The Level of Consciousness

Certain drugs give one a strange conscious effect and when Lonergan speaks of raising the level of consciousness one may imagine he is calling for some strange mental contortion. He is merely asking one to replace consciousness as a mere experience, or set of experiences, by consciousness which has been raised by having a superstructure of terms with meanings and values. Instead of human subjectivity being just taken for granted, it becomes, through a process of question and answer, through a process of puzzlement and enlightenment, something one knows about alongside the other things one knows about.
When the Royal Society admitted only the results of observation and experiment as being scientific, human consciousness was as it were forced outward to consider only things outside man.
It is true the scholastics spoke about man having sense experience, agent intellect, possible intellect and free will and such terms allowed the scholar to talk about human nature in an objective way, but the knowledge so gained did not have to be verified in a personal way.
When with Freud psychology started to attend to human consciousness, the conclusion appeared to be that consciousness was a poor witness to ones real intentions. It is true that Karl Rogers got the patient to name and talk about his feelings which might be causing alarm and so bring about some sort of understanding and security, but I think it is true to say that no major psychologist has placed human intentionality in the foreground. Fr Robert Doran SJ has of course attempted to do so, but his work is not recognised as mainstream. Perhaps Fr Teilhard de Chardin SJ has the unique distinction of a Catholic cleric making that breakthrough.
Still, the case of Karl Rogers helps us understand what Lonergan means by ‘raising the level of consciousness’. Feelings which had been a cause of dismay, a part of the substructure of a life, are named and so brought into the superstructure of meaning and value – this way ‘the level of consciousness is raised’.
The following terms refer to areas of consciousness we can raise by naming them and gaining some understanding of their interconnections. Sense data (which includes words of course, whether spoken or written), a question, a schematic image, an insight, a conceptual expression of the insight, a consideration of the validity of the insight, a judgement, a development in one’s world view or horizon, consideration of a course of action, decisions, the realm of commitment and love. One might think all one needs is commitment and love, but if your beloved has appendicitis you badly need the expertise of the surgeon.
One might imagine that these operations go on just in the head of a solo thinker, illustrated by Rodin, but they also go on in the back of the Clapham omnibus, as people leaf through the newspaper.
So for good reasons or bad our European leaders including the Irish politicians think the Lisbon Treaty is a great thing. To come into effect the agreement is all nations must ratify it. The Irish people have not ratified it. Logically the Treaty is dead. The question arises, what sort of Europe are we building if small nations like Ireland do not count? Why then should any nation count? Are we back in a situation where what counts is the convenience of the rulers?
Lonergan posits the individual operating on sense data, but a group operating on a common field of experience. The individual has insights but the group has common and complementary ways of understanding. The individual gives assent when the evidence is in but the group attains common judgements and common aims. This happy picture is not easily attained. The scene in Zimbabwe, where the Presidential election has been cancelled, illustrates the problem. The achievement of a ‘common and complementary understanding’ is not so easy. So Lonergan writes ‘Ethical differences affect all evaluation. Philosophical differences affect the meaning of meaning. Religious differences modify the meaning and value of ones world.’
As well as the contemporary scene which amply illustrates the clash between authenticity and bias, there is the realm of history to be studied. Here one finds, in contrast with much psychological work, that the world is full of intentionality, with meanings lived and meanings expressed, with common aims and terrible clashes, even unto revolutions and armies marching. There is a world of events to be understood, even events which have shaped us, bringing about the tradition in which we were born and brought up.
The meanings and values passed down to us may have a great influence on our lives. So Fr Troy spoke to us about the founder of the Verona Fathers and then spoke in much the same way about his own vocation. Within the wider ambit of the Church, he has been living out a narrower tradition, extending a saintly story.
Each such tradition, while it has a very positive side also has its negative, most probably. So St Francis Xavier wanted all the scholars in Paris to leave their desks and get out on the mission in India. Possibly though, had they done their work properly we would find that Europe had more successfully kept and transmitted the faith. The scribe in the kingdom has an essential role bringing out from his treasure house what is old and what is new. He has the key of knowledge for all the people but can lock the door.
So alongside the fact of taking inspiration from a tradition, there is also the task of allowing the tradition to be corrected and so enriched. There was a Vatican astronomer who thought he ought to get out on the missions in Africa. When he got there he found people wanted to know about astronomy! So, after a while, he returned to the Vatican with a clear conscience.
In his writing or speaking a man may express himself clearly to his contemporaries but hundreds of years later there may be some problem abut interpreting what he meant. The context has changed. The language has developed. So there is the task of understanding. In the 19th Century Shliermacher described this task as avoiding misunderstanding. Hermeneutics is the fashionable word here. So the achievement of understanding belongs to the natural sciences but also to the human sciences. The sort of evidence is different of course, but both sorts of science move from evidence to hypothesis to firm conclusion, one about the nature of the world around, one about the achievement and meaning of an individual. Dilthey saw that the hermeneutic task belongs not just to one person’s product but to a whole way of life. So the Irish referendum is evidence of something going on which needs interpreting. There is an idea abroad, a set of ideas abroad that belongs to the Irish and might contribute to Europe. Those who rule have therefore a hermeneutic task – which, if they are open, they should welcome!