Codes of uniqueness and representation
The four registers of UNIQUENESS – LOCATION, BODY, EXPERIENCE and PERSON anchor and contextualize being and being human in a “reality” of what it means to “exist”, both in each moment of “here and now” and throughout the space-time (of the post Big Bang multiverse). Each register has a distinct role and relevance (centrality, importance) in the formation of (i) one’s uniqueness and (ii) one’s representation of oneself and others.
Centrality of LOCATION (L) implies focus on the spatiotemporal coordinates of location of one’s body and on immediate proximal events, relations and entities within one’s sensory horizon.The body itself is excluded from the location (ex-BODY).
Centrality of the BODY (B) implies focus on the biophysicality of one’s body, including its appearance and behavior. Sensations are typically, but not always, excluded, unless clearly articulated as corporeal / somatic, e.g. “My body is cold / tired” vs “ I am cold / tired”.
Centrality of EXPERIENCE (E) implies focus on primary or secondary experience as the content of one’s consciousness, including sensations, awareness and ideation.
Centrality of PERSON (P) implies focus on societal and interpersonal markers, including records, products and memories.
The relative relevance of each register can be expressed by its position in a sequence of four letters (L-B-E-P) organized in a descending order of centrality from left (high) to right (low). For instance, [LBEP] means that LOCATION is the most central (important), followed, in a descending order of importance, by BODY, EXPERIENCE and PERSON.
There are twenty four unique prototypical configurations (codes) of the four registers.
The six prototypical [Lxxx] configurations (LBEP, LBPE, LEBP, LEPB, LPBE, LPEB) reflect focus on coordinates of location and on proximal events and their mutual relations, including other entities and bodies of others (e.g. GPS, air / street traffic control, flying / driving, ballet, team sports, staged performances).
The six prototypical [Bxxx] configurations (BLEP; BLPE; BELP; BEPL; BPLE; BPEL) correspond to focus on the BODY and it’s biophysicality, appearance and behavior (e.g. medicine, sports, exercising, physical contact, parent-infant interactions, performances, dance, modelling).
The six prototypical [Exxx] (EBLP, ELBP, EBPL, ELPB, EPBL, EPBL) configurations correspond to focus on the primary or secondary experience as the content of one’s consciousness (e.g. sensations, thoughts, feelings, desires, memories.)
The six prototypical [Pxxx] configurations (PBLE, PBEL, PLBE, PLEP, PEBL, PELB) reflect focus on societal markers (e.g. science, media, politics, government, rules, schedules, law enforcement, fame / celebrity, socioeconomic status, history, economy / business, public / institutional order).
Relevance (centrality) signifies the relative presence of each of the four registers in one’s consciousness as marked by focus (vs peripherality), frequency and duration. For example, the prototypical BLEP configuration means that one’s consciousness is focused on the BODY, most of the time, with LOCATION, EXPERIENCE and PERSON represented progressively more peripherally and less often, in a descending order, respectively.
As one moves throughout domains and contexts of one’s life – the public (work, peer groups, community) and the private ([being with] intimate [others]; [being] alone) – centrality and corresponding configurations of registers continuously change, based on inherent fluctuations within each and among all the four registers, in space-time, moment after moment
Domains and specific contexts are coded in front of the registers acronym.
For instance, (work)PBLE; (alone)ELBP might be used for someone who in the work context is focused primarily on the public PERSON followed by the BODY, LOCATION and EXPERIENCE and who,when alone, is focused mainly on own EXPERIENCE, followed by LOCATION, BODY and PERSON, respectively (e.g. traffic officer who, when alone listens to music in a secluded room to relax from daily stress)
The flow of actual configurations in time (t), across domains and contexts of one’s life, can be coded as a string of the four registers e.g. (t1)blep-(t2)eblp-(t3)lbpe-(t4)pble-………-(t∞)xxxx, etc., where each moment of time (t) refers to focus (in one’s consciousness) on a specific location (l), biophysical state / behavior of one’s body (b), experience (e) and societal attributes (markers, products, memories). The length of each moment is defined by the time a particular one configuration is detected as new or different (sensory threshold) and maintained in one’s consciousness (attention, working memory).
In addition to representing oneself one also forms representations of others. There may be up to twenty four prototypical [Lxxx]; [Bxxx]; [Exxx] or [Pxxx] prototypical representations of others in one’s consciousness. Together, the representations of oneself and others can form a [24X24] matrix of up to 576 prototypical configurations. As above, the representations are coded as a string of letters, the first four reflecting representations of oneself and the second four, representations of others, with a description of the context (domain) in front of them. For instance, (intimate)BLEP-EBLP for mother-infant vs (intimate)PEBL-EBPL for psychotherapist-patient
Other examples, (community)BLEP-LPBE for a race runner vs PBLE-EPLB for a politician at rally; (intimate)BELP-BLEP for sexual encounter vs (intimate)EBLP-ELBP for friends texting.
The number of possible configurations (576) is not the same as the number of actual configurations characterizing one’s unique pattern (focus, frequency, duration) of representing oneself and others. The actual number is significantly lower and corresponds to the range of one’s internal states addressed separately.
Patterns of being and representation – interpersonal styles, identity, gender
Prototypical configurations of the four registers correspond to unique patterns (styles) of being and experiencing (representing) oneself and others (“identity”, “personality”) . For instance:
The six prototypical [Lxxx] configurations (LBEP, LBPE, LEBP, LEPB, LPBE, LPEB) correspond to a style (pattern) focused on location, including (i) tangible proximal events (entities, things) and their relations (e.g. geographical locality, nature / aesthetic, physical / material objects l) or (ii) relative position and distance of others and their bodies (e.g. proximity-seeking / avoiding / controlling, reclusive styles).
The six prototypical [Bxxx] configurations (BLEP; BLPE; BELP; BEPL; BPLE; BPEL) correspond to a style focused on the corporeal – action, contact, appearance and/or performative behavior of the BODY (e.g. demonstrative, externalizing, impulsive, (en)acting-out, somatizing, physical contact-seeking / avoiding styles)
The six prototypical [Exxx] (EBLP, ELBP, EBPL, ELPB, EPBL, EPBL) configurations correspond to a style focused on (subjective) experience (e.g. introspective, internalizing, symbolizing, mentalizing).
The six prototypical [Pxxx] configurations (PBLE, PBEL, PLBE, PLEP, PEBL, PELB) correspond to a style focused on public societal markers (e.g. status / image / celebrity / fame; rebellious / exploitative / transgressing vs conforming / protectionistic / enforcing; individualistic / eccentric vs collective / collaborative).
The relevance of each register in the developmental formation of one’s uniqueness and in the construction of representations of oneself and others is is based on a dialectic between the Desire of others – the totality of what others want and desire one to be or do, and one’s own Desire – what one wants and desires for oneself and from others. The boundary between the two is fluid and changes in space-time.
Accordingly, within the dialectic of Desire, and at a particular (sub)cultural LOCATION, the formation and manifestation of gender identity involve (i) the epigenetics, anatomy, appearance and behavior of the BODY (ii) the (subjective) EXPERIENCE of one’s gender and (iii) the societal markers of gender (official records and interpersonal perceptions). Developmental resolutions of the universal tension among (i) biological ambiguities of “gender” of one’s body, (ii) inherent fluidity of one’s experience of own gender, including fantasies about and desires for (being) the “other” gender and (iii) societal markers of gender (binary / fluid / other) lay foundation for eventual formation and expression of gender identity and interpersonal attraction (Desire to be vs Desire to be with (have) the Other) and related interpersonal challenges and problems (psychopathology).
Relationality and intersubjectivity
One exists among others and any dyadic transaction between two individuals X and Y involves a matrix of four sets of representations – representations of oneself and others of individual X and representations of oneself and others of individual Y. Consistently, such a matrix is coded X(domain)xxxx-xxxx><Y(domain)xxxx-xxxx.
For instance, prototypical code X(work)PBLE-BELP><Y(community)EBLP-PBEL might refer to a physician X examining a patient Y at a local emergency room
X(community)BPEL-BPLE><Y(community)BPEL-BPLE for a first date, in person or virtual, with X and Y in matching configurations or X(intimate)BELP-BELP><Y(intimate)EBLP-PLBE for sexual encounter between a celebrity (X) and a groupie admirer (Y).
The above examples illustrate prototypical dyadic transactions. The actual interactions between two or more individual are extended in time (t1……tn) and would be coded as an expanded version of the formula in footnote #10 above.
Vicissitudes of DESIRE – attraction, relationships, intimacy
Interpersonal attraction, relationships and intimacy are based on DESIRE, the dynamic totality of what one wants (wishes) and longs for (turns to) versus what one is aversive to (turns away from). It is a wish or longing to (i) be (not be) someone / something, (ii) be (not be) like someone / something or (iii) be (not be) with or have (not have) someone / something.
Most fundamentally, DESIRE is for an EVENT or RELATION to be different from what it is (change). Based on evolutionary progression from kinesis, tropism, taxis, reflex, instinct towards needs and “motivation”, wishes and desires are EVENTS within or about (i) one’s BODY (e.g. pleasure, pain, hunger, craving, turning to / away) and (ii) one’s EXPERIENCE (e.g. preference / choice, fantasy, dreams) and reflect EVENTS and RELATIONS within (i) one’s LOCATION (e.g. proximity, distance from / to or physical energy of other entities) and (ii) one’s PERSON (societal / interpersonal markers, demands and expectancies)
Many desires of the BODY are not represented in one’s EXPERIENCE (unconscious) and, correspondingly, many desires in one’s EXPERIENCE never become observable BEHAVIORS (private, secrets). The experience of desiring is quintessentially agentic and intentional, one DESIRES a particular EVENT or RELATION to be different than it is, was or might be, based on one’s experience of insufficiency (lack, absence) of what is.
The matrix of one’s DESIRE is based on the four registers of UNIQUENESS.
One desires through one’s BODY (e.g. drowsiness, hunger, gasping for air), within one’s EXPERIENCE (e.g. loving, hoping, fantasizing ), based on one’s LOCATION (e.g. being homesick) or in response to one as a PERSON (e.g. recognition, status, title, position). Correspondingly, one’s desire can be focused on other’s LOCATION (e.g. physical proximity / distance), BODY (e.g. corporeal beauty), EXPERIENCE (e.g. other’s feelings / ideas) or PERSON (e.g. celebrity, status, wealth).
For instance, lust can be conceptualized as primarily corporeal and coded as LUST=[X]BELP-BPLE, whereas love is often thought of as a more complex experience possibly coded as LOVE=[X]EPBL-PEBL
In the work domain, a hiring decision by a boss X can be based on any of the four REGISTERS and coded HIRE DECISION=[X]PEBL-BLPE for a modelling agency vs HIRE DECISION=[X]PELB-PELB for a college professor.
While attraction is mainly based on one’s Desire, interpersonal dyadic compatibility between two individuals X,Y are based on the degree of similarity of their interpersonal (personality) styles and Desires. Unsurprisingly, two individuals (friends, couple, marriage) with matching styles and Desires are more likely to be compatible and enjoy the relationship than individuals M,F whose styles and Desires are substantially different.
Societal challenges and questions
In the society, one’s being is viewed from at least three perspectives: (i) subjective – how one experiences and represents oneself; (ii) interpersonal – how one is represented in the experience of others and (iii) public – how one is represented in and marked by the official public records, including the (academic) discourse of science. While one’s representation of oneself reflects all four registers of UNIQUENESS, the representations by others and by the public / scientific markers reflect one’s LOCATION, BODY (appearance, behavior) and PERSON.
Policy and the law
In public policy and the law one exists and is identified as a specific BODY (biophysical mass, DNA, appearance, behavior ) at a specific LOCATION associated with a unique spatiotemporal continuity of societal markers (name, government identification code, place / date of birth, parents, addresses, activities and, roles, functions). One is considered to be the same unique individual across one’s entire life span, irrespective of all changes and is always the “same” PERSON associated with the “same” BODY even if their particular attributes (markers, appearance, behavior) change across the trajectory of spatiotemporal LOCATIONs. One is always the “same” PERSON and BODY from birth to death even if the LOCATION, EXPERIENCE and the actual biophysicality of one’s body are not.
Legally, one can be held accountable for one’s behavior irrespective of the passage of time and subsequent changes in one’s life (e.g. war crimes, felonies without a statute of limitations). The legal accountability is based on the spatiotemporal continuity (identity) of the PERSON and the BODY but not necessarily of one’s EXPERIENCE. However, is one, many decades and life changes later, still the same individual?
Similarly, one can be paroled (as reformed / rehabilitated) based on the changes in one’s (now “good”) BEHAVIOR and inferred changes in one’s EXPERIENCE. However, forgiveness notwithstanding, is the parolee a different individual?
The question of continuity of identity, agency and accountability (same-ness) across the four registers lies at the core of societal challenges presented by individual uniqueness.
Why are the death penalty allowed (legal) but suicide is not? Death is an end of one’s BODY’s life and one’s ability to EXPERIENCE but almost never an end of the PERSON or LOCATION. In fact, one can continue endlessly as a PERSON associated with a particular trajectory of LOCATIONs (history). The society usurps the authority to allow or to make one to end the life of the BODY and EXPERIENCE of others but not one’s own. A prison executioner is authorized to end the life of a death row inmate but not his own.
Is it possible to reverse it and to give the society the power to put an end to the PERSON without ending the life of one’s BODY and EXPERIENCE? A life sentence without parole in solitary confinement at a maximum security facility comes as close as legally possible. Suicide is a desire to end one’s life as one experiences and knows it. Can one’s life be ended not by biophysical termination of the corporeal BODY and EXPERIENCE but by termination of the societal PERSON and its markers? Instead of self-destruction of the BODY could one “self-disappear” as a PERSON but remain biophysically alive? All interpersonal and societal steps and records of such “suicide” would be irreversibly enacted, permanent and legally enforced ad infinitum (execution of one’s Will, inheritance, mourning, “funeral”, “grave” (“place of departure”), etc.). A designated facility, staffed by a new breed of specialized “PERSON-al transformation teams” would be set up where individuals could stay until they are ready to return to the mainstream life as a new PERSON and, more importantly, embodying (embo-dying) a new (non-suicidal) EXPERIENCE.
As strange as such process may appear to us at this time, might it be an alternative to actual suicide or euthanasia and, perhaps, substantially reduce costs of mental health care and, likely, mass incarceration?
Similar concerns arise with respect to the beginnings of individual life and revolve around the questions about when a fetus becomes a PERSON. Is a fetus a part of the mother’s body or an experiencing, embodied PERSON within (inside) of the mother’s BODY? Does the PERSON originate at conception, at birth or somewhere “in between”?
Some mothers speak about experiencing an in utero fetus as an emerging biophysical presence (BODY) of an “Other” outside of the familiar boundaries of their own “I”, agency and movement in particular. Some others are focused more on LOCATION – in utero vs postpartum as meaningful. However, the question of separateness is different from the question of uniqueness.
From the UNIQUENESS perspective, the question is how it is determined when a newly conceived life (embryo) becomes a unique BODY, unique LOCATION, a unique EXPERIENCE and a unique PERSON? And perhaps most importantly, who makes that decision and how?
Culture wars
Once born, an individual is immediately presented with challenges of societal / cultural tribalism, including, among many, language, ethnicity and race.
In general, tribalism, (ethnic, racial, other) arises when perceived differences in the four registers of UNIQUENESS (BODY, PERSON, EXPERIENCE, LOCATION) override their actual commonalities.
There is tribalism (i) of the LOCATION (continents, countries, regions, localities, neighborhood, address), (ii) of the BODY (race, gender, age, size, appearance), (iii) of EXPERIENCE (sensations, awareness, ideation) and (iv) of the PERSON (societal markers, culture, language, laws).
Ethnicity, as a societal and cultural attribute of UNIQUENESS, is associated primarily with the BODY (DNA) and LOCATION (country of origin) and, secondarily, with the PERSON (ethnic subculture) and EXPERIENCE (consciousness) (BLPE).
Race is primarily an attribute of the BODY (skin color, DNA, appearance) and secondarily of the PERSON (societal markers of race) and EXPERIENCE (experienced identity) (BPEL)
Tribalism involves multiple and overlapping registers, domains and aspects of life. Tribalism of the BODY may pertain to race (e.g. white supremacists, segregationists), gender (e.g.misogyny), appearance (e.g fashion, fitness, body build), age or a physical disability. Tribalism of the PERSON may refer to societal markers of status (e.g. meritocracy of education, wealth), political spectrum (Left vs Right), religion (e.g. Hindu vs Muslims, Catholics vs Protestants), club or gang membership, etc. Tribalism of LOCATION may involve entire countries (e.g. Israel and Iran), geography (e.g. South vs North, coast vs inland); populations (urban vs rural), local neighborhoods or micro-locations within a particular area (e.g. office space, apartment, subgrouping at an event). Tribalism of EXPERIENCE can be based on shared values (e.g.conservative vs progressive), interests (e.g. art vs business) or more broadly, on the focus of one’s consciousness on a particular register or domain of life (work, public, community, intimate, private)
Tribalism, including ethnicity and race, as a dialectic between representation of oneself and representation of others, is experienced and manifested differently by different individuals and groups (stereotypes) and changes in (i) focus (BODY, LOCATION, EXPERIENCE, PERSON) and (ii) relevance (intensity, valence, regard) across individuals, groups and main domains of life
Contemporary geopolitical and socioeconomic tensions, including the divergence between forces of globalization and the national / cultural / local identities, seem to revolve around control over land or territory (LOCATION), ethnicity, race, appearance and behavior (BODY), religion, culture, nationality, history, SEC status (PERSON) or shared desires, values, lifestyle choices and preferences (EXPERIENCE).
Language and speech, and their local attributes (syntax, semantics, lexicon, accent, dialect, jargon, etc.), have evolved to be inherently tribal – they represent both the within-group commonalities and between-group differences.
As long as we speak and think in different languages and inhabit separate and demarcated parts of the globe governed by autonomous nations, the strife between one vs fragmented Earth is likely to continue.
Politics, social media, marketing and behavioral economics
Contemporary societies are regulated by the Desire to be or to have something or someone. What exactly “to be” or “to have” mean is often poorly understood or articulated.
Votes, “clicks”, “likes”, “followers” and wealth and celebrity quantify desirability and status. Competition for the attention of others (publicity, fame, media, business) is the “new normal” paradigm of public discourse.
Politics, at least in a democracy, are about winning votes and elections. It is a game of the dialectic of DESIRE, played publicly by elected officials and the voters.
Politicians engage in performative behaviors (BODY) choreographed to influence the EXPERIENCE and, ultimately, the voting behavior (BODY) of others. They typically focus on voters’ LOCATION (e.g. city, county, state, region), BODY (e.g. age, gender, race), PERSON (ethnicity, religion, status, life style) or EXPERIENCE (e.g. feelings, interests, values, preferences).
Reciprocally, the voters engage in constructing a representation of the politicians in their EXPERIENCE (consciousness). The voters representations also focus on the LOCATION (e.g. state, region, city, neighborhood), BODY (race, gender, age), PERSON (education, status, ethnicity, religion) or EXPERIENCE (ideation, feelings, sensations) associated with each politician. A political win is a successful match and a collective compromise among all involved parties.
Social media allows one to establish an online presence (re-presentation) to express (communicate) something to others. It is a performative behavior within the register of the BODY which both reveals and conceals one’s actual corporeal body and its behavior. One may choose to present (post, tweet, share, etc.) focusing on LOCATION, BODY (appearance, behavior, activity), EXPERIENCE (thoughts, feelings, concerns, values, desires) or PERSON (publically / interpersonally marked events, records or products).
Unlike most in-person behaviors at one specific location, the online ones create a permanent digital record which can be then accessed and experienced by others at an infinite number of other locations. Sometimes a digital record of one’s “private” behavior online is made public, or an already public record receives increased attention or scrutiny, often resulting in unintended consequences for all involved. More broadly, online social media allow one’s LOCATION, BODY, EXPERIENCE and the PERSON to be “shared” with and by others, including virtual reality, avatars and online gaming,with implications addressed further below.
Individual UNIQUENESS is particularly relevant in behavioral economics and marketing. Understanding how each of the four registers contributes to human economic behaviors, buy / sell market decisions and consumer purchasing choices is key in any industrial society. How does one’s cognitions and feelings (EXPERIENCE) affect one’s economic behaviors (BODY). How do LOCATION (in-store vs online, mall vs local vendor, geographical context, urban vs rural), BODY (biophysical states, gender, age, appearance / behavior / speech), EXPERIENCE (sensations, feelings, thoughts, desires, fantasies) and the PERSON (language, religion, SEC markers) of the “seller” and the “buyer” affect the flow of economic and business transactions?
Patterns of and preferences for particular economic behaviors (decisions, choices) of both “sellers” and the “buyers” correspond to and are predicated on the interpersonal / personality styles described above (Bxxx; Lxxx, Exxx, Pxxx) and can be used to optimize business / market transactions.
In many cases, one’s political, social media and business presence are intricately intertwined and mutually leveraged to maximize political gain, social media exposure and financial profit (e.g. Trump presidency). Both issues will be explored further below.
Mental health
Substance addictions, addictive behaviors, interpersonal / personality problems, suicide, trauma, violence, crime are widely prevalent and pervasive in postmodern societies. They, as most psychopathology in general, occur at a particular context or circumstance (LOCATION), involve specific (maladaptive) biophysical processes and overt behaviors (BODY), follow sequences of recurrent internal states (EXPERIENCE) and have interpersonal / societal effects registered (marked) by others (PERSON).
Although all four registers are always involved in symptom formation, some symptoms may be primarily associated with LOCATION (PTSD, specific phobias, anxiety), with the BODY (anorexia, addictions, mania, compulsions, behavioral / conduct / impulse control problems), with EXPERIENCE (psychosis, dissociations, obsessions, delirium, dementia) or with the PERSON (violation of societal / interpersonal norms and / or expectations). Many mental health problems involve complex interactions across all four registers (personality / gender / sexuality related problems).
Normative considerations regarding the definition and demarcation of “normal” vs “abnormal” and an ongoing societal, cultural and scientific debate about how to conceptualize, identify (diagnose) and prevent mental illness have been underway for a century in modern societies.
The role of UNIQUENESS in psychopathology, interpersonal (personality, Self, identity) disorders and their treatment in particular, are explored in depth in Chapters 2 and 3 below. A broader discussion of UNIQUENESS, mental dis-ease (symptoms), Buddhist psychology and philosophy of suffering (“dukkha”) is addressed separately.