Thus: A superconsciousness!(?)?(!).
Western logic has the either A or not A type self evident truths. I think these are limited. IOW I think there are ‘things’ events processes where it is me AND not me. Inside but also outside. Self and not self. We can see this with things that are unconscious in us. Say we have a pattern of behavior in relation to women. Others notice this. We are not aware of it. Years later we become aware of it. Perhaps first we notice that they have a point. We do behave in a certain way that implies this. But why would we be angry at women?
I wonder how you have come to the latter conclusion, if it is one.
The anger is in the unconscious. Yet - and here’s the key point - when we do become aware of it, there is a way in which we can feel we were always aware of it. This is a an A and not A situation, but, sadyly for certain logicians, I think it is the case.
That reminds me a bit of Heidegger and his concept of “Angst”.
I mention this because this is consciousness and unconsciousness, but something like this seems to me to be the case in the consciousness to superconsciousness direction. Separation and connection.
Yes, I can agree with that.
And I agree with it the more, the more it is not meant in the way of psychoanalysis but of pure existence and its analysis (compare: “Dasein” and “Daseinsanalyse” - Martin Heidegger).