Semantic fields and meaning: A bridge between mind and matter

Abstract

The model hypothesizes that the semantic structure of the local universe will tend to allow for the occurrence of specific events while diminishing the likelihood of others. This could be seen as the dynamic underlying synchronicities or “chance” series. Several parameters relevant to this informing and “blending” of reality can be identified, including the psychological and cognitive traits correlated to psi performance in laboratory research, as well as the depth‐psychological dynamics observed in psychoanalytical studies. Whether seen as a product of symbolic operations or as a neural‐network emergent, meaning is largely conceived as an internally generated epiphenomenal process. Little attention is given to the active role of meaning. The basic hypothesis presented here is that the generation of meaning is, in itself, an organizing process shaping reality, while the mind is, in its turn, shaped by a reality endowed with meaning. Extending a basic connectionist premise, we might view the mind as a network organized in semantic constellations, generated by the interplay of experience, genetic constraints and cultural context. This network, which we will call the noo‐semantic field, reflects an ongoing conceptualization and valuing process; it constitutes the totality of a person's cognitive/affective dynamics, and serves as the basic interpretational framework. It is postulated, however, that the noo‐semantic field is also the source of a projective process imprinting information and order upon the outer world. The effects of this process range from the everyday creation of “world‐three” objects, to an ongoing, but far subtler “impregnation” of the environment with meaning. This dynamic generates a semantic dimension in objects themselves—an eco‐semantic field of an allopoietic nature. The two facets of global semantic interaction are engaged in a circular dynamic. Perception of a novel object activates and reorganizes internal constellations, while, simultaneously, the emergent meaning‐clusters are injected into the eco‐semantic field of the external object, thus changing its organization and status in consensual reality. The modified eco‐semantic field, in turn, will be “retrojected” into the psyche, starting a new loop, until eventually, this mind/object interaction stabilizes. It is proposed that this semantic synergy primarily implicates events or objects relevant to the noo‐semantic field—especially those of our immediate environment. This leads to the concept of “local universe” as being, for an individual, that part of phenomenal reality imprinted and shaped by his/her noo‐semantic field; thus, the way in which the local universe is organized tends to reflect the person's own worldview and set of values. Analogous semantic dynamics come into play at a collective level. Groups sharing common beliefs, aims, activities, etc. can be viewed as a collective noo‐semantic field creating its own local universe. Thus the group consciousness also shapes events and objects within its local universe—the more coherent the group, the stronger the shaping of reality.