2. What is the Soul? (The return of Relativism)

Now this is a particularly hard topic and I am going to approach it this time with reference to Truth and the Soul. My investigation is going to focus on the process of distorted and manipulated truths from the outer interactions of the social ego (D) to the ego (C) to the "self" (B) to the witness-consciousness (A). Here I have a difficulty positioning my previous idea of the Soul and this will prove interesting. My main argument is that relativism exists in all dimensions of interaction within and outside of ourselves (as a composite identity of A, B, C and D). What then happens to the Truth and how can we regain it? My assertion is of a realist-rationalist approach of reflection and circumspection.

Before we embark on the processes, we must understand the various composite parts of our identity. Allow me to start with the witness-consciousness, which is known as the saksi-pratyaksa in Hindu philosophy. I have used the similar term because linguistically it makes a lot of sense to my understanding of it. However, I am not agreeing with the romantic notions of its origin. That much is out of my scope as a moral-realist.

Now what is the witness-consciousness, you may ask. Well, follow me with a little experiment and it will quickly be apparent. Tell yourself a definite truth statement. Next, tell yourself an untruth. That little voice which speaks out against your untruth is the witness-consciousness. Sometimes it speaks in the form of a tentative doubt-ridden pause in response to your untruth. The witness-consciousness is the part of you that knows all. It has witnessed all but is passive in a sense. It may "counsel" you in your deliberations but it is unable to affect your final decision. It is the "entity" to which we speak when we engage in self-justifying talk. But ultimately, we find that we cannot lie to our witness-consciousness. We may placate our "self" but we can never lie to our witness-consciousness.

This is the first level of story-telling in which we construct (or attempt to construct) before our witness-consciousness a more ideal image of ourselves.

When we engage in story-telling, we engage in self-justification of our actions and denial against the voice of our witness-consciousness. At the most basic level, story-telling is when we tell our witness-consciousness that we need what we want. Yes, it is oxymoronic for wants and needs are different in priority. But to be able to acquire what we want to better ourselves, we must need it. We must try to story-tell to our witness-consciousness that we need these things, not want them. So our acquisition of them are perfectly justifiable and then we can live with ourselves.

Our witness-consciousness is in essence truthful. In this quality, then lies the possibility for all truth. Indeed, our witness-consciousness acts as the source of radical doubt (Descartes: where the slightest suspicion of a doubt will be enough to make me reject any one of my beliefs.)