Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
May 25, 2026
Hans-Joachim Rudolph
Consciousness can emerge in a reality that is not originally conscious. Reductive physicalism cannot explain how interiority arises from purely external processes, while panpsychism avoids this problem only by assuming consciousness is already present from the start. A real-imaginary conception of reality, developed since 2003 and later extended into a quaternionic framework, proposes that reality includes an intrinsic dimension of structured possibility beyond present actuality. This structure grounds pre-subjective openness, and its quaternionic differentiation provides the basis for pre-phenomenal subjectivability. Conscious experience emerges when structured possibility becomes sufficiently integrated, self-referential, stabilized, and centered. Reality is originally structured to make the emergence of conscious subjects possible.
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
May 22, 2026
Hans-Joachim Rudolph
Reality is not merely factual actuality but a structured open process where actuality emerges from potentiality without eliminating it. Observability is an epistemic mode of disclosure within a richer physical organization, not an ontological boundary. Consciousness arises where openness, selective stabilization, resonance, integration, self-reference, and centering generate a stable inner domain; it is neither a universal property nor a miraculous emergence. Reality may be intrinsically open to experience without being experiential at its most basic level. Meditative and spiritual experiences can be profound and transformative but do not establish final metaphysical ontology; the structure of experience is not automatically the structure of reality. Open realism treats observability, consciousness, healing, and spiritual meaning as modes of disclosure within possibility space.
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
May 16, 2026
Hans-Joachim Rudolph
Discussions about consciousness are often confused because the same vocabulary is used with different underlying ontologies. A key example is "cosmic consciousness." In some traditional Vedantic interpretations, consciousness is a transcendent, non-spatial, ontologically primary principle—a metaphysical nucleus from which the cosmos derives order. In modern New Age thought, the same term typically denotes a universal field permeating the cosmos, something distributed and immanent. The problem is not merely different conceptions but the unnoticed transfer of vocabulary from one ontology to another, creating an illusion of conceptual continuity. This explains why debates about consciousness can be so tangled, as participants rely on incompatible background assumptions while using the same words.
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
May 16, 2026
Hans-Joachim Rudolph
The concept of 'cosmic consciousness' is used in fundamentally different ways across spiritual traditions, often without recognition of the differences. In traditional Vedanta, consciousness is a transcendent, non-spatial, ontologically primary principle—a metaphysical nucleus from which the cosmos derives order. In modern New Age interpretations, consciousness is imagined as a universal, energetic field permeating space and immanent in reality. The problem arises when the vocabulary of one system is unconsciously transferred into the ontology of another, creating an illusion of conceptual continuity where significant ontological differences exist. This leads to misunderstandings and unnecessary conflicts in discussions about consciousness.
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
May 14, 2026
Hans-Joachim Rudolph
The concept of 'cosmic consciousness' is used in fundamentally different ways in traditional Vedantic philosophy and modern New Age spirituality, leading to confusion and unnecessary conflict. In Vedanta, consciousness is understood as a transcendent, non-spatial, ontologically primary principle—a metaphysical center from which the cosmos derives order—rather than something spread throughout space. In contrast, New Age interpretations treat consciousness as a universal field, distributed and immanent within reality. The problem arises when the vocabulary of one system is unconsciously transferred into the ontology of another, creating an illusion of conceptual continuity where significant ontological differences exist. This explains why discussions about consciousness can become confusing: people use the same words while relying on different background assumptions.
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
May 12, 2026
Hans-Joachim Rudolph
Consciousness is not a fundamental feature of reality but arises when reality's intrinsic relational and semantic structure becomes actualized as experience under specific organizational conditions. The paper argues against both reductive physicalism and classical panpsychism by distinguishing between the ontological condition for experience and experience itself. Reality is described as intrinsically relational and semantically differentiated (pansemanticism), with a non-closed character called pre-subjective openness that allows perspectival experience to emerge. This openness is not a hidden form of consciousness or micro-experience but the ontological precondition for consciousness to become actual.
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
May 7, 2026
Hans-Joachim Rudolph
Nondual experience—where the usual subject–object distinction dissolves—is often mistakenly treated as if it directly reveals an ultimate cosmic consciousness or ground of reality. This paper identifies two symmetrical fallacies: first, interpreting a transformation of the experiential field as proof of an ontologically independent supreme consciousness; second, claiming that one's own realization authorizes such an ontology, even though the experience itself does not warrant that claim. The experience is phenomenologically compelling but ontologically underdetermined, meaning it can support multiple incompatible interpretations. The authors argue that nondual experience does not justify ontological closure, and that distinguishing experience from interpretation and epistemic authority is necessary to avoid overstating what the experience proves.
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
April 27, 2026
Hans-Joachim Rudolph
Having a powerful meditative experience does not prove that the metaphysical interpretation attached to it is true. An experience of boundlessness or divinity does not demonstrate that reality itself is universal consciousness or absolute being. Conversely, an inherited spiritual tradition can shape how practitioners interpret their own experiences, leading them to treat those experiences as confirmations of a realization they have not actually attained. This is especially relevant to Sarkar's concept of 'Cosmic Consciousness,' which refers to the ontological ground of reality, not an expanded individual state. Responsible spiritual transmission requires distinguishing between experience, interpretation, authority, usefulness, and ontology, so that neither immediate experience nor inherited authority is mistaken for ontological justification.