Measuring Consciousness

"Our ordinary waking consciousness....is but one special type of consciousness, whilst all about it, parted from it by the filmiest of screens, there lie potential forms of consciousness entirely different. We may go through life without suspecting their existence; but apply the requisite stimulus, and at a touch they are there in all their completeness."  - William James

   It occurred to me the other day while I was in a discussion about consciousness that people mean different things when they use this word. In a spiritual discussion, people usually mean the degree someone is aware of their interconnection to the cosmos, God, and humanity. What about professional athletes who are totally in tune with their bodies, possessing extraordinary awareness of their physical presence? Or the person who possesses exceptional psychic abilities but is rather amoral when it comes to ethics?

How can we consider someone truly conscious when they may have exceptional awareness about one aspect of life – say in the spiritual domain – but are almost devoid of consciousness when it comes to some other part of their life, say their physical health? How do we rate someone’s consciousness when they possess uncanny awareness and presence in the domain of nature, for example, but are completely oblivious of any relationship beyond the material/physical plane?

Since we are all human and each of us possesses different strengths and weaknesses, or different degrees of awareness in different areas of our lives, how do we assess consciousness of the whole person?

I have been writing about conscious leadership for a decade or more now. My work has been focused on observing the consciousness of leaders – their skills and awareness, their mastery of their actions as well as their dominion of ethics, their commitment to responsibility for the whole and their continuous willingness to question their assumptions and choices. But is the conscious leader who has mastered one domain still regarded as conscious in the many other domains of his or her life?

We have all heard of highly-evolved spiritual teachers who have scandalized sex lives or other behaviors unbefitting a conscious icon in our society.

Is one’s consciousness a cumulative assessment of the various facets of one’s life?

I would enjoy hearing from anyone out there in the blogosphere on this subject.


NOTE: Be sure to catch my newsletter editorial this month.

Comments

[john renesch]

COMMENTS FROM FACEBOOK: SUNDAY, 1-2-11:

Bill Daul: Can we measure unconsciousness? Or do we just look for our elected officials and measure them?!?

John Renesch: Cute, Bill. I see conscious individuals enter the bowels of dysfunctional systems and they start acting in concert with the system rather than in concert with their hearts. In my view, they are not forewarned and get blindsided.

Nancy Polend: John, I call the phenomenon you describe in your comment the "Giant Sucking Sound." It is very seductive and holds a collective momentum that challenges the individual to align strongly with their own core in order to resist getting sucked into it. I see it as a form of entrainment, where the system's energy that's geared toward the survival of the system itself entrains individual's energy into resonance with it. It makes another aspect of consciousness--discernment--very important.

John Renesch: well stated, Nancy!!

[john renesch]

COMMENTS FROM FACEBOOK: MONDAY, 1-3-11:

Nancy Polend: In terms of your broader invitation about consciousness, I'd say: Consciousness is far vaster than what our individual consciousness can perceive or comprehend (infinite). This is "good news" in the sense that our limitations are precisely ...what allows us to experience anything as individuals, since it is only in *relationship with* something that we can have an experience of self-as-individual. It's "bad news" in the sense that our finite experiences of the larger infinite is always going to be only a part of the picture. However, in terms of your leadership observations, I think the extent to which people are aligned with and act from the undistorted truth in the deepest reaches of their hearts is the extent to which they have access in each moment to everything they need to BE (and be aware of) greater and greater parts of Consciousness.

Stephen Phillips: John , I will spare you the details of my hours in the 'rabbit hole' with your question of assessment. I will share with you one of the places where this led me- the shared human perceptions of Barry Bonds and Mohammed Ali.

Both men were at... the pinnacle of athleticism and exceptional prowess during most of their careers. Both men undoubtedly spent most of their time in conditioning their bodies and honing their skills. Both men put forth a notion of entrenched ego.

Bonds was as protective of his egotism as a drunkard his drink - shielding himself from as much interaction with the press and the fans as possible. He also succeeded in getting many perks installed in the locker room of his peers that would validate his lofty exceptionalness.

Ali, on the other hand, played with the world that might otherwise subjugate him by using the media to disseminate his teachings. He was a just and fair powerhouse of consciousness that spread light. Learned men such as Jack Paar and Howard Cossell saw his brilliance early on - and provided him the pulpit of mass media to showcase his gifts. Ali quickly gained a vast audience who were thrilled to be 'in his corner'. Ali remains one of the most recognizable and beloved men on earth. And humanity is wealthier for all he showed us.

My initial question upon reading your post this morning was: "What happens to the energy in a room when that person enters?" That question alone has limitless qualifiers. I love Nancy Polend's closing thoughts in her second post.

Mark Bachelder: This is a great question and I am glad you are asking it. I have started a list of words we use often, yet with really reckless concern for what they mean or don't mean. The large-scale "information media", as well as "conscious people" are guilty of this. Works included: terrorism, peace, higher vibration (my current peeve). Thanks.

[Peter Turla]

John, I think this "consciousness" blog is right on.

I've always been bothered that the term "consciousness." I suspect that in most of your circle of readers there tends to be one meaning for "consciousness," but by itself with no qualifiers, the word "consciousness" doesn't communicate in an obvious way what it really means.

I hereby vow to be more "conscious" of the need to use "consciousness" in a clearer way so that "unconscious" people are sure to know what I really mean when talking about "conscious" leaders.

[john renesch]

Thanks, Peter, for the comment and reporting the broken link. I think it is fixed now.

[john renesch]

Thanks to all the Facebookers who commented to this post. Next month will be a furthering of the exploration here...

[john renesch]

FROM A COLLEAGUE'S EMAIL TO ME PERSONALLY: John, I think the question you pose is very valid. Sometimes, people are very advanced in one aspect of their lives, while not so developed in another. I think you and I have discussed this, with regard to spiritual teachers. In many circles, this is now referred to as "integration," where one's advancements aren't limited to one area but are "integrated" into their whole being. I would argue that one is not really fully "conscious" even in the one area, if it is separated out from the core of their being. In that case, it seems to be operating from something split off, or possibly memory. That type of consciousness may be functional as a specific type of "doing" on the part of the individual, but is limited in terms of "being." It is still better than unconsciousness, though!