We all want lives that are very rich and yet also balanced.
When life feels fragmented and off center, you may find it helpful
to have a model of the self. A good model can do two things.
First, it can display the parts of something and how they fit
and work together as a whole. Second, it can serve as an ideal
-- a guide or tool to be used in making improvements. MetaSelf
does both: it helps you understand how parts of yourself fit
into a picture, and also how to bring greater unity and balance
into your life.
In building a model, MetaSelf starts with familiar spatial figures
of speech, such as "the back of my mind," "straightforward," and "an
outside observer." Taken by itself, any one of these phrases
may seem trivial, but when you bring many of them together, it
becomes clear that they are thoroughly grounded in our bodily
experience of space and still manage to describe very important
abstract aspects of the self: the mind, virtues or morality,
and spirituality. MetaSelf reveals that these phrases actually
constitute a naturally organized model. This model is not only
a philosophical approach to the self based on recent advances
in cognitive science; it is also a practical tool for doing an
inventory that will help you identify problems and find solutions
that unify and balance your life.
THE
FUNDAMENTAL METASELF IMAGE:
TWO PEOPLE FACING EACH OTHER IN A
ROOM. (fig. 1)
public image, shame
memory, the unconscious, and
hidden potentials
honest, frank and sincere
empathy, compassion
communication and interaction
treated equally with
a perspective from outside a
system
infinity, divinity, ultimate
values, etc.
In the fundamental MetaSelf model, two
people stand upright, facing each other in a room. This is
a strong spatial structure: each body stands upright in gravity
and has three axes -- front/back, left/right, up/down. To
this we add two more contrasts: the inside/outside contrast
(inside and outside the room, inside and outside the body)
and the light/shadow contrast. As you will see, this bare-bones structure supports an enormous amount of abstract meaning conveyed by figurative spatial phrases. The examples in the illustration are just a few of the ways English has elaborated the meaning of space metaphorically. Together, the structure and spatial phrases add up to a model that gives us an image of the mind, the virtues and the spirit.
Just two of the ways such a model helps us:
First, MetaSelf reconnects several things
that can seem very separate from each other: our bodies, our
language, our minds, our virtues and our spirits. It shows
that we can think about these aspects of the self in a unified
way, instead of feeling split into several alien parts. Just by itself, this brings a very healing sense of integration that is at once psychological, philosophical, ethical, spiritual and aesthetic. That's a lot to claim, I know, but check it out as you learn the details of MetaSelf.
Second and more practically, when you want to get an overview of your life or of a challenging situation you are facing, MetaSelf provides a natural way to organize a calm, methodical inventory. Doing a Metaself inventory has many benefits. It can get you back on track by highlighting conflicts and pointing to solutions. And it gives you the assurance that you have looked at things in the light of your most important values and from many points of view. An inventory also creates an opportunity for growth, which we can define as knowing more about yourself and your world while keeping it all working well together. In other words, growth creates a more integrated diversity. A MetaSelf inventory is fairly easy to do, because it's based on familiar, non-technical language and your upright bodily structure in gravity. What other organizing principles could be both so simple and so richly detailed?
return to top
Hierarchy of Needs
We can get some perspective on how MetaSelf
works as a model by comparing it with Abraham Maslow's famous Hierarchy
of Needs,* which is organized spatially as a pyramid. In this pyramid, physiological needs are at the bottom, building up through safety needs, belonging needs and esteem needs, to a need for growth at the peak. The
basic spatial metaphor here is "Building a complete life is (like)
constructing a building; each level of functioning supports the
ones above." Explanations of this model give a very good description of the self. And the pyramid displays a few summary phrases in a memorable spatial form.
MetaSelf reflects our language and thinking
better than the Hierarchy of Needs. First, Maslow's pyramid
is too solitary an image; it lists social needs but does not
show them spatially. MetaSelf, by contrast, has social interaction
built right into its main image. The space between people is where meaning, language
and morality are learned and generated.
Second, the MetaSelf model draws on actual
spatial phrases that English speakers use to understand abstractions
like the self, the mind, virtues and the spirit. It relies
on the fact that real, literal, bodily space has been elaborated
in English into very familiar metaphorical spatial language. And, once MetaSelf
has made you freshly conscious of that, you can always return
to the vivid bodily origin of your language and thinking. Unconscious,
half-dead metaphors will be given new life as powerful, conscious
tools.
In these ways, MetaSelf reflects the important "cognitive revolution" in
linguistics, psychology and embodied
philosophy that occurred
mostly after Maslow's death in 1970. This profound and exciting
change in thinking was spurred along in 1980 by George Lakoff and
Mark Johnson's Metaphors We Live By, which has a short chapter
on spatial metaphors. Their Philosophy in
the Flesh (1999) spells
out the implications in detail.
MetaSelf is partly a layman's attempt to adapt the lessons of the
cognitive revolution in order to create a psychological and spiritual
model of the self that is less abstract, more embodied, than Maslow's,
one that is handier and more effective as a tool for self-reflection
and growth.
MetaSelf is focused largely on Structure and the cluster of metaphors that extend the meaning of the three right-angled axes of the body in space and gravity. But MetaSelf also uses other clusters, including Balance (the upright human figures), Location (the bounded space of the room), Locomotion (stepping forward, stepping back), and Vision (which represents consciousness, knowing and understanding, as in the light/shadow contrast, I "see" what you mean, The Enlightenment, etc.).
return to top
A REVISED METASELF IMAGE
Look Deeper...

About the Author
Before doing artwork, Peter Carleton was in private practice as a counselor for twelve years, having received his M.A. in Humanistic Psychology (Clinical Emphasis) at California State University Sonoma in 1972.
He received his bachelor's degree in Sociology at Columbia University, and studied philosophy at the University of London.
Born in Manhattan in 1940, he became a Californian in 1966 and now lives just north of Berkeley, California. He recently married his partner of thirty four
years.
In order to highlight the spatial structure
of the MetaSelf model even more clearly, we can remove the
distinguishing characteristics (sex, clothing, etc.) of one
of the people in the illustration above. What remains are the
bare bones of our body's schematic structure -- three axes (front/back, top/bottom, left/right)
plus the inside/outside contrast. To represent
this structure, I use the kind of deep box-frame in which art
or other three-dimensional things are commonly displayed. I
was using a box-frame like this for my fiber art in the 1980's,
when it dawned on me that, just by itself, a box-frame could
serve as a model, a visual reminder of many spatial phrases describing
the self and its world. The details of a standard box-frame's
construction also give us a clear way to represent the "front" or "mask" someone
puts up (Carl Jung's "persona"), the idea of a personal "boundary," and
the "shadow" at the back of the mind (Jung's term for
repressed problems and hidden potentials that are mostly unconscious).
MetaSelf,
Figure 2
A PERSON FACING A BOX-FRAME ON THE WALL OF A ROOM
(mouse-over image for exploded view)
Why is this schematic structure so very important? Because,
if you want to have an integrated sense of your self, you have
to describe abstract things like "mind," "virtue" (or
morality) and "spirit" in metaphorical terms that
are clearly grounded in bodily reality and intelligible to
other people. Otherwise, they can be dismissed as "mere
abstractions." The spatial/structural regularities of
the human body are shared by all users of the language, making
it possible to have something like a geometry of the self --
a structured, fairly consistent set of phrases that describe
the self, including the mind, the virtues and the spirit. After
all, though we are born with many bodily variations and sometimes
with anomalies, we never have legs protruding from our head,
a left hand on the right arm, or nipples on our backs! That
would be confusing! So there is a regularity that is reliable
enough to "constrain" (to use Lakoff and Johnson's
term) our spatial metaphors for the self and that helps make
them mutually comprehensible from one person's mind to another.
The mind, therefore, can be understood
as a figurative space that extends bodily space and bodily
structure by means of metaphor: thinking deep thoughts, my innermost thoughts, the back of my
mind, broadminded, narrow-minded, high-minded, low-minded,
etc.. The box-frame illustrates this fit between the body and
the mind by using the wooden board at its back to represent the
human body with its three axes, while the five-sided clear acrylic
cover represents a mental "space" that is built onto
that board, adopting the same three axes. When you also remember
how many ways we organize our thinking in terms of space, the
fit between bodily space and mental, metaphorical space becomes
an overwhelming fact. In MetaSelf, the mind and body, which have
sometimes been split in Western philosophy, are presented as
co-existing on the same level and fitting together.
Because this model is based on spatial phrases and they, in
turn, are based on our bodily structure in gravity, MetaSelf
simply reveals what is already there. MetaSelf is not a new creation;
it records some things that are implicit in our speech and thought
as they have been elaborated out of our bodily experience. And
because spatial structure does organize not just the mind, broadly
conceived, but also some of our specific concepts of virtue and
the spirit, we should not be surprised, as we proceed, to see
all three of these ideas start to blend, becoming intertwined
manifestations of the self.
return to top
VIRTUES or MORALITY
I said at the outset that a model can serve as an ideal,
a guide for making improvements. So,
what spatial, bodily terms does the MetaSelf model use to represent
ideals such as ethical values, virtues and morality?
Let's start by looking at the metaphorical meaning of the three
right-angled axes of the body.
The words "upright" and "upstanding" are
spatial and metaphorical; they mean honest, strictly
honorable and respectable. Their power is deeply
rooted in our bodily experience of the vertical, y axis of gravity. As
Lakoff and Johnson point out, "other things being equal,
it is better to be upright and balanced." Moral
strength is partly a matter of maintaining this upright
balance in the face of outside forces, a not inconsiderable achievement
of human development. The box-frame embodies virtue by
being mounted upright on the wall and not tilting; compared
to the human figure in the room, however, the box-frame falls
short symbolically, since it is not free-standing like a sculpture.
"Facing a problem squarely" and "confronting
it directly" are ways to speak of the virtue of courage,
while turning away can suggest fear or deviousness or, in special
cases, a discreet indirectness. The box-frame embodies
courage by facing directly and squarely into the room, with its
z axis at right angles to the x axis and the plane of the wall. Correspondingly,
a viewer typically stands directly in front of a work of art
which is centered in a display case.
The virtue of good judgement is described as
the ability to "strike a proper balance" between the
right and left hand on the x axis, as in the scales of justice. We
have an impulse to be sure the box-frame, like any frame, is
level (horizontal) on the wall, which seems to come from our
strong bodily orientation in gravity. This standard position
represents the virtue of making good decisions after weighing
things evenhandedly.
Social equality, fairness and justice are often
spoken of as a "level playing field," which is shown
by the angle of the z axis between people. In the basic
MetaSelf illustrations, this "level field" is represented
by the floor as well as the line of sight. Just as
considerable effort is required to level an actual playing field,
so it is not easy to change a whole social system to make it
more fair. But, on a smaller scale, if we see two people
in a relationship as being on a seesaw and if things are too
tilted toward one side or the other, then one or both parties
can adjust their positions on this z axis -- negotiate
-- until there is a better balance. The idea of balance,
as Lakoff points out in Moral Politics (p. 55), is central
to accounting ("balancing the books"), and accounting
is a major metaphor for morality. More generally, balance
means the proper relationship between multiple factors, such
as the balance of powers in government.
Empathy and compassion are central to the meaning
of MetaSelf. The complex spatial way we conceptualize
empathy is very interesting. Partly, one keeps a certain
distance or even steps back along the z axis to a position outside the
situation or system; note the stylized eye outside the room in
both Figure 1 and Figure 2. But one also steps forward
to put oneself in the other person's shoes, imagining the
perspective from that place on the z axis. Both of these
steps are necessary; if one only steps back, one remains
too remote, too detached and even judgmental. And if one only puts
oneself in the other's place, one is excessively sympathetic,
identifying with them too much. Our spatial language -- "stepping
back" and "putting oneself in the other's shoes" --
prompts us to make these imaginative leaps of empathy.
The stepped-back position of the outside observer is one place
we can metaphorically locate the Soul, the "Witness," and
what Lakoff and Johnson call the Subject, i.e., individual consciousness.
(A vertically oriented system is likely to place the eye of consciousness
at forehead level or just above the head, within the body's aura.) The
Subject is the locus of "subjective experience, moral judgment,
reason, will, and most important, one's essence, that which makes
a person who he or she is." (Philosophy in the Flesh,
p. 563.) I suggest that we sometimes locate our essence "outside" (instead
of in our heart, for example) because our essence is made
up of the fundamental values, rules, laws and principles that
we "stand for" beyond ("outside")
everything else. These values, etc., are "larger than," "bigger
than" the individuals in the room, who exist within the
category to which they apply, and they are therefore placed "outside
space and time."
From an outside position, one can observe and also project consciousness
into places all along the front/back (z) axis, including various
parts of oneself and of others. Thus, one can observe one's
own feelings in one's body, or simply be "immersed in them." Also,
one can be aware of the back of one's mind (our "shadow," hidden
agendas, background issues, etc.), or simply be in its control. And
one can examine the protective "front," mask or persona
one has put up, or be consumed with pride or shame. In
addition to all this, one has to take care to imagine or inquire
about the corresponding spaces in the other person. This
separation between the Subject and the other self or selves is
fundamental to self-consciousness, and MetaSelf helps us diagram
it.
Integrity is a consistency or unity among the
inner spaces of the self. It's a match, or, in geometric
terms, an isomorphism or congruence between what is in front
and what is inside or at the back. Integrity maintains
this congruence in the face of temptations or strains exerted
from outside. Sincerity, a related virtue, has
especially to do with saying what one genuinely believes, which
one cannot do with assurance unless one has considerable self-knowledge;
two synonyms for sincerity are straightforwardness and openness,
which are both spatial terms. Self-knowledge means
being able to see into yourself, to have in-sight into the
depths, whether one is "looking" from the point of
view of the ordinary conscious mind represented by the contained
space at the front of the box-frame, or from the "outside" viewpoint. Two
related visual metaphors are Carl Jung's Shadow, his term for
the hidden, hard-to-see aspects of the self, and what the humanistic
psychologist Carl Rogers called "transparency," the
ability to disclose oneself to others in a way that increases
the possibility of growth.
Because, according to Lakoff and Johnson and the cognitive revolution,
the mind is largely made up of metaphorical extensions of bodily
experience that operate unconsciously, part of the task, then,
of philosophy, psychology and spiritual thought is to make these
extensions explicit so that one uses them as consistently as
possible and with awareness of the logic they imply. That
is part of what self-knowledge, sincerity and integrity mean.
return to top
The Horizontal Emphasis of MetaSelf
 Figure 1
 Figure 2
It is clear even in Figure 1 that MetaSelf emphasizes
the front/back axis of the body. The box-frame has a
similar front/back axis, while its four other sides are indistinguishable
and could be rotated without disturbing the function of the
frame. In Figure 2, this axis stretches between
the person in the room and the schematic image of a person. They
face each other along the z axis of geometry, at more
or less the same level. Positioned this way,
the human figure and box-frame evoke a number of things:
(a) face to face social interaction and communication (what
goes on between people);
(b) compromise, giving and taking; (c) two-way streets; (d)
mutual respect; (e) equality; and (f) fair trade, fair exchange
or fair competition on a level playing field. This is
also the space where, according to Martin Buber, the immanent
God appears in genuine human interactions between I and Thou. How
different this axis is from the vertical y axis, which can
have connotations of superiority/inferiority, egotism, unequal
status, rank and power! The z axis will also be the chief
one along which you will organize a MetaSelf
inventory.
The left/right axis of the body gives the box-frame
image its other horizontal dimension. It's as
if a person's two arms, instead of reaching forward to a single
other person, have opened out to join hands in a wider circle
of relationships, a larger social system. This enhances
the social dimensions of the MetaSelf model even more, complementing
Maslow's pyramid, which is an image of a solitary self and
its internal organization. With MetaSelf, you can interpret
the figurative space of the room to represent larger social
systems, and it can nest inside still larger social and natural
environments, even the natural universe.
These two horizontal axes make MetaSelf a valuable counterweight
to vertical models that emphasize such things as solitary power,
dominance and authority over others;
obedience; and social class (high, middle, low and under-class).
The contrast between the vertical axis and the two horizontal
axes is similar to George Lakoff's contrast between Strict
Father Morality, which emphasizes authority and obedience,
and Nurturant Parent Morality, which stresses empathy, nurturance and
inclusiveness (Moral Politics). Lakoff believes
we all use elements of both kinds of morality, which, as MetaSelf
shows, means we need to think of the self in all three dimensions.
return to top
CONSCIOUSNESS AND THE SPIRIT
Our ideas about consciousness and the Spirit are often
extremely abstract and disembodied. This is a very contentious
area, but let me lay out my thoughts, as tentative as they
may be.
How do we
in fact express the idea of consciousness in spatial terms? We
have already taken two big steps toward answering this question.
In the first big step, we gave a metaphorical location
for consciousness of self, placing it on the z axis, at some
(variable) distance outside the room in the position of an
outside observer. And second, we noted that empathy and
compassion involve imaginatively moving our consciousness along
this same axis so as to understand how other people see things
and how they feel in their shoes or "places" (their
positions, roles, situations and stations). Individual
consciousness, although commonly thought of as disembodied,
is still embodied enough to have a point of view and a metaphorical
location, and it is able to move and change its location. (In
a more vertical model, a bird's eye view or transcendent God's
eye view from above might be invoked. Here in
the MetaSelf model, the distant, transcendent God can be thought
of as looking into the world from all angles around the room,
something infinitely beyond any individual consciousness.)
Both Figure 1 and Figure 2 show a stylized eye in this outside
position on the z axis. It represents such ideas as the Soul,
the Witness and the Subject (that is, the individual consciousness). This
position gives it some "distance from ourselves" and
from the system within which we are acting; if consciousness
were figuratively located within the wall, however, it would
only be adopting the perspective of the system and only critiquing
the self in terms of its role in meeting system norms. By
locating consciousness outside the wall on the z axis, we are
able to see it as both disembodied and yet still metaphorically located
relative to bodily space.
The phrase "distance from ourselves" is striking. Lakoff
and Johnson call this "The Objective Standpoint Metaphor." For
example, "You should take a good look at yourself." They
point out that the use of vision as a metaphor for knowing and
consciousness creates a distance or split between what is called
the Subject (a disembodied consciousness) and one or more selves. They
note that this split occurs in cultures across the world, because
there is an actual separation between, on the one hand, the eye
and vision centers in the brain, and, on the other hand, what
one is seeing and, normally, paying attention to.
The MetaSelf model, by locating self-consciousness in a place
one imaginatively steps back to, allows us to picture self-awareness
as escaping the attachments and the forces exerted by what is
going on in the self or selves. These forces include: the
feelings and emotions going on in one's bodily self; the
feelings of prideful display and shameful hiding experienced
in the front one puts up; and the deep, mostly unconscious material
at the metaphorical "back of the mind" where the mind
merges with the bodily drives. In this outside position,
the Subject may also be able to disengage a little from the entanglements
and repetitive scripted dramas of its relationships; it can extend
compassion to the parts of the self (to various of its "selves," in
Lakoff and Johnson's terms), and to other people in the situation,
as well. This is, as it were, the home base from which
imaginative empathy operates.
The Subject is sufficiently outside the system to look around
and notice other systems, imagine other ways of doing things
and ask, "What if...?" This wider awareness opens
up the possibility of making another choice or acting according
to different principles, that is, the possibility of having free
will. (One can also imagine stepping to a place outside
the room that is not on the z axis but, rather, to one side of
it, in order to view the situation from a position equidistant
from the two people inside.)
In sum, we have seen that individual consciousness (also the
Soul, Witness or Outside Observer) can be represented as an eye
that is (a) disembodied, (b) locatable (at least sometimes), (c)
movable, and (d) as sometimes having the power to see --
that is, understand things -- from other points of view in the
world, thus perhaps making the individual more empathetic and
compassionate. (I say perhaps, because this knowledge could enable
one to be manipulative and malicious, too.)
Consciousness and the soul can be located at some distance,
metaphorically, from the rest of the self, outside a system or
even "outside" space and time. We speak of coming into existence,
coming into the world (into the room along the z axis,
as it were). Exactly when the soul comes into the body
is a disputed question, of course, but in general we can speak
of this direction of movement along the z axis as incarnation,
while movement in the opposite direction, toward eternal things
outside the world of the room, can be called the direction of transcendence,
dis-identification with the body and the world, and death.
Consciousness as a Tightrope Walker.
It is very clear that in describing the MetaSelf model, we have
now expanded our metaphors of the self to include far more
than those that cluster around the idea of spatial structure,
which was our main starting point. But the idea of Balance
was in fact present from the very start in the upright bodies
maintaining their physical balance, and this idea became explicitly
metaphorical with the virtues of Honesty and honorableness
(the upright y axis of balancing on one's feet), Judgment (weighing
things on the left/right x axis), and Fairness and Social Justice
(the angle of the see-saw or playing field of the z axis). The
light/shadow contrast turned up early as the Jungian Shadow
(the hidden, repressed issues and potentials at the back of
the mind), and we now recognize it as part of the whole cluster
of Vision and Light metaphors in which Seeing represents knowing,
insight and consciousness. The cluster having to do with
Location was present in Figure 1 as the inside/outside contrast:
the two figures found themselves inside the bounded space of
the room, which represented a relationship or system. The
space outside the room signified a number of things, including
a framework of eternal values.
We have now introduced the idea of motion from one viewpoint
to another, which is only suggested by the stylized eye in the
original drawings, but how are we going to represent this additional
complexity? What image fits? Years ago I stumbled upon
a metaphor that works for me. It summarizes much of what
we have understood about these clusters of metaphor and the way
they use the body's three right-angled axes to describe the nature
of the mind, consciousness, empathy, and the virtues. And it specifically
employs the idea of motion back and forth on the z axis. The
metaphor is this: We are Tightrope Walkers.
The tightrope itself is the front/back z axis; the body balancing
upright on the tightrope is the vertical y axis; and the transverse
pole held in the two hands of the tightrope walker is the x axis. We
live our lives constantly trying to stay flexible, agile and
mentally focused enough to remain upright. We need to move
back and forth on the tightrope, from one metaphorical location
to another, both within ourselves and others; we need to step
forward, pivot and look at ourselves from the other person's
point of view, trying to understand each kind of meaning that
is spelled out in the details of Figure 2.
A Metaphor for The Spirit.
My impression is that the Spirit is thought of as more disembodied
than consciousness. It is elusive (but sometimes locatable)
and has the power to move around (though it may sometimes refuse). And
Spirit has a power of understanding greater than our own. The
phrase "as the spirit moves me" suggests
that the Spirit is distinguished from the Subject and simple
consciousness by being "beyond" our individual will
(which is usually centered in the Subject) and capable of appearing
and exerting force anywhere unexpectedly, breaking through
barriers and thereby transforming a person or persons, a situation
or even the whole world.
Spirit can certainly be disruptive, sometimes, but in the end,
by definition, if it is a good spirit, it resolves conflicts
by creating more integration and unity among the parts of the
self and its world, bringing them into accord with the eternal
values and principles represented by the space beyond the world
we know, that is, beyond the room. We cannot know much
that is final about what is beyond the room when it is taken
on the grandest scale, and we may express this as not knowing
what God or the Goddess in his or her infinite wisdom wants us
to do. Ultimate reality is "beyond us," and our
view of it is always partial at best.
We describe the relationship between what is inside the room
and what is outside in many different ways. A few that
resonate with me: The whole (outside the room) is greater
than the sum of its parts (inside the room). The greater
good vs. individual selfish interests. Win-win solutions
instead of zero-sum solutions. Ought (outside) vs. Is (inside). It
is often a very emotional experience when we are moved by the
Spirit from being concerned only for a part to a concern for
the whole, from zero-sum to win-win. Our world is jarred,
but we keep our balance. We realize, for example, that
we must sincerely apologize, we do so and are forgiven and move
on in a more positive way; we have become a "bigger person," and
our part of the world has become bigger and more integrated.
We have grown.
The action of the Spirit often seems mysterious, since it operates
partly outside of human will, which might suggest that the Spirit
is really not embodied at all. Lakoff and Johnson assert
that Spirit is often viewed in this disembodied way, but they
issue a call for an embodied spirituality instead (Philosophy
in the Flesh, chapter 25). How are we to understand
Spirit as something that has the power to change people but which
is partly outside of human will and yet also embodied? I
suggest that we can resolve this conundrum in the following way:
the metaphors that we base on the body have the force of a logic
deeply embedded in the body, in what Lakoff and Johnson call
the "cognitive unconscious." We are unconscious
or only semi-conscious of the workings of many metaphors, including
those virtues based on the three axes of the body in gravity
that we have outlined above (courage as facing directly, etc.). But
these metaphors greatly influence us and have a creative force
of their own, and that is why, when the Spirit operates through
them, it is something beyond our will, although it is still at
the same time embodied in us, still rooted in our bodies. Because
the logic of the cognitive unconscious has a power of its own,
if we follow it consistently and with some awareness, it can
help us lead lives that are spiritually integrated and virtuous. I
believe we can nurture virtue and consciousness of the spirit
by becoming more aware of our metaphors, which are rooted in
our bodily spatial structure. That is part of the point
of MetaSelf.
The Beam of Light.
To capture the mysterious quality of the Spirit as something
that is both outside our will, "beyond us," and also
embodied in us, I like to envision the Spirit as a beam of
light along the z axis, which not only extends beyond our world
(or comes from beyond it), but also runs through it, through
our physical bodies' front/back organization and through all
the metaphorical spaces we have spelled out. Spirit manifests
itself differently in each of the spaces along the axis. The
beam of light belongs to the whole cluster of metaphors
around vision and light, which we use in speaking about
consciousness, awareness and knowledge. A beam of light
has a direction, it moves, but it is insubstantial. We
require light for vision, and when we newly understand something,
we speak of "seeing the light" and having our "eyes
opened." Of course one cannot walk on a beam
of light, but one can poetically combine standard metaphors
such as light and balance with the structure of the body to
create an image that reminds of our nature as human beings
with bodies, minds, virtues and spirits.
Using MetaSelf
With an understanding of the MetaSelf model, we can begin to see how the structure it provides to experience can be used to guide self-understanding and decisionmaking. Stepping through the spaces of the model we can take an inventory of where we stand in relationship with others and use that to inform our actions and beliefs.
Click here for Using MetaSelf: Doing a Growth Inventory.
return to top
|