CYCLE THIRTEEN

1. What one perceives through one's senses is not the concept of an object but the object itself; the concept follows from the application of mind.

2. I do not see a computer in front of me, but an object which my mind recognizes as a computer. Likewise, I do not hear a car in the street but a sound which my mind interprets as a car.

3. Mind is both subjective and objective, and therefore while my computer exists in my mind to the extent that the latter has recognized the object corresponding to it, the computer also exists where it is in my room by dint of the mind's ability to project itself into space and, as it were, conceptualize externally. Were the computer only in my head, it would not also exist in my room, but would be an imaginative projection or fantasy on my part. Thus as far as my mind is concerned, the computer is both internal (as conceptualized image) and external (as conceptualized object). It is only an object (and not a computer) to my eyes, which do not have the ability to conceptualize. Of course, this applies to the senses in general, which are scientific instruments dependent upon the ability of mind to interpret a wide variety of phenomena - at any rate, such would be the case from a scientific viewpoint. For the converse situation of that in which the senses serve the mind would be rather more economic in character, while mind independent of the senses smacks of a religious standpoint.

4. We are habituated to conceiving of the mind as being in the brain and encompassing, besides consciousness, both subconscious and superconscious, not to mention unconscious, dimensions. In fact, it is self-evident that mind is both more and less than simple consciousness. But while we should allow for dimensions within the brain which correspond to the above-mentioned psychic distinctions, it should be understood that while mind per se, or consciousness, is indeed situated within the brain as a sort of psychic attribute of brain activity, both the subconscious per se and the superconscious per se, not to forget the unconscious per se, correspond to attributes which have nothing whatsoever to do with the brain but, on the contrary, everything to do with other organs - namely the subconscious per se with the heart, the superconscious per se with the lungs, and the unconscious per se with the womb (and, by implication, the sex organs generally). Hence the subconscious per se, corresponding to the 'psychic' attribute of the heart, namely the soul, should be carefully distinguished from the cerebral subconscious, which is, rather, a subdivision of the mind (consciousness). Likewise the superconscious per se, corresponding to the 'psychic' attribute of the lungs, namely the spirit, should be carefully distinguished from the cerebral superconscious, which is simply a subdivision of the mind. Similarly, the unconscious per se, corresponding to the 'psychic' attribute of the womb, namely the will, should be carefully distinguished from the cerebral unconscious, which, again, is merely a subdivision of the mind.

5. Hence while consciousness per se is indeed of the mind or, rather, of the mind in relation to the brain (with particular reference, I contend, to the right midbrain, the dominant part of the brain), the subconscious per se is of the heart, the superconscious per se of the lungs, and the unconscious per se of the womb. Doubtless a further correlation exists between the subconscious per se and the cerebral subconscious (situated in the backbrain), the superconscious per se and the cerebral superconscious (situated in the forebrain), and the unconscious per se and the cerebral unconscious (situated in the left midbrain).