How Ontic Structure Matches the Human Mind

Abstract

This essay explores the deep correlation between the ontological layers of reality as posited in Instancology and the structural composition of the human mind. By aligning six components of the human inner system—ego, soul, mind, consciousness, thinking, and action—with the six-tiered ontic framework—Relative, Absolute, AA, AR, RA, and RR—we demonstrate that human cognitive architecture is not arbitrary but mirrors the very structure of reality it seeks to comprehend. This matching offers a profound metaphysical insight: the human being is not merely a participant in reality but a structured reflection of its essence.

I. The Structure of the Human Mind

The human mind, when analyzed from the standpoint of depth psychology, metaphysics, and Instancology, is not a monolithic or flat structure. Instead, it reveals six functional and hierarchical dimensions:

1. Ego – the surface self, reactive and identity-bound.

2. Soul – the essential being or immutable core.

3. Mind – the total internal field where awareness, reasoning, and identity reside.

4. Consciousness – the luminous capacity to be aware and to know.

5. Thinking – the active, structured function of reasoning and reflection.

6. Action – the interface between the mind and the world, realized in behavior and interaction.

These six layers, although internally coherent, are not self-grounded. They require an ontological counterpart—a structure of reality—to justify their existence and function.

II. The Ontic Structure of Reality

In Instancology, the six-fold ontological structure defines the layered nature of all that exists:

1. Relative – that which is representational, shifting, contextual.

2. Absolute – that which is invariant, eternal, and non-representational.

3. AA (Absolute Absolute) – the unspeakable background issuing all instances.

4. AR (Absolute Relative) – the natural world, life, and consciousness as instances.

5. RA (Relatively Absolute) – laws, logic, and mathematical structure.

6. RR (Relative Relative) – human-made systems, languages, technologies, culture.

These ontic layers are not just abstract philosophical categories but the very scaffolding upon which both existence and cognition unfold.

III. The Matching Pairs: Mind and Reality

By aligning the inner faculties of the mind with the ontic structure of reality, we propose the following direct correspondences:

Human Mind Ontic Structure Justification

Ego Relative The ego is context-sensitive, representational, and reactive—just like the Relative layer.

Soul Absolute The soul represents the timeless, essential core of a person, mirroring the Absolute layer of being.

Mind AA The mind as the wholeness that contains soul, ego, consciousness, etc., reflects the unspeakable wholeness of AA.

Consciousness AR Consciousness emerges with life and nature, falling into the category of Absolute Relative.

Thinking RA Thinking is structured, rule-based, and law-dependent, rooted in logic and reason—thus matching RA.

Action RR Action manifests into the world through representations, systems, and relations—belonging to RR.

IV. Implications

This six-fold mapping reveals that:

- Human nature is not chaotic but patterned ontologically.

- The highest parts of mind (mind-AA, soul-Absolute) cannot be fully analyzed or represented, only intuited.

- Thinking belongs to the law-bound RA layer, which explains why mathematics and logic come naturally to it.

- Action, as RR, shows how all knowledge must finally externalize to become social, linguistic, or technological.

- Consciousness, as AR, arises not from artificial construction but from an issued, natural order.

- Ego, as Relative, is the most fragile and context-bound part of the mind and thus the source of illusion or identification.

V. Conclusion

The mind is not an isolated organ but a metaphysical map—an instance echoing the structure of reality itself. Each aspect of human interiority finds its reflection in the ontological framework laid out by Instancology. This alignment does not merely help us understand reality better; it helps us understand ourselves as reality. In this view, to know the world is to know the self, and to know the self is to know how the world is structured.