9.22 Are Perception Spheres (also) Creation Spheres?
We typically perceive reality as something existing independently of us – a world, a universe, unfolding regardless of whether we are present to observe it. We assume that reality exists “out there,” prior to our consciousness, and would continue to be even if we were not. Yet, this deeply ingrained conviction lacks empirical proof. No one has ever definitively demonstrated that the world persists precisely as we know it when no conscious observer is present. The only honest assertion we can make is that when we are here, the world is here. This observation leads to a profound question: What if we are not merely discovering reality, but actively participating in its very formation?
This very conclusion can be drawn from the insights of quantum physics. While macro physics supports the idea of the world’s independent existence, the subatomic quantum world does not exist without its observer, as events within it are co-created by the observer.
This inquiry leads us to a fundamental re-examination of the Perception Spheres theory. Are these spheres merely different lenses through which we observe an already existing reality? Or do they represent the very modes and mechanisms through which we (individually and collectively) create that reality? We propose that Perception Spheres are, in fact, also Creation Spheres. If our perception is inherently an active, formative process, then it must, by its very nature, be creative.
Let’s illustrate this with an example from the realm of business, which, as a micro-application of Perception Spheres, demonstrates these shifting modes of creation:
Consider the traditional shoemaker, crafting bespoke footwear for an individual customer. The shoemaker operates primarily within the Sphere of Concreteness (Level 1). Their perception is focused on the unique foot of a specific client, the tactile qualities of the leather, the precise measurements, and the immediate, tangible outcome. Their act of creation is intensely personal, direct, and unique to that one interaction. They are creating a concrete, one-of-a-kind reality tailored precisely to the individual’s needs.
Now, contrast this with a global corporation like Nike. Nike does not craft individual shoes for unique feet. Instead, Nike designs and produces a vast range of footwear for broad categories of customers, market segments, and generalized athletic needs. This shift signifies a profound change in the mode of creation and perception, moving primarily into the Sphere of General Perception (Level 2). The shift from the shoemaker to Nike is not just a change in business scale; it’s a fundamental transformation in the human mind’s approach to perception and creation – moving from directly creating individual instances to creating standardized, generalized realities.
The shift between Perception/Creation Spheres is not merely a matter of efficiency or scale; it often reveals profound, sometimes hidden, costs and benefits, and fundamentally impacts our process of self-creation – the continuous transformation of our own consciousness and identity.
Another illustrative example can be found in Indigenous buffalo hunting practices. From a purely concrete (Level 1) or generalized (Level 2) perspective focused solely on immediate sustenance or resource management, one might wonder why Indigenous peoples did not simply “invent” ranching. The ability to corral and breed buffalo, ensuring a steady supply of food with less effort, seems like an obvious gain in efficiency. However, this seemingly simple innovation requires a perception rooted in the Autonomous Realm (Level 3) – a connection to abstract principles of efficiency and productivity. Yet, to make this shift would have necessitated a profound sacrifice: the abandonment of values deeply tied to their existing way of being. For many Indigenous cultures, animals were perceived as free, de facto equal beings, and the hunt was a respectful, sacred interaction. Native peoples often saw Nature as their Mother, nourishing her children. To enclose the bison would have been to imprison not just the animals, but a part of their own spirit and to betray their fundamental spirituality, severing a sacred connection to the concrete manifestation of the wild.
This stands in stark contrast to the Western perspective, exemplified by the biblical injunction in Genesis 1:28: “And God blessed them and said to them: ‘Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it; rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.’” This worldview positions humanity as a master over nature, making the pursuit of “efficiency in utilizing nature” a more straightforward and less spiritually conflicted path.
The Indigenous example illustrates that advancing to a more abstract, efficient mode of creation often involves the sacrifice of existing values, a redefinition of sacredness, and the emergence of new values that align with the higher principle, leading to a new self-creation and identity.
This dynamic of sacrifice and emergence is also evident in grand societal transformations, which are fundamentally acts of collective self-creation through the spheres. Take the building of a common Europe. This transition required sacrificing deeply held values associated with absolute national sovereignty and identity, prioritizing instead a shared civic principle (e.g., peace, cooperation, human rights) rooted in a more generalized (Level 2) or even autonomous (Level 3) perception. While this shift prevented devastating wars between nation-states, it also brought about new challenges and the emergence of a new value: “Europeanness,” a transformed identity encompassing elements of the old within a broader, unifying framework.
Crucially, in this process of collective self-creation, even when external forms change, internal patterns of relating can persist. For instance, in the transition from autocracy to democracy, while the external king is removed, societies can still fall into the trap of relating to top democratic leaders as if they were kings. This demonstrates that collective patterns of perception and relationship, forged in lower spheres, do not instantly transform. This persistence subtly influences how the new reality is created and experienced, often “twisting” the pure intent of the higher-sphere principles through ingrained behavioral patterns. Ongoing acts of self-creation, both individual and collective, constantly shape the manifestations of reality in every sphere.
If Perception Spheres are indeed Creation Spheres, then the mode of creation fundamentally shifts and evolves as one moves from one sphere to another:
Sphere of Concreteness:
Creation as Immediate Manifestation: at this fundamental level, creation is direct, tangible, and immediate. It is the act of bringing specific, singular instances into existence through direct interaction and physical action. The shoemaker creating a bespoke pair of shoes for a unique customer embodies this: perception of specific needs and materials directly results in a concrete, physical manifestation. Individual daily actions – building a fire, tending a garden, engaging in a one-on-one conversation – are all acts of creation in this sphere, immediately shaping the tangible reality around us.
Sphere of General Perception:
Creation as Collective Construction: moving to this sphere, creation extends beyond individual instances to encompass generalization, categorization, and the formation of shared conceptual realities. Here, creation occurs through the development of abstract systems, language, shared narratives, and collective beliefs. Nike’s creation of generalized footwear for market segments is an example; not just shoes, but a market reality defined by brands, trends, and consumer categories are created. Nations create shared identities through flags, anthems, and collective histories. Laws are created as generalized rules, shaping collective behavior. This sphere is where collective realities are widely constructed, often becoming deeply ingrained and powerfully influencing the lives of many, even if based on abstract, rather than concrete, foundations.
Autonomous Realm:
Creation through Alignment with Principles: in the Autonomous Realm, creation takes on a more profound quality. It involves the act of aligning with or applying universal, inherent principles that exist independently of specific human desires. The principle of efficiency, as in the ranching example, is one such principle. When these autonomous principles (e.g., cause-and-effect, universal justice, mathematical laws) are perceived and consciously chosen to be operated in accordance with, realities that are inherently governed by these principles are created. This is a form of conscious co-creation, where will brings into manifestation what is already inherently true at a fundamental level. A scientist creating a new technology based on natural laws, or a society building a system of justice based on universal ethical principles, are examples of creation in this sphere.
Essential Sphere:
Creation as Emergence from Substance: the Essential Sphere represents the ultimate, mysterious ground of all being. Creation at this level is less about individual doing and more about allowing, merging, or drawing directly from this fundamental “Substance.” It is the origin point from which all other forms of creation ultimately derive their possibility. While its nature remains enigmatic, it is the ultimate grounding for why anything can be created at all. Deepest intuitive insights, moments of profound inspiration, or experiences of unity might be fleeting glimpses or direct connections to this sphere, through which ultimate reality is allowed to manifest.
While how creation manifests distinctly within each Perception Sphere can be articulated, and the resulting shifts in reality observed, a deeper mystery remains: What compels humanity, or individuals, to transition from one mode of perception and creation to another? The “how” and the “what” of these spherical shifts – how perception becomes creation, and what forms that creation takes – can be described. Yet, the underlying “why” – the fundamental impetus that drives a collective consciousness from, for example, a primary focus on concrete, individual creation (like the shoemaker) to a generalized, systemic mode (like Nike), or from valuing national sovereignty above all to embracing shared civic principles – remains a profound and ongoing question. It points to forces or processes that may lie beyond complete understanding, perhaps drawing from the very ‘mysterious’ nature of the Essential Sphere itself.
This reflection aims to offer possible insights into creation within the spheres, rather than definitively explain the ultimate catalysts for these profound transformations.
The main idea of the proposition that Perception Spheres are also Creation Spheres is that if perception equals creation, then responsibility must be assumed for what and how one perceives. This means reality has been created precisely as it was perceived. No one and nothing else created this reality for us, nor are we left with simply perceiving it as a given.