top of page

The transition from subjectivity

to intellect based mental complexes 


      The Concrete Tussle Between the Subjectivity-based Old Mind and New Intellect-based Mental Processes in our view, Nature’s dynamic in relation to our species pertains to the further evolution (which will include dismantling and restructuring) of our existing old mental complex to its new intelligent form based on intellect’s primary role. 


The process of transition from the old to the new has to concretely take place through moments, accumulating to a point where evolution is completed with the making of a new form. However, in the aggregate and in any given moment (if we can separate the moment that is), all mental processes of an individual have time-space and energy constraints arising due to his limited lifespan. Given this limitation, if our time-space and energy are occupied by the previous evolutionary stage, i.e., intelligent subjectivity (emotional software driven), our emerging intellect will not have these critical resources available to it for evolving its own form and all our other mental processes. Consequently the process of transition will not gather enough momentum and either get delayed or not happen at all. Which means many specimens of an evolving species will get wasted in this process. Due to the above situation a lot of time-space and energy available for evolution, along with specimens are wasted both in the random and the intelligent subjectivity stages in Nature. One can see this graphically at all stages of Nature’s evolutionary journey from the pre-big bang onward. Just consider how much time-space, energy and forms were wasted in the pre-big bang phase in evolving from a geometrical state to the big bang while going through the stages of strings and massless particles, and later on from big bang onward until the emergence of organic molecules. Similarly one can observe wastage in all subsequent stages from the emergence of complex organic molecules to cellular forms, to plant and animals species, Homo Sapiens and finally to contemporary man in the period of civilization. Of course with each new stage the wastage keeps diminishing but is still quite a lot. We are just trying to pinpoint here the process of waste when the previous state still occupies (physically and objectively) the available time-space and energy, resulting in meager positive productivity, in terms of generating new functions and capabilities required for the new form. This tells us how inefficient the hitherto process of evolution has been, despite being logically inevitable. Although it has become progressively more efficient with us but is still not enough,  as witnessed in the wear and tear of human physical and mental (emotional and intellectual) resources, and also destruction and disintegration at various levels.  


Even today when the new has to emerge out of the old, the question arises of the relative strength of the two opposing logics operating within an existing evolving phenomenon—logic of the emerging new and the pre-existing old phenomenon, and the issue of wastage. Currently within our minds this tug of war is being played out between the logics of the emerging intellect-based mind and the preexisting ‘intelligent subjectivity’ driven mental complex. Both these logics are operating in terms of utilization of available time-space and energy. Hence today through observing this process within ourselves we can actually see how integrated Universal Logic Process is operating in relation to our further evolution. 


Distinction Between Intelligence and Intellect; Critical Role of the Intellect in Transforming Intelligent Subjectivity 

Our existing intelligent subjectivity is made up of two parts. Its primary form is the basic genetically made mental software concerning our needs from the environment. While its secondary forms like ideas, motives, feelings, etc., arise as our intelligence grows as a tool for the purposes of the primary form. These secondary forms are made covertly and unconsciously but the process of their operation and pursuit is conscious, i.e., in terms of intelligence, reasoning, thinking and imagination etc. The term intelligent subjectivity therefore refers to when ‘contemporary intelligence’ (knowledge gathering and reasoning) processes are circumscribed and driven by our existing primary and secondary subjectivity software. 


The mainstream history of civilization; of inventions, discoveries, culture, language (and its uses), education, etc. is essentially the history of man’s intelligence process operating within the confines of his intelligent subjectivity. Here we need to note that intelligence uses some of the same processes which we also find in the intellect (of course the intellect has some additional processes as well), i.e., of reasoning, problem solving, imagination and the use of knowledge. But it deals with phenomena in the outside environment as realities seen subjectively by us (for our primary and secondary subjective drives), and not as objective realities. The intellectual process on the other hand begins with recognition of an objective reality as irrelevant to our subjective reality. In order to understand the origins of the intellect let us go back to the stage where language began and analyze the pre and post language situation. Before language one finds a lot of intelligence in dolphins, dogs, monkeys, and horses but this intelligence is driven by their primary subjectivity, and secondary subjectivity expressed in terms of elementary emotions, feelings, likes, dislikes. For example, the dog likes to be playful at times or would like to walk with you, which are preferences arising out of its secondary subjectivity.  


In this nonverbal stage the animals are using their ears, eyes, etc., to perceive and observe (external things), sometimes more than us, but the issue is that their mind only processes these perceptions from the standpoint of their subjective relevance. The dog also observes stars, moon and the climate but in the absence of language its mind and intelligence cannot work with those observations, so they are not even retained. Thus its mental processing and intelligence is limited by its subjective drive. Similarly the sparrow’s mind has a capability of perceiving and observing magnetic fields and making a map of magnetic variations spreading over thousands of miles, enabling it to travel from Siberia to a specific pond in India and back, but this is again within the framework of its subjectivity. Hence one can see how much intelligence exists in this nonverbal phase but it is tied and not free. That is why during the nonverbal period of tied intelligence a large part of observations are wasted. 

It is after language that we become capable of another kind of intelligence wherein we look at a thing not in terms of its subjective relevance only. With language observations start getting stored in the form of words and begin to accumulate. Of course in the beginning despite having a growing memory of observations our minds only have a subjective use for them. There is as yet no objective use for them installed in our minds. But then a time comes in our mental evolution when we become capable of thinking about objects not connected with our subjectivity; when we can mentally process and handle information (received through observation), which is not or cannot be driven by the engine of subjectivity. And this capability has no connection with being clever or intelligent. Some animals are far more clever than us and were certainly cleverer than primitive man but were still not able to evolve this capability due to their very rigidly tied (to the gene based software) intelligence.

The problem is that greater intelligence cannot produce mental evolution. It is a different use of that intelligence which initiates a process of evolution. A process that happens when we can store our observations in language and there emerges a huge library of such observations. This results in the realization that our minds have this enormous collection of language based facts, which cannot be driven by the engine of our subjectivity because they are irrelevant for it.

Then the stage is set for some people, who have accumulated a big library of observations and have spare time, to start the process of thinking. Their intelligence process then acquires the space for a new drive of curiosity and questions, which have no connection with the existing drive of subjectivity. This is a curiosity arising out of their ability to reason, which was there even in the nonverbal period (animal and human) but could not be used extensively and separately/autonomously. The data gathered through this process of nonverbal reasoning actually came into a useable form when it was captured in language. It is this form of post verbal intelligence that we are calling intellect. This is a new use of the mind and intelligence, not by a subjective drive but by curiosity driven questioning pertaining to an object/phenomenon. Of course if that object becomes relevant for the subjective then intelligence will take over the mental processes and operate in accordance with that subjective relevance. But when it is not relevant, intelligence will assume the role of intellect. So the beginning of the intellectual process is where our intelligence works on objects because they exist and not because they are relevant to us subjectively.

After language, one sees the beginning of intellect ordinarily in people, even in children. It was on the basis of this very productive process coupled with developing language that man started making discoveries. However, when he found some of those discoveries practically useful, they were promptly coopted by his subjectivity. For example, the wheel, fire, stone or metals. This process then became a loop after the Copper and Iron ages; working with the intellectual process had subjectively useful fallouts, which in turn led to further development of the intellectual process. 

In present times we have reached the high point of this process because objectively we have discovered so many things and their subjective uses have increased so much that they have surrounded our lives. So now subjectivity of individuals at large has become a lion after drinking milk and blood (in the form of subjective applications of objective knowledge and understanding), and wants to hog the entire capability of objective observation, reasoning and understanding. Consequently it makes projects and research teams and channelizes both people and tools more and more towards subjective applications. 

Alongside the above individuals (whose intellect has been coopted by their intelligent subjectivity), there exists another category of people who have not been in the net where subjectivity imprisoned the first children of intellect and made them slaves. These individuals through philosophizing are able to remain out of that net, and their subjectivity becomes a part of their intellect. The interaction of their growing intellect with their emotional process upgrades and remodels their subjectivity. The intellect plays the role of informing, educating and cultivating their emotional and sensitivity processes through the observations and understanding it acquires. These developed sensitivities and emotions due to having a closer connection with subjectivity, which at the core level is a product of the emotional process and not the intellect, are then able to influence, modify and upgrade it. Thus, in essence, their subjectivity adopts the observations and ideas of intellect via the sensitivity and emotional process, and that is how it becomes a part of their intellect. 

The intellect is able to achieve the above process through discovering a framework of understanding, within which, the observations, knowledge, and ideas it gathers acquire relevance for the emotional process. Because just as one needs shelves to keep books similarly some framework of understanding (in terms of categories and classifications) is needed to keep these ideas. Of course this framework depends on how many intellectual formats one is able to develop within which one can grow one’s sensitivities and keep them. In the absence of a framework of understanding we either throw away or discard our intellectual observations and ideas or use them subjectively. There is also a third possibility that these observations which are not fitting into our subjectivity, due to some unclear emotional and intellectual relevance, keep accumulating and therefore stay in the background of our minds. It is these intellectual observations which after reaching a certain stage of development, where they start becoming external to the rest of the mental complex, are able to then develop a framework of understanding on the basis of which the intellect can evaluate and critique subjectivity. 

Once we have a framework of understanding for our intellectual observations and ideas then we become positioned for moving on to the path of evolving our intellectual processes to the point where they acquire a leading role in the evolution of the rest of our mental processes. The objective (as elaborated above) being to move towards a new intelligent and more efficient mental complex which is in sync with the Universal Logic Process and able to get closer to it. 


i. The relevance of the moment is that it is in micro steps of moments that our mind is going to evolve into a new form having the role and function of the intellect as its primary characteristic while other processes will be connected to it in secondary positions. 

ii. See endnote [ii] in ‘Tendency of the Universal Logic Process to evolve new stable forms’. 

iii. The term ‘geometrical’ we are using to refer to the state of space time before the big bang when there was no matter or even heavier energy forms but only massless energy forms and maybe strings. At that stage the space time or energy processes that existed can only be described in terms of geometrical concepts, which are appropriate for explaining physical phenomena at ‘ultramicroscopic’ (below Planck length and time) levels, beyond the grasp of existing laboratory tools. Currently we find various pre-big bang cosmologies, which speculate about the nature and characteristics of this space-time geometry existing before the big bang. These include string theory and its many versions, Loop Quantum Gravity and Loop Quantum Cosmology and the cyclic and ekpyrotic models, etc. The ‘geometrical’ state in these various models is sometimes described as quantum foam, vacuum potential, spin networks, many-dimensional branes, strings, spinorial space time geometry, etc. 

iv. Here we would like to give the example of the wastage that occurred in mass extinctions of living species over the course of evolution. According to Zimmer (2002, p. 169) “…Catastrophic waves of extinctions are a reality. They have ripped through the fabric of life destroying as many as 90 percent of all species on earth in a geological instant….once mass extinctions strike it takes millions of years for life to recover its former diversity.”   

v. We find that “…Over the past 600 million years, life experienced a steady, low level of extinctions.” (Zimmer, 2002, p. 171). Which implies that wastage has been reducing over time. Because less extinctions mean less rejection of specimens.

vi. In addition to the already existing wastage in the process of evolution itself we have added to it the complexities and hurdles of our own making, which are obstructing the evolutionary process in Nature and consequently leading to unprecedented wastage of time-space and energy resources and even physical and mental disintegration of specimens.

vii. The process of curiosity and questioning in children apart from subjective agenda is evidence of this capability.

viii. We can see the growing subjectively relevant applications of objective knowledge discovered in medicine, genetics, nanotechnology, Computer sciences, brain and mind sciences, etc. For example genetic engineering, new drugs for brain and mind manipulation, computer aided weapons, etc.

ix. Our intellect has not yet reached the stage where it is able to completely grasp the universal logic process in its entirety. So it can only try to get close to it through its own maturing and the evolution of the new mind.   

bottom of page