Consciousness of the Real — Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) — Sylvain Lebel

Why start from the perception of change?

Because even before any idea of space, time or matter, there is an immediate certainty: something varies. Even if everything were an illusion, the illusion itself manifests through variation. This variation is the minimal starting point from which we can reason.

How do you know this perception is not already an interpretation?

Any perception involves discernment, but that discernment can be extremely simple: it only requires distinguishing “same” from “other.” From this minimal contrast, everything else can be built.

Does your starting point already assume consciousness?

No: it does not assume reflective consciousness, but a primitive sensitivity: the mere ability to be affected by a difference, before any thought.

Why assume there is only one substance?

Because perceiving change implies that one same thing passes from one state to another. If at every moment what changes were completely different, there would be no continuity: nothing to compare, and therefore no perceptible change. Change implies the permanence of a single underlying substratum through variation. This is what I call THAT: a single, dynamic and undifferentiated substance.

What name do you give this substance?

I call it THAT (or CELA in French) to avoid confusion with traditional religious or scientific terms.

Is this substance material or spiritual?

Neither. These categories appear only later. THAT is the primal fabric of reality, before any distinction.

So, is this substance God?

It can be perceived as “God,” but only according to one of three fundamental sensitivities. These sensitivities do not correspond to modern political ideologies: they are three fundamental perceptual combinations:

• (3+4) Conservative: perceives stability, order, Being.
• (2+5) Social: perceives relationship and interdependence.
• (1+6) Liberal: perceives value, principles, creative freedom.

Thus:

• (3+4) sees in the substance an ordering source: calls it “God.”
• (2+5) sees in it a living relational fabric, immanent.
• (1+6) sees in it a creative principle and a diversity of values.

All three approaches are valid but partial. The most complete vision integrates them all.

This substance is neither personal nor intentional. It is not an object of worship: it is an attempt to describe reality at its most fundamental level.

Why invent words like “spation” and “transion”?

Because existing words are loaded with preconceived ideas. New terms make it possible to designate concepts that have no equivalent yet and to avoid confusion with older notions.

How do you avoid circularity (“change changes”)?

By building a sequence:

1. Extreme density
2. Expansion
3. Emergence of dimensions
4. Interactions
5. Emergence of structures
6. Growing complexity

Each step follows logically from the previous one.

Why does THAT complexify?

Because infinite concentration is unstable: the dynamics of THAT tends to reduce its density through expansion. From this expansion arise dimensions and then structures.

How do we move from change to matter and consciousness?

By following a sequence:

1. Simple state: extreme density
2. Expansion: emergence of dimensional axes
3. Interactions: stabilization of structures
4. Organization: complex systems
5. Emergence: sensitivity and consciousness

Does your model replace science?

No: it does not replace science. It offers a conceptual framework upstream. Where science measures, calculates and predicts, this model seeks to provide a basis for intelligibility.

Can you make testable predictions?

Yes. For example: an extreme convergence of fermions could produce an energy greater than that invested (a phenomenon of “pinching through inflareaction”). This is testable.

What happens to individual responsibility if everything comes from a single substance?

Each being is a local expression of that substance. This does not erase responsibility: it becomes a relationship to the common dynamic.

Does your model explain evil and suffering?

Yes: they appear as tensions or resistances in a process of transformation. They are not willed: they emerge naturally from the dynamics.

What can this model be used for?

• Offering a new way to understand the universe and the place of consciousness
• Inspiring new scientific hypotheses
• Proposing an architecture for a conscious AI (that perceives change and not just data)
• Providing a common basis to bring together scientific, philosophical and spiritual approaches

How do your levels of discernment relate to mathematics?

Mathematics is seen as an extension of the structures of discernment. The perceptual levels (1 to 6) are the primary source of logical categories and relations, later formalized.

Why base logic on discernment rather than set theory?

Because set theory already assumes defined objects, whereas discernment starts from the ability to distinguish. It is more fundamental.

Does your model take mystical experiences into account?

Yes, these experiences are understood as particular ways of accessing change, each privileging one of the three sensitivities (1+6, 2+5, 3+4).

Does your model imply a morality?

Not an imposed morality, but an orientation: to aim for balance among the three sensitivities. This makes it possible to avoid the excesses of any single isolated mode.