definitions of AWARE
declared archaic at some point, and thence replaced by definitions
that are indirect and passive?
And whose vitality can be managed by
conditioning this way or that?
To help consider the appalling nature of this situation, it is
useful to postulate that unimpeded states of awareness do exist. In
their first instance, they are not dependent upon conditional
situations which can be modulated by motivational societal factors.
If we postulate the existence of the unimpeded states, they could be
unimpeded only if they were NOT amenable to being modulated by
conditioning motivational factors.
Additionally, in order for the awareness states to become impeded,
they would FIRST have to exist in some kind of unimpeded state.
With regard to the superpowers, the existence of unimpeded awareness
faculties would have to naturally pre-exist them as such - after
which they could undergo having impedance installed by various
societal conditioning formats.
As mentioned earlier, the term IMPEDE, of course, means "to
interfere with the progress of; to block; to hinder; to obstruct."
As it is, one cannot impede something that doesn’t pre-exist in an
So it becomes at least hypothetically possible to think that if
one’s superpower faculties are non-functional or inactive, the
reason could be that their ancillary awareness spectrums have been
impeded - and for any number of possible reasons.
Nuances of some of those possible reasons will be discussed in two
One of these is entitled as "Awareness and Perception vs Status of
Another essay, entitled "Passive Awareness Formats vs Active
Awareness Formats," will discuss the prevailing problems of
attempting to activate the superpowers by utilizing passive