Beyond Ego and Object: Epistemic Enclosure and the Relational Field of Awareness
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) February 23, 2026 DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18737261 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Key points | Argues that awareness is a relational field rather than a property of subject or object, and that "epistemic enclosure" stabilizes the ego and reified objects, obscuring their co-emergence. Proposes that decentering awareness from ego identification and object fixation restores relational symmetry and produces equanimity, characterized by reduced egoic distortion and increased fluidity of action. |
Abstract
This paper develops a relational ontology of awareness grounded in the concept of epistemic enclosure. It argues that awareness does not exist as a property of either the subject or the object, but as the relational field within which both co-emerge and become intelligible. The apparent independence of the ego and of objects arises from epistemic enclosure, a structural stabilization mechanism that confines awareness within bounded identity and reified objecthood. Internally, enclosure stabilizes the ego through narrative continuity, memory, and identification; externally, it stabilizes objects by treating them as independently existing and fully determined entities. These reciprocal enclosures obscure the relational condition that makes both subject and object possible. By loosening the center of gravity of awareness from exclusive identification with the ego and its fixation on objects, relational symmetry is restored. This decentering does not eliminate the self or the world but reveals their co-emergence within a unified field of awareness. The experiential consequence of this structural shift is equanimity, characterized by reduced egoic distortion and increased fluidity of action. The paper proposes epistemic enclosure as a foundational mechanism underlying the stabilization, limitation, and potential liberation of awareness. It differentiates the present framework from Kantian transcendentalism, enactivism, Metzinger’s self-model theory, classical phenomenology, Buddhist nondual philosophy, and materialist reductionism, and provides a comparative table, concrete illustrative analyses, and a discussion of empirical operationalization.