Introduction

The ‘purpose of life’ is a significant topic that most of us contemplate upon at some point in our lives. In this paper, we will arrive at a total of seven dimensions of faculties—that may have emerged throughout the grand scheme of phylogeny—across which purpose can be instantiated. We will begin by taking up the perspective that the purpose of life is to perform according to one’s aim for survival; then, throughout the first three parts of this paper, we will examine—how such aim is achieved within the material reality—in order to develop a more comprehensive definition of the ‘purpose of life’. Afterwards, we will incorporate the Aristotelian notion of ‘nested faculties’ of living beings with this comprehensive definition of purpose, then delve into speculations on how natural selection may have given rise to the hierarchical domains of faculties.

 

Part 1: Survival

According to experience, reality appears to exist from one sequential present to another. Between any two consecutive presents—the former having become the past—there is a continuity of events. On a more fundamental level, all physical events are ultimately interactions of matter unfolding throughout spacetime.

​

While being subjects of the material reality, organisms also possess the potential to live, which in turn enables the disposition to manipulate matter in our favor—we are able to swim against the ‘current’ of natural forces with an aim for survival. In other words, organisms possess the capacity to intercept the flow of natural interactions, with an aim for survival. Moving along, with the current of natural forces, constitutes being a part of the material interactions qua matter—a passive interaction. By contrast, moving against the current requires an active—motivated and goal-directed—interaction with the current. Any current of natural forces is constructed from a cluster of interactions of matter; therefore, an interaction with the current is itself an interaction with interactions, namely a meta-interaction. To summarize, an organism possesses the capacity to aim for survival and actively interact with the interactions that unfold within the material reality; in short, all organisms possess meta-interactive capacities with an aim for survival.

​

The previous statement disclaims neither the possibility that survival may carry on through passive interaction(s), nor the eventuality that it may fail as a direct result of active meta-interaction. Imagine a scenario in which one is attempting to flee from an active shooter. If one dodges a fatal bullet to the back of the head by accidentally tripping over a stump and falling to the ground, survival has been secured through passive interaction. We can equally imagine a scenario in which, were one to have a successful course of active meta-interaction to run upright and not fall, one would fail to secure survival. Plunged into such a vast sea of interactions, one can neither split it in half nor drink it dry—all one can do is kick and flap about to stay afloat.

 

Part 2: Meta-interaction

In general, many of us are accustomed to the perspective that we interact directly with material objects, and, therefore, it may seem counterintuitive to envision a course of meta-interacting, namely interacting with interactions of matter. It may be helpful here to forget about the notion of matter for a moment and conceptualize a physical process or event in which you, in some sense, partake. Imagine, for instance, eating an evening meal at a steakhouse with a serving of bone-in rib-eye steak, a side of steamed broccoli, and a bowl of soup. Eating the food requires your active participation to manifest a process through which the food travels from the dinnerware, down the esophagus, and into the stomach. Such a process is essentially a set of interactions that is set in motion according to the attributes of the matter (i.e., the food, as you actively interact to induce this process). Each of the food items has various attributes that require it to undergo different processes before it can safely reach your stomach. For example, the bone-in rib-eye can be carved, using a knife and fork, into appropriate sizes and away from the bone. Once a piece has been cut, you can open your mouth, use a fork to put it in your mouth and chew it into smaller and softer pieces. The steamed broccoli requires considerably less work, as it requires less cutting and chewing than does the steak. In contrast, the bowl of soup cannot be picked up by the jabbing of a fork and rather requires scooping with a spoon. In addition, there is no need for you to chew the soup but to swallow it immediately upon its entering into your mouth. In sum, the various nature of matter cause different sets of interactions that manifest as processes or events, as one actively interacts to induce a goal.

 

Part 3: Scope of Survival

Note that the word ‘active’, within the context of this paper, is used to refer to the deliberate and goal-oriented (teleological) nature of the performances of organisms, even those of cells with their cellular respiration, as they aim for ongoing survival. Such activity is not to be confused with the self-aware, intentional, or voluntary actions performed by humans and arguably also some of the ‘higher’ animals, which is but one category of active meta-interaction.

​

As we aim and meta-interact for survival, we accumulate resources that are useful for ongoing survival. For example, energy metabolism, which all living organisms clearly and frequently perform, is a process through which organisms store and accumulate energy as a resource for ongoing survival. Another example is the case of bees gathering honey, as it is stored and accumulated in the hive, to be consumed for ongoing survival in the future. Therefore, accumulated resources are essentially prosperities that can extend survival further into the future. In other words, today’s prosperity is for tomorrow’s survival, and any act of accumulating resources is an instance of active meta-interaction for the sake of contributing to ongoing and future survival, which takes the form of prosperity in the present. Such a concept of contribution is related to Aristotle’s notion of ACQUISITION, according to which “this kind of capacity for acquisition is evidently given by nature of all living beings, from the moment when they are first born to the days when their growth is finished” (Politics, I, 8, 1256b7–9). In sum, an organism’s aim and performance for survival takes the form of a motivated and active meta-interaction with the goal of contributing to ongoing and future survival; it is an IMPETUS TO CONTRIBUTION to prosperity.

 

Part 4: Hierarchical Nature of Meta-interactive Capacities

Instances of contribution to prosperity manifest variously across species. In the grand scheme, there are clear gaps in the complexity of meta-interactive capacities across different species of organisms: less complex organisms (at least in terms of performances) such as plants lack the ability to immediately escape certain death by the stampede of a herd, which more evolved organisms such as insects and reptiles possess. However, all organisms possess the capacity to contribute to bodily prosperity through the metabolism of energy. Taking such a comparison to an extreme, humans not only possess the ability to escape imminent mortal threats but can also actively prevent them by relocating dangerous animals to a faraway habitat, erecting barricades, etc. Most notably, we can develop linguistic and scientific frameworks through our collective efforts of comprehensive investigation of the sources of threats to engineer proactive solutions. The twentieth-century Russian zoologist Dmitri Belyaev and his colleague Lyudmila Trut, for instance, successfully altered the very nature of a potentially hostile species of wild silver foxes through selective breeding. Having bred dozens of generations of wild foxes that were considered the ‘tamest’, the zoologists were subsequently able to bring about the highly domesticated behavioral traits that were rare, if not entirely non-existent, in the silver foxes’ natural habitat (Trut & Dugatkin, 2017, Meet the Elites).

​

On the one hand, more evolved organisms display meta-interactive capacities that are similar, if not identical, in nature to those of less complex organisms. On the other hand, more evolved organisms also display advanced and advantageous meta-interactive capacities that less evolved organisms lack. As Aristotle puts it:

 

Of the aforementioned capacities of the soul some things have all of them, as we said, and some have some of them, but others have only one. And we mentioned the faculties of nutrition, perception, desire, movement in place, and cognition. Plants have only the nutritive faculty, but other creatures have both this and the perceptive faculty. (On the Soul, II, 3, 414a30–34)

 

Aristotle emphasizes the hierarchical nature of faculties and that organisms with ‘higher’ faculties appear to possess all ‘lower’ faculties, in a nested fashion. (On the Soul, II, 3) In other words, there must be a hierarchy of domains of meta-interactive capacities on which meta-interaction, contribution, and prosperity can be achieved and that the lower domains are prerequisites to higher domains.

​

Among the organisms listed in the aforementioned comparisons (cells, plants, insects, reptiles, and humans), all possess the domain of capacities to meta-interact with matter inside the body, which equips them with the ability to metabolize energy. On the other hand, insects, reptiles, and humans also possess higher domains of meta-interactive capacities, as we can perform movement to evade imminent threats. Finally, humans also possess the highest domain, with which we can collectively develop scientific frameworks for engineering solutions to acquire further contributions to prosperity.

It is worth reiterating that organisms aim and meta-interact to contribute to prosperity. Aiming and meta-interacting for contribution to prosperity are one and the same process; therefore, a ‘domain’ can refer to meta-interactive capacities, aim, meta-interaction, contribution, and prosperity, depending on which is being interpreted.

 

Part 5: Natural Selection and the Evolution of Domains

According to Charles Darwin, the physical structures of any given species can change and evolve from pre-existing species through natural selection. Moreover:

 

It will be universally admitted that instincts are as important as corporeal structures for the welfare of each species, under its present conditions of life. Under changed conditions of life, it is at least possible that slight modifications of instinct might be profitable to a species; and if it can be shown that instincts do vary ever so little, then I can see no difficulty in natural selection preserving and continually accumulating variations of instinct to any extent that was profitable. It is thus, as I believe, that all the most complex and wonderful instincts have originated. (Darwin, C., & Huxley, J., 2003, pp. 245–246)

 

Darwin has suggested that, over significant duration and circumstances, there is a clear pattern of natural selection that may give rise to profitable features—those of an organism that amplify its potential for contribution to prosperity—that are not only physical but also instinctual. Following the same pattern, we can hypothesize that some organisms’ domains of meta-interactive capacities have evolved, because more domains would theoretically lead to greater prosperity, within a relatively fixed environment. As discussed in Part 4, humans—who are the most evolved organisms on earth today—can not only physically dodge imminent threats but also engineer complex and collectively orchestrated precautions to prevent threats, which less evolved organisms such as plants and cells have no chance of performing. Having the capacity to perform such advanced meta-interaction indubitably leads to greater opportunities for contribution to prosperity.

​

Although the fossil record is far from complete, there is evidence of behavioral evolution in the grand scheme of phylogeny—cells were the first to appear, immobile organisms such as plants showed up earlier than did highly mobile organisms such as insects and reptiles, and humans evolved relatively recently. In the grand scheme, there has been a clear rise in the complexity of meta-interactive capacities, in some species.

 

Part 6: Speculation on the Evolution of Domains

Beginning with the assumption that possessing an additional domain of meta-interactive capacities expands one’s access to opportunities for contribution to prosperity, the following sub-parts explore speculation on the evolution of domains of meta-interactive capacities.

Note that, due to the vastness of the number of different species that exist on earth—not to mention our lack of discovery of them—and the speculative nature of this part, the examples of organisms mentioned are specific and limited.

 

(i) First Domain: Vessel

The first domain must be one that is a prerequisite to life and therefore shared across all organisms. As Aristotle notes:

 

Everything that lives, then, must possess the nutritive soul, and it possesses soul from birth until death, for what has been born must possess stages of growth, maturity, and decline, and these are impossible without nourishment. (On the Soul, III, 12, 434a22–26)

 

From cells to humans, all living things have a material form (i.e. the corporeal structure) and meta-interactive capacities within their body (i.e. energy metabolism). The body is the vessel with which the IMPETUS TO CONTRIBUTION (to prosperity) is carried out. The Domain of Vessel is the domain of capacities to interact with interactions caused by matter inside the body.

​

A possible example of organisms with only the first domain would be cells.  Cells can perform bodily functions such as cellular respiration—which is a meta-interactive process carried out with glucose inside the body to produce energy—but have neither limbs nor roots, which are a key feature of organisms that can actively interact with the surrounding environment. Other examples of the Domain of Vessel, from humans, are (i) the immune system (which fights off germs that invade the body), and (ii) the liver (which filters toxic substances that exist within the body).

​

Organisms such as cells, that possess only the first domain, have the potential for contribution to prosperity that is limited to the matter entering the body. If no energy source enters the body, survival is doomed.

 

(ii) Second Domain: Territory

To achieve further potential for contribution to prosperity and better fitness for survival, an organism must aim to extend its meta-interaction outside the body and onto the surrounding territory. Through the surface of the body as a medium, the organism can thereby identify new patterns of causality and meta-interact with its surrounding environment. The Domain of Territory is the domain of capacities to interact with interactions caused by matter adjacent to/surrounding the body.

​

A possible example of organisms that possess up to the second domain would be plants. A plant can detect water concentrations in the surrounding environment and grow its roots correspondingly via hydrotropism. However, plants cannot perform immediate movements—such as traveling across a field to obtain water—which require the next domain. Other examples of the Domain of Territory, from humans, are the physical senses of the body—taste, smell, sight, hearing, and touch or feeling—as these are triggered via the meta-interaction on the surface of the body. It is worth noting that with regard to seeing and hearing, what collide with the surface of the body are sound and light waves, which are not matter but energy. Nonetheless, we interact with the interactions caused by matter outside the body and the waves are part of these interactions. For example, when a glass bottle falls and shatters on the ground, it causes a chain of interactions that creates a pressure wave that collides with our ear drums. Similarly, the existence of an apple across the table causes interactions through which the light particles bounce off and then collide with our eyes.

​

Possessing only two domains, one’s potential for contribution to prosperity is limited to the matter surrounding the body. If the territory becomes barren or hostile owing to climate change, survival is doomed.

 

(iii) Third Domain: Exploration​

To increase one’s potential for contribution to prosperity, one must aim to extend one’s scope of meta-interaction beyond the surrounding environment to reach a more fruitful and hospitable territory. To explore beyond its current territory, an organism must be able to move its body by interacting with the interactions of the terrain, namely the stationary (grounded) matter. Using the muscles of the body, an animal can carry its body by pushing against or pulling on the ground and with this ability to move around, can travel in search of more hospitable and fruitful territories. The Domain of Exploration is the domain of capacities to interact with interactions caused by stationary (grounded) matter.

​

A possible example of organisms that possess up to the third domain would be animals that can perform basic and slow movements, such as gastropods. Slugs, for instance, have a muscular foot that contracts and relaxes in a coordinated manner with the ground to generate movement. Slugs can explore nearby territories to find food and water and can crawl under a rock to seek shelter and to avoid desiccation. However, they are largely defenseless in cases in which the rock they are on loosens and collides with another rock, causing the slug to be crushed in the process. Furthermore, although many slugs possess certain defense mechanisms such as seeking refuge under a rock and producing distasteful or harmful chemical substances (from the specialized glands located inside their bodies) to deter predators, slugs are incapable of fending off predators with a physical counterattack. Other examples of the Domain of Exploration, from humans, are getting out of bed, walking across a room, etc.

​

Possessing up to the third domain, an organism can travel across terrains in search of unknown but potentially hospitable territories. However, exploration of an unknown territory is a treacherous ordeal—the volatile nature of terrains and ferocious predators introduce anomalous patterns of interactions and impede one’s contribution to prosperity. One may face potentially fatal contingencies of getting crushed by debris, being trapped in loose terrain, or getting eaten by a predator, for instance, in which case survival is doomed.

 

(iv) Fourth Domain: Preservation

To further increase opportunities for contribution to prosperity, one must aim to preserve the stability of one’s exploration from troublesome foes and shifting terrains—the common factors being that they are moving and that they are comprised of matter. The same material object, such as a pile of rubble, can signify two strikingly different things depending on its state of motion. When stationary, it can be a pathway to a destination, but a collapsing pile of rubble can become a catastrophic avalanche. This is also the case for living things—a resting predator, such as a venomous spider, poses no threat; however, when it starts moving in for a hunt, it can become deadly for any prey animals. To safeguard one’s journey from contingent hazards, one must aim to react in accordance with the patterns originating from the motion of matter, including the physical movements of organisms. One must accordingly possess the Domain of Preservation, namely the domain of capacities to interact with interactions caused by mobile (moving) matter.

​

A possible example of organisms that possess up to the fourth domain would be insects such as bees. Bees have evolved not only to fly away from dangerous terrains, such as shaking branches and collapsing grounds, but also to fight off enemies and predators with counterattacks such as stinging. Furthermore, honeybees can communicate the location of food and water sources or potential nest sights to other members of the hive using a highly effective form of communication called a ‘waggle dance’—during which a forager bee performs a series of movements involving a specific angle and duration of rapid side-to-side shaking (Dong et al., 2023; Seely, 1996; Von Frisch, 1993). By observing the patterns of the waggle dance, the members of the hive can determine the direction and distance of the valuable resources. In other words, by interacting with the interactions caused by the dancing bee (i.e., observing the audio and visual cues caused by and originating from the movements of the dancing bee) the members of the hive can achieve a new opportunity for contribution to prosperity. Other examples of the Domain of Preservation, from humans, are catching a flying baseball, swatting a fly, etc.

​

Possessing the first four domains, an organism can interact with all interactions caused by matter in accordance with one’s capabilities across the four domains. However, with enough living beings swimming against the ‘current’ of natural forces, a ‘secondary current’ emerges with peculiar patterns of interactions caused by those with their own aim for prosperity—tiny ripples created by the kicking and the flapping amass into giant waves that can easily devour any unfortunate and unsuspecting beings. While composed entirely of material substances, the ‘secondary current’ is manufactured by the living. For example, a warrior wasps’ nest is built with pieces of wood fibers; however, unlike with other chunks of earthly material, if you were to nudge a wasps’ nest, you would suffer the fury of a swarm. Thus, for any organism who regularly crosses paths with wasps’ nests, it would be crucial for survival to distinguish between the ‘current’ of natural forces (i.e. a regular chunk of wood), from the ‘secondary current’ manufactured by living wasps (i.e. a chunk of wood manufactured by wasps).

 

(v) Fifth Domain: Emulation

For further contribution to prosperity, one must aim to differentiate between the interactions caused by matter and those caused by the corporeal structure of living beings. To achieve this, one must aim to interact with the ‘secondary current’, which is caused by the physical activities of living organisms. If something were to fall from a tree, for instance, the ability to accurately interpret this—whether it is just a harmless ripe fruit or a deadly predator descending for a hunt—could determine life or death. Likewise, if an animal can distinguish between the sound of wind and the singing of a potential mate, it could lead to an opportunity for contribution to prosperity through mating. The Domain of Emulation is the domain of capacities to interact with interactions caused by the physical manifestation of life.

​

Possible examples of organisms that possess up to the fifth domain would be the descendants of the class Reptilia, which includes turtles, lizards, crocodiles, and birds. For example, frilled lizards have evolved a fascinating set of behaviors: upon perceiving a threat, they will open their mouths wide, puff out the skin around their necks, and hiss at their attacker to scare them off. Capable of detecting the signs of an approaching predator, frilled lizards have evolved to deploy effective bluffs as a defensive mechanism. Another set of examples is the various species of birds that sing to attract mating partners. In general, the male birds generate elaborate and melodious songs to advertise their presence and fitness to potential partners. The females, in turn, interpret the songs to evaluate the quality of their potential mates. Other examples of the Domain of Emulation, from humans, are waving at a neighbor, smiling at a stranger to display friendly intent, shooing away birds from the dining table, and so on.

​

Evolving one’s meta-interactive capacities to encompass the Domain of Emulation entails expanding one’s capacity of meta-interaction to interactions caused by attributes of life. Possessing up to the fifth domain, an animal can meta-interact with life that manifests physically. Thus, to further one’s potential for contribution to prosperity, beyond the fifth domain, one must aim to meta-interact with the manifestation of life that is non-physical, in this case, the conscious awareness of oneself.

 

(vi) Sixth Domain: Self-awareness

Further opportunities can be accessed with the Domain of Self-awareness, the domain of capacities to interact with interactions caused by one’s own conscious awareness. Possessing the sixth domain, an individual being can provide self-feedback and reflect introspectively to gain insight into one’s own meta-interactive capacities. Self-awareness enables individuals to recognize their existence, attributes, and experiences and provides a sense of agency or control over their courses of meta-interaction, something that further enhances their method of contribution to prosperity.

​

It may be impossible to determine, with absolute certainty, which of the non-human animals possess self-awareness, as it cannot be directly observed. Philosophical topics, Solipsism and the problem of other minds, lay out the questions and arguments surrounding the observation of a person’s conscious awareness (Bartha 2013; Other Minds (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy), 2023). If you are a person reading this, you have a direct access to your own conscious experience and awareness; however, this is not the case for another person’s conscious awareness. The argument from analogy explores that you may have a good reason to believe and infer that other persons have conscious experience and awareness due to the similarities of behaviors between you and them—yet it is still impossible to directly observe another person’s mind. The problem of other minds becomes ever more significant if non-human species are involved—to infer that non-human animals have conscious awareness, due to the similarities between you and them, would be subject to the problem of anthropomorphism. As behaviors can vary significantly across any two species, anthropomorphizing can lead to inaccurate conclusions.

​

Nevertheless, some experiments have provided thought-provoking insight into non-human self-awareness, most notably, the mirror self-recognition tests. In these tests, certain species of animals have been observed to manifest a series of self-directed behaviors that may suggest a level of self-awareness (Breed & Moore, 2021; Gallup, 1970; Plotnik et al., 2006). In one study, four preadolescent chimpanzees were provided with mirrors in proximity to their cage (Gallup, 1970). As the animals became accustomed to their mirror, they began using it to groom parts of their body such as picking bits of food from between the teeth. As the pieces of food around the teeth are not visually accessible without a mirror, the animals’ precise behavior of observing and grooming—via self-reflection as a visual aid—suggests a level of self-awareness.

​

In another self-recognition experiment, three Asian elephants were exposed to one large mirror (Plotnik et al., 2006). Like the chimpanzees, the elephants appeared to use the mirror to observe and interact with parts of their body that are not visually accessible except via self-reflection. For instance, one of the elephants put her trunk into her mouth at the mirror, as if investigating the insides of her oral cavity. In another example, an elephant used her trunk to pull her ear toward the mirror, as if inspecting the sides of her ear that she cannot normally observe.

​

The mirror self-recognition tests provide compelling evidence in relation to the topic of non-human self-awareness, particularly in members of most species of great apes (Anderson & Gallup, 2011). It should also be mentioned, however, that there are criticisms and controversies surrounding such experiments as well (Suddendorf & Butler, 2013). For example, when researchers used a different method during the study, namely the mark test, only one out of three elephants responded in a significant manner (Plotnik et al., 2006). During a mark test, an animal is applied with a visible mark on the side of its head that is not visually accessible without self-reflection. Next, the animal is presented with a mirror as the researchers observe how the animal responds to the mark. While all three elephants continued responding to the mirror in ways that suggest self-awareness, only one reacted to the mark by repeatedly touching it.

​

Regardless of such controversies, numerous scientists have explored and suggested evidence for the possibility of self-awareness in nonhuman animals through the mark test, and great apes, elephants, dolphins, and magpies have been observed to pass the test (Breed & Moore, 2021; Gallup, 1970; Marten & Psarakos, 1994; Plotnik et al., 2006; Prior et al., 2008).

​

Despite the astonishing findings of the various mark tests, behaviors that display self-recognition in the mirror are nonetheless an indirect observation of self-awareness. The mirror self-recognition test is designed to investigate the physical behaviors of its subjects, as they interact with their physical appearances reflected on the mirror. Then, the conclusion, on whether the subject is self-aware or not, is inferred from the observations of the physical behaviors—such is the inevitable limitation of investigating another conscious animal’s self-awareness, as discussed in the aforementioned Solipsism and the problem of other minds. In other words, a positive outcome of a mark test (i.e., an animal that passes the test by responding to the mark) suggests only evidence, not proof, that its subjects possess self-awareness. Such a proof is perhaps impossible to devise with today’s technology.

​

According to the concept of domains of meta-interactive capacities, it may be possible for an animal to recognize and interact with the reflection of its body without self-awareness. Given that the reflection pertains to one’s physical appearance and movements, self-recognition with the help of a mirror would essentially be an example of meta-interaction with the physical manifestation of one’s attributes of life, which is an instance of Domain of Emulation. On the other hand, the negative outcomes do not necessarily contradict the argument that the subjects possess self-awareness. With regard to us humans, we often look in the mirror to inspect and investigate irregularities in our faces, but other animals may not possess such inclinations. Despite the limitations and the lack of precision in methods of measuring and observing self-awareness, we can speculate that some of the non-human species of mammals may possess up to the sixth domain, the Domain of Self-awareness.

 

Animals with the sixth domain are capable of augmenting their methods of contribution through insightful self-feedback and introspection, thus increasing their fitness potential. Some compelling examples are mammals’ complex social dynamics and hunting tactics. In Tanzania’s Serengeti National Park, prides of lions have been extensively followed and studied over the years and cited as one of the prominent examples of highly cooperative pack hunting behaviors (Schaller, 1972; Wilson, 1975). Averaging at over a dozen individuals per pride, the female lions often initiate the hunt by stalking their prey from various angles, then rushing simultaneously. A pride’s complex and coordinated hunting strategy provides a superior success rate and allows it to catch exceptionally larger prey, such as giraffes and buffalo. This can be crucial for feeding the non-participating members of the pride, such as the cubs. This highly synchronized and extremely fierce hunting skill, however, takes several months to years to hone and master. Lion cubs can begin walking as soon as two weeks after birth, but their hunting skills remain insufficient for a team hunt until they are around one year old. Even then, they require extensive practice and reinforcement of their hunting methods to become competent team members—young lions generally become proficient hunters from around the age of two years. Until that time, they rely on the contributing members of the pride for food and protection as they practice hunting through play and observation of the elder lions.

​

The evolution of animals with the sixth domain introduces conscious awareness as a new phenomenon of the world. Such a powerful phenomenon inevitably introduces certain anomalous patterns that may impede one’s contribution to prosperity. To obtain further opportunities for contribution, an individual must therefore aim to meta-interact with the conscious awareness of other individuals.

 

(vii) Seventh Domain: Satellitic-awareness

As discussed in the previous section, a person has direct access only to their own conscious experience, not to those of others; thus, in order to meta-interact with another’s conscious awareness, it must be represented through a medium, namely, a ‘satellite of conscious awareness’. The most conspicuous instances of satellites of conscious awareness can be created via the use of a language. By speaking a phrase or writing a note to another person who shares the same language, an individual can effectively meta-interact with the other person’s conscious awareness. In essence, a satellite is a material substance that bears a person’s non-physical instance of life, namely conscious awareness. A satellite can be an object, such as a piece of paper, but it can also be the physical body of a person or that of some other organisms. For instance, if a person were to speak to another, the speaking individual’s face would be acting as the satellite of their own conscious awareness through vocalization. A satellite can also be an object such as a piece of paper. Imagine if you live with several family members but wake up in one morning and found your house empty. Before you decide to call your sibling to ask where they had gone, you find a piece of paper on the dining table with “getting breakfast” written on it. Without having seen your family leave the house, you can meta-interact with the family member via the piece of paper with a note on it, to find out why they are not in the house. Furthermore, a satellite can also be a non-human living being such as a parrot. If you were to visit someone’s house and heard a parrot repeat the phrase “Please take off your shoes”, you would understand that the owner most likely prefers to keep a clean floor and has trained their parrot to alert the visitors as they enter the house. Thus, further opportunities for prosperity can be accessed with the Domain of Satellitic-awareness, the domain of capacities to interact with interactions caused by conscious awareness that exists outside one’s body (through a medium).

​

It is worth emphasizing that while a satellite of conscious awareness has a material nature (i.e., it has weight and requires three dimensions of space to exist), the conscious awareness that the satellite bears is arguably constructed of information and has a non-physical nature. For instance, your smartphone can be a multi-purpose satellite (of conscious awareness) device that you can use to meta-interact with other people’s conscious awareness. Although your electronic device has a material form, the information it displays on its screen is the combination of pixels lighting up in a specific order. Browsing additional pages on an application—such as viewing other people’s comments about a topic—does not increase the weight of your device, therefore, the information (i.e., the projections of other people’s conscious awareness) is weightless and non-physical, even if it supervenes on the physical. The nature of information makes it possible for humans to invent extremely powerful and scalable technology such as the internet, which provides us with the potential to transport conscious awareness across the world in a fraction of a second.

​

Another remarkable aspect of the satellites is their lasting impact. Through the ability to leave behind one’s conscious awareness, a person can communicate with others even after death, even though it is a one-way communication. For instance, Aristotle lived more than two thousand years ago in ancient Greece, but his writings are still widely read and have taught countless students of philosophy over the years. Such a lasting nature of satellites enables humanity to build and scale collective knowledge that makes it possible for continued innovation in the fields of science, technology, and medicine, for example. Sir Isaac Newton once expressed, as he showed admiration for his predecessors in mathematics and science who had influenced and inspired his intellectual contributions, “If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.” With the potential to meta-interact with satellites of conscious awareness, new generations of individuals can assimilate and further enhance the collective knowledge left behind by their predecessors, subsequently leaving it behind for the next generation to continue the cycle. With the seventh domain, the Domain of Satellitic-awareness, mankind has the potential to scale the advancement of civilization in perpetuity, which is built with the collective conscious awareness and contributions of its past and present citizens.

​

Although some of the extinct species, such as the Neanderthals, could have possessed the seventh domain, among the known and surviving species, we humans are the only ones that possess up to the seventh domain.

 

Part 7: Domain Resonance and Multidimensional Meta-interactive Capacities

Domains can scale together to form multi-domain capacities. For example, three domains—the Domain of Vessel, the Domain of Territory, and the Domain of Exploration—can build up multi-domains of Territory-Vessel, Exploration-Vessel, and Exploration-Territory. An example course of meta-interaction of Exploration-Territory is traveling to find a habitable shelter, and that of Exploration-Vessel is traveling to find food. In other words, an organism with more than one domain can combine and coordinate capacities of multiple domains to construct multi-domain capacities. In so doing, each domain effectively becomes a dimension of meta-interactive capacities, and an organism can devise multi-dimensional aim and courses of meta-interaction to expand the scope of potential options for contribution to prosperity. Over the years, an actively engaged mode of experience has been referred to as immersion and flow; with regard to individual domains cooperating and integrating to develop multi-dimensional capacities, the word “resonance” seems to be a perceivably suitable description. Thus, Domain Resonance is the process by which single domains collaborate to generate multiple dimensions.

​

The lists below represent basic examples of multi-dimensional course of meta-interaction.

 

List of Multi-dimensional Meta-interaction of the Domain of Vessel

1. Territory | Vessel: Foraging for food within a perceivable environment.

2. Exploration | Vessel: Traveling across a hill in search of food.

3. Preservation | Vessel: A honeybee observing the patterns of a waggle-dancing bee for direction and distance of the food source.

4. Emulation | Vessel: A bird listening to its flock member for calls regarding food.

5. Self-awareness | Vessel: A person preparing a health-conscious meal.

6. Satellitic-awareness | Vessel: A person ordering takeout through a mobile app.

 

List of Multi-dimensional Meta-interaction of the Domain of Territory

1. Exploration | Territory: A snail burrowing underground for habitable shelter.

2. Preservation | Territory: A homeowner fixing a leaking roof.

3. Emulation | Territory: A fox marking its territory with urine.

4. Self-awareness | Territory: A carpenter using his expertise to build a balcony as an extension of his house.

5. Satellitic-awareness | Territory: Purchasing a vacation home through a real estate agent.

 

List of Multi-dimensional Meta-interaction of the Domain of Exploration

1. Preservation | Exploration: Removing snow from driveway for safer passage.

2. Emulation | Exploration: An off-leash dog following its owner on a walk.

3. Self-awareness | Exploration: A taxi driver devising an impromptu path to a client’s destination.

4. Satellitic-awareness | Exploration: Using Google Maps to navigate to a restaurant.

 

List of Multi-dimensional Meta-interaction of the Domain of Preservation

1. Emulation | Preservation: A frilled lizard puffing up its neck to scare off a predatory snake.

2. Self-awareness | Preservation: A tourist packing an umbrella on her way out after looking at the cloudy sky.

3. Satellitic-awareness | Preservation: Calling the police for help after witnessing a suspicious person.

 

List of Multi-dimensional Meta-interaction of the Domain of Emulation

1. Self-awareness | Emulation: A park ranger using his tracking knowledge to hunt a hostile predator.

2. Satellitic-awareness | Emulation: A foreigner tourist using body language to ask for directions to a native stranger.

 

List of Multi-dimensional Meta-interaction of the Domain of Self-awareness

1. Satellitic-awareness | Self-awareness: A student studying calculus in a classroom.

 

With higher domains, the scale of meta-interactive capacities becomes orders of magnitude larger owing to the multiplier effect of resonance—as indicated by the first list, an organism with up to three domains of meta-interactive capacities can contribute to bodily prosperity not only via energy metabolism but also via foraging for food nearby or traveling afar in search of food. While the examples above are simple and two-dimensional, several domains can resonate as well. For example, if you were learning to drive a car, on the road, with an instructor, you would be meta-interacting across four dimensions, as you are listening to your instructor for guidance (Satellitic-awareness) to learn how (Self-awareness) to safely and defensively (Preservation) drive on the road (Exploration).

 

Part 8: Multidimensional Prosperities

Within the context of this paper, prosperity can be defined as that which you have access to meta-interact with, in order to achieve further opportunities to prosperity. For example, your body is your prosperity that you can utilize to further your prosperity—such as perceiving your surrounding environment for nourishment or walking across the street to buy a sandwich.

As mentioned at the end of part 4, “Aiming and meta-interacting for contribution to prosperity are one and the same process; therefore, a ‘domain’ can refer to meta-interactive capacities, aim, meta-interaction, contribution, and prosperity, depending on which is being interpreted.” Thus, prosperity is also subject to the multidimensional structure.

​

The lists below represent basic examples of multi-dimensional prosperity.

 

List of Multi-dimensional prosperities of the Domain of Vessel

1. Territory | Vessel: Eyes to observe the surrounding environment; a bedroom to rest your body.

2. Exploration | Vessel: Legs to run across a field; an accessible route to water source.

3. Preservation | Vessel: Arms to fight off an attacker; a facemask to prevent inhaling toxic emissions.

4. Emulation | Vessel: Frill of a frilled lizard for scaring off predators; A blind person’s service dog to help prevent accidental injuries.

5. Self-awareness | Vessel: A part of a brain responsible for reasoning abilities; Knowledge about your food allergies and other health-conscious matter.

6. Satellitic-awareness | Vessel: A part of your brain responsible for ‘satellitically’ communicating with other people; Other people that can and are willing to ‘satellitically’ communicate with you.

 

List of Multi-dimensional prosperities of the Domain of Territory

1. Exploration | Territory: An elevator from a penthouse to the lobby; Road between your residence and office.

2. Preservation | Territory: Fire-retardant curtains in a residence; A fire extinguisher in case of house-fire.

3. Emulation | Territory: A scarecrow to deter birds from sabotaging a farm; Guard dogs that bark at strangers that approach your house.

4.  Self-awareness | Territory: Surveillance cameras to observe different parts of your house; Knowledge about home maintenance.

5.  Satellitic-awareness | Territory: A Wi-Fi-connected smart TV in your living room; Public places in countries that you have the right to be on—via citizenship, visa, etc.

 

List of Multi-dimensional prosperities of the Domain of Exploration

1.  Preservation | Exploration: Barriers to prevent rocks from falling onto a hill-side road; A spare tire in case of puncture to an equipped one, to minimize downtime while driving.

2.  Emulation | Exploration: A lighthouse to aid sailors on their way to the port; A bike bell to alert others of incoming traffic.

3.  Self-awareness | Exploration: A hiker leaving marks on his path up a mountain as a guide back down; A sailor’s knowledge of constellations as a guide to navigate the seas.

4.  Satellitic-awareness | Exploration: Traffic signs; Guided tour packages, cars, plane rides, etc. that are available for you to purchase; Stories about another person’s adventures.

 

List of Multi-dimensional prosperities of the Domain of Preservation

1.  Emulation | Preservation: A bear spray; Bright-colored clothing to increase visibility on a rainy day to prevent car accidents.

2.  Self-awareness | Preservation: A car’s parking assist system that alerts you if your car is too close to another object; Knowledge on self-defense.

3.  Satellitic-awareness | Preservation: Warning signs at the front of the house such as “No trespassing”, “Private property”, etc.; The police force, national guard, and the legal system of your residential jurisdiction.

 

List of Multi-dimensional prosperities of the Domain of Emulation

1.  Self-awareness | Emulation: Doorbell and chime to notify you that someone needs your attention at your front door; Knowledge about your dog’s body language to determine what it needs or wants.

2.  Satellitic-awareness | Emulation: A flare gun to indicate your location to other people; Your social skills (i.e. capacity to communicate, collaborate, and empathize with other people).

 

List of Multi-dimensional prosperities of the Domain of Self-awareness

1.  Satellitic-awareness | Self-awareness: Your capacity to understand yourself from a 3rd person’s perspective (i.e. to be self-critical); A sense of oneness with other people (i.e. patriotism, charitability, selflessness, etc.); The collective conscious awareness of other people (i.e. books, institutions, governmental regulations, YouTube videos, etc.).

 

While the examples above are interpreted as two-dimensional, prosperities can pertain to several domains as well. For instance, the example number 13 from the above list, “A bike bell to alert others of incoming traffic”, could be interpreted as a bike bell to alert others (Emulation), while you are riding across a street (Exploration), to prevent collision (Preservation) and potential injuries to your body (Vessel).

 

Part 9: Dynamics of Prosperity Across the Domains

Contribution to prosperity can be achieved by utilizing another part of one’s prosperity—in other words, you must utilize or, in many cases, sacrifice a share of your prosperity in order to attempt contribution and acquisition of some other prosperity. For instance, any effort to meta-interact expends energy, whether it be perceiving a nearby territory, walking up a hill, fighting off a predator, thinking about your future, etc. In short, utilization or sacrifice of prosperity is a necessity to accomplish any contribution to prosperity.

​

         As stated in part 7, with higher domains, the scale of meta-interactive capacities becomes orders of magnitude larger owing to the multiplier effect of resonance”. This is also the case for prosperity—for example, a corporeally thriving and dominant mountain lion has—not only more potential opportunities to claiming a larger and more fruitful territory but also to fending off any competitors—than does a weak and sickly lion. In other words, one’s affluence on a lower domain of prosperity opens up new opportunities for contribution to a higher prosperity. In turn, a successful utilization or sacrifice of lower domains’ prosperity for higher prosperity not only leaves one with net positive prosperity but also even further expands one’s scope of potential opportunities with a multiplier effect, theoretically speaking. For instance, the dominant lion, after claiming its large and fruitful territory, gains the potential to further widen the perimeter of its territory through exploration.

        While aiming for net positive prosperity and opportunities—via utilization or sacrifice of lower domains’ prosperity for higher ones—is ideal, unfortunate circumstances may compel an organism to sacrifice higher prosperities for lower ones, resulting in net negative prosperity and opportunities. For instance, if a pack of wolves were to invade the lion’s territory, it would be compelled to abandon its territory for the sake of its bodily well-being—in the end, the lion has lost its higher prosperities but has secured its bodily prosperity so that it may, once again, have opportunities to explore and claim new territories.

 

Conclusion

The purpose of life, from a certain perspective, is an IMPETUS TO CONTRIBUTION to prosperity. Upon receiving the gift of life and until the moment of incapacitation, one’s purpose can be instantiated via the pursuit of higher dimensions of prosperities—relative to one’s current state of prosperities and according to one’s meta-interactive capacities. For instance, a person’s purpose can be instantiated via the pursuit of physical and mental health and aptitude (Vessel), affluence of property (Territory), stimulating adventures (Exploration), manageable responsibility (Preservation), inspirational and influential social encounters (Emulation), knowledge and wisdom (Self-awareness), and charitability and oneness (Satellitic-awareness).

 

References

Anderson, J. R., & Gallup, G. G. (2011). Which primates recognize themselves in mirrors? PLoS Biology, 9(3), e1001024. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001024

Aristotle. (2009). The politics. Oxford University Press.

Aristotle. (2018). On the soul: and other psychological works. Oxford University Press.

Bartha, P. (2013, June 25). Analogy and analogical reasoning. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/reasoning-analogy/

Breed, M. D., & Moore, J. (2021). Animal behavior. Academic Press.

Darwin, C. (2003). The origin of species: 150th Anniversary Edition. National Geographic Books.

Dong, S., Lin, T., Nieh, J. C., & Tan, K. (2023). Social signal learning of the waggle dance in honey bees. Science, 379(6636), 1015–1018. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.ade1702

Gallup, G. G. (1970). Chimpanzees: Self-Recognition. Science, 167(3914), 86–87. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.167.3914.86

Marten, K., & Psarakos, S. (1994). Evidence of self-awareness in the bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus). In Self-Awareness in Animals and Humans, edited by Sue Taylor Parker, Robert W. Mitchell, and Maria L. Boccia (pp. 361–379). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511565526.026

Other Minds (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). (2023, December 19). https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/other-minds/

 

Plotnik, J. M., De Waal, F. B. M., & Reiss, D. (2006). Self-recognition in an Asian elephant. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103(45), 17053–17057. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0608062103

Prior, H., Schwarz, A., & Güntürkün, O. (2008). Mirror-induced behavior in the magpie (Pica pica): Evidence of self-recognition. PLoS Biology, 6(8), e202. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0060202

Schaller, G. B. (1972). The Serengeti Lion: A Study of Predator-Prey Relations. University of Chicago Press.

Seeley, T. D. (1996). The wisdom of the hive: The Social Physiology of Honey Bee Colonies. Harvard University Press.

Suddendorf, T., & Butler, D. L. (2013). The nature of visual self-recognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17(3), 121–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2013.01.004

Trut, L., & Dugatkin, L. A. (2017, May 1). Wild Foxes Can Be Transformed into Pets in a Few Generations. Scientific American. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/wild-foxes-can-be-transformed-into-pets-in-a-few-generations/

Von Frisch, K. (1993). The dance language and orientation of bees. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674418776

Wilson, E. O. (1975). Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. Belknap Press.