Institute of Information Transmission Problems, Moscow, Russia
ABSTRACT
The main idea: we suppose that the 'basic faculties' of thinking correspond to the fundamental qualities of the Septenarity (the Seven Rays), a basis of hypothetical self-developing Reality (God, Universal Mind, World Soul, etc.) and the underlying subtle structure corresponds to well known esoteric structure of the Universal Mind's manifestation:
Unity --> Duality --> Trinitarity --> Quaternarity, and basis -- Septenarity, as final resultWe discuss real and elusive problems of the conventional psychology concerning mind concept definition including known structure models of mental faculties. We derive our subtle structure of 'basic' mental faculties from the main idea and give characteristics these seven basic faculties of thinking and the underlying subtle structure of groups of the faculties. We describe the seven basic types of thinking and suggest a systems 'esoteric' approach to any ivestigations; they follow from discovering of the basic abilities of the thinking. We define concepts of intelligence and intuition in terms of the subtle basis and consider a mental psychosynthesis. Lastly, we discuss the 'mixed' faculties studied by conventional psychology in light of the 'pure' seven basic mental faculties.
To the end of 20th century a quantity of books and articles devoting to problems of the thinking have been strongly increased [1]. Now human mind is a subject of explorations both in philosophy and psychology, and even the artificial intelligence is sometime considered [2] as a part of common intention to understand the thinking.
However, any known concept of mind is a vague one: '... it is one of the most obvious concepts of psychology and simultiously is one of the most elusive ones' [3]; 'Elaborate studies of mental functioning have been undertaken for years by experts in the field, yet no true consensus exists as to the true nature of the mind. Is it an epiphenomenon of brain phisiology ? Or is it a faculty or principle, the existence of which is independent of (though interactive with) the substance of the brain ?' [4]. Besides, one often adds some intuition concept to intelligence concepts. Generally, the intuition includes all unknown and unrevealed into the thinking mechanisms. If we feel that some mental manifestation can not be realized in principle, we say 'it is intuition' simply. The intuition is a fuzzy set of mental faculties; we do not understand how they can be called or have not simply any interest to them.
There is an ancient idea to describe the mind in terms of its faculties (abilities). Two thousands of years ago Aristotel said that 'the mind is not an activity, it is a faculty to it'. And in our 20th century M.Anry asserts [5]: '...in our analysis of the mind we must leave unsufficient and superficial levels of mind understanding and turn to the essential features of psychical; they are power and ability ... Our organism is a family of our faculties to mastering of world; and it realizes the world by all our organs of senses and motor activity'. We can read in section 'mental faculties' in [6] that the intellectual abilities can be defined as a set of qualities manifesting in processes of human activity (see [7] also).
'The occult point of view ... stresses the concept of 'mind over matter'. Occultism proposes that the concrete mental faculty, as it works within the substance of mental field, initiates what might be called certain 'modes of motion' which, in their aggregate can be recognized as familar mental processes. These processes are reflected in brain processes, and hence, the opportunity for confusion' [4].
Thus, we will apply the esoteric approach to understanding the mind. It is cognitive and psychological rather than physiological. Those who have studied the mind in this way have isolated a number (approximately 150) of mental faculties, some of which have been listed in psychology (see, for example, [1,8]). The list is far from exhaustive, of course.
We will often quote [6] in the sequel. C.Levi-Stross (see [6]) proved that existance of particular mental faculties motivated by cultural singularities does not except existance of the 'essentials'. The essential faculties are common potential abilities of people. The singularities of intellectual activity of people from various cultures are various manifestations of the universal rules of human mind constitution.
C.Levi-Bru'el proved (see [6]) that, in principle, the various styles of thinking are also in every culture and individual person also. He concluded that such homogenity is an essential common quality of the mind.
Concluding, let us note the esoteric psychology supposes the following subtle constitution of man:
Spirit -- Soul -- PersonalityThe personality contains phisical, vital, emotional and mental 'bodies'.
The experimental psychological explorations of the mind proved (see [6]) that:
1) its development and activity depends on a lot of factors, including social-cultural, personal, neuro-physiological ones, etc.
2) there are a lot of functional properties of the intelligence (forming of mental operations, cognitive processes, rates of information processing, etc.) characterizing of particular psychological mechanisms of performing of mental activity; they give some representations about development level of intellectual faculties of any person.
At present any mind concept is (see [9]) 'an open concept, since we can always add potentially infinite number of new behaviours described by new researchers. A reccurent researcher creates a new test and describes a new style of mental activity. Thus he 'wides' a phenomenological field of researchs. However, he does not advance -- not one step -- to a satisfactory explanation of mind nature'.
Therefore (see [6]), 'it is obviously lacking in prospects of such extensive researches. Increasing of quantity of qualities of any psychic object does not advance to understanding of its nature. Moreover, it generates a tendency to de-ontologize it'.
M.Kholodnaya writes [6] that the traditional theoretical and metodological approach to the mind must be revised. Of course, the testological and experimental psychological approach gave a wealthy phenomenology of manifestations of mental acitivity, but they did not give any possibilty to explain it with point of view of some united and consistent understanding of mind nature. We need a new approach that could explain the mind nature, she concludes.
Thus, at present we can study the mind on any type of cognitive activity, for example, spatial activity, sense-motor activity, memory, etc. However, the set of all cognitive processes is not the intelligence. The mind is BEHIND of the cognitive processes; they are its 'working organs'.
Russian psychologist S.L.Rubinstein (see [6]) wrote that 'it is not possible to define the mental faculties, human intelligence by means of activity only. We must reveal the process of thinking that implies it. The mind theory ... is a theory of that psychic reality that initiates definite functional properities of intellectual activity for the given concrete situation'. It is desirably to reveal integral aspects of structural organization of intelligence [6], its depth subtle structure. Such a structure is a foundation for intellectual functioning. Namely it could explain phenomena and rules of mental activity for any given situation that are observed by researchers.
We have mentioned there are appoximately 150 mental faculties (see [1,8]). A famous cubic structural model of J.Guilford [10] organizes 120 mental faculties, he revealed and organized them by means of factor-analysis.
We start from famous C.Spearman [11,12] and his two-factor theory of mind. In the beginning of the 20th century he declared that our mind consist of 'G', a general factor, and 'S', a specific factor (a set of concrete factors that take a part in particular mental faculties). On his opinion, namely 'G' is the intelligence and its essence is reduced to individual differences in the mental energy.
L.Thurstone [13] and his many-factor model asserted that it is better to represent the mind as a set of some factors. He selected ten 'group factors' and called seven of them 'the initial mental faculties'. L.Thurstone made a conclusion that the individual mental abilities must be described in terms of some 'profile' of level of these initial mental faculties development.
Later, investigations (see, for example [14]) demonstreted that both the two-factor theory and the many-factor theory are simply two facets of the same theory dealing with a description of the same phenomenon. The first theory underlines the general aspect, the second theory underlines the specific aspect. Indeed, when followers of the idea of general inteligence made their attempts to measure the general factor, they are convinced that the general intelligence is an abstraction in respect to a variety of different modes of manifestations of intellectual activity. Again, followers of the idea of intelligence as 'a family of faculties' made a conclusion about existence of some general origin that was represented by different types of intellectual performance.
It is interest, that (see [1]) R.J.Sternberg and E.B. Hunt concluded that the nature of general factor of human intelligence is equal to a small number of 'basic' cognitive processes. In whole, the modern psychologists admit existence of the 'general intelligence'; it is some united foundation and this foundation is represented (by a part) into different types of intellectual activity.
A few psychologists selected two basic factors of intelligence. For example, J.Raven [15] opened a productive thinking and a reproductive thinking; Yager (see [6]) selected two aspects of intellectual activity in his 'Berlin model of mind structure' also; R.Cattel (see [16]) opened 5 factors of the intelligence using a term 'basic mental faculties' for two of them, namely, for 'crystallized and fluid intelligence' (R.Cattel used the two intelligences instead of one -- the general intelligence).
We can understand the situation concerning these theories of two intelligences owing to Humphreys [17]. He proved that R. Cattel division of the general intelligence into two types of mental faculties had a conditional character, since the both factors contained common mental faculties, for example, ability to analogy and formal conclusions (Hamphrey called these faculties as faculty to semantic relations establishment).
The creation of such hierarchical theories of intelligence made more deep the theory of 'whole intelligence' (see [18]). The idea of hierarchical organization of mental faculties gives 'higher' and 'lower' levels of mental faculties and simultiously existence of manager influencies on intellectual components of various degrees of generality. Vernon [18], applying factor analysis, constructed a four-level hierarchical model. The factor 'G' is on the first level; it includes approximately 52 percent of all mental faculties. Two group factors are on the second level; in turn, these two factors are divided on less important group factors characterizing specific mental faculties. Lastly, the last factors are disentegrated on some set of more specific factors.
L.Guffman (see [19]) constructed a radial level model of the intelligence. R.J.Sternberg (see [6]) try to unite all known directions of mind investigations in order to create more advanced model. M.Kholodnaya, trying to systematize all characteristics of mental activity from different tests, suggested a model of 'whirling' [6]. Her collegaue V.Druzhinin [20] try to systematize cognitive faculties also.
Our favourite idea for understanding of thinking is extracted from the concept of participation (see writings of eastern philosophy, writings of Plato, J.Goethe, G. Hegel, H.P. Blavatsky, R. Steiner, A. A. Bailey, R. Assagioli, etc.). According to this idea, the principles of the human thinking are a reflection of self--developing "Reality" (God, Universal Mind, World Soul, etc.).
"Human is ... a part of universal mind or world soul and (in this sense) it shares.... qualities of this soul" (see [21]. Our minds are one of means of revealing this Reality.
We use a modern version of the participation concept borrowed from the Tibetan's teaching as interpreted for us by Alice Bailey during the first half of the 20th century. The teaching (see, for example, [21,22]) supposes that Reality has a basis -- the Septenary. It is the key idea.
The kernal of these ancient esoteric ideas is the following subtle structure of God's manifestation:
1. Non-maifested, External, incomprehensible and inexpressible Real Being (transcendental God),
2. Out of It emerges Manifesting God (immanental God), unfolding Itself out of Unity into Duality, and out of Duality into Trinitarity,
3. Out of Trinitarity emerges Quaternarity, and a final result, Septenarity, the basis of The Fundamental Mind, comprising its seven intelligent components (the Seven Rays), -- which, after having acquired their individual identities, are consciously working along the other direction -- toward evolutionary manifestation of concealed Divine Purpose. Universal Laws of Nature are nothing but expressions of interacting Wills of these Seven Entities, each of which controls its own set of fundamental laws.
Thus, we have the subtle 'canonical' structure:
Unity --> Duality --> Trinitarity --> Quaternarity, and a basis - Septenarity, as final resultIn [21,22], the basis is characterized by fundamental qualities. Besides, it inherits fundamental qualities of the Duality, the Trinitarity, and the Quaternarity that had been before It. The teaching declares that a purposeful activity of the seven basic governing elements of Septenary manifests by forms certain fundamental qualities on all planes of the Universe. All forms express these qualities but more and more perfect, subtle, and complicated forms arise on the evolutionary path.
This ancient and constanly exising esoteric idea got an essential development in the 20th century (see, for example, commentary in [4]). The basic esoteric idea was reanimated and developed. A lot of information about the Seven Rays have appeared, in particular, a few books concerning the nature of the Seven Rays were published, as was mentioned, by Alice Bailey in the first half of 20th century. This information was given in terms of new esoteric philosophy, psychology and medicine. New data were elaborated in the second half of 20th century. They confirm the hypothesis that the Seven Rays lie indeed in foundation of all forms and phenomena.
We have mentioned that the esoteric psycholgy considers the following constitution of human:
Spirit -- Soul -- Personality (Phisical/vital, emotional, and mental 'bodies')It emphasizes that THE PRINCIPAL FUNDAMENTAL FEATURES OF ANY ELEMENT OF THE SUBTLE CONSTITUTION IS DETERMINED BY ONE OF THE SEVEN RAYS.
According to this idea, the mental 'body' and all results of human mental activity reflect the qualities of the Septenary.
In this paper we represent the human thinking as a superposition of its faculties. We use the idea [23] of "a correspondence between the subtle basis of Reality and some faculties of the thinking".
Thus, the 'basic' mental faculties will be simply A REFLECTION OF THE SEVEN RAYS. In the present paper we do not construct this correspondence (see [23]) but we use the result [23] as a conjecture.
Let us discuss a little: how we can reveal them in principle in the end of 20th century? Of course, using both conventional sciences and esoteric traditions ! Namely, we mus consider the mental faculties that have been revealed by mathematics, the Emperer of all conventional sciences, and considered as fundamental qualities of it. Modern mathematics is a result of very long historical development (over the span of at least 20 centures); a lot of mathematicians took part in its development. In the end of 20th century it is not difficult to reveal such basic features of mathematics by means of esoteric analysis of mathematics and mathematical creativity. Such a features have inevitably an objectiveness, in contrast to subjective, seeming random, mental faculties of one individual.
Work [23] reveals these basic faculties of the thinking and simultiously basic features of mathematics. It distributes the basic faculties of thinking on the Seven Rays, keeping in mind the subtle structure of its subbeings (corresponding to Duality, Trinitarity, Quaternarity from the kernal esoteric structure). Such a approach admits to construct a structure underlying groups of the faculties.
It is necessary to mention about an esoteric approach [4] to the thinking. I recommend this beatiful monograph in every way. M.Robbins gives large lists of qualities for every element (including soul and mental 'body') of the subtle constitution of man corresponding to every Ray from the Seven Rays. He describes and analysize in detail qualities of various seven types of mind (corresponding to the Seven Rays) also; see the following section 7.
However, he selected these 'mixed' qualities from modern conventional psychology and from everyday life, not from other more developed conventional sciences, in particular, mathematics. Therefore, they inevitably are mixtures from our more deep and 'pure' basic faculties (see section 8 also). Besides, in order to reveal the seven basic faculties, we need firstly to construct their subtle underlying structure. For this goal we need to attract the above subtle cononical esoteric structure. The idea is not used in [4].
Presented below is a description of a set along with the structures of its subsets. It is a three-level structure whose elements are three groups of basic faculties of the thinking corresponding to the fundamental qualities of the Dual, the Ternary, and the Quaternary accordingly.
Before to describe our model, let us emphasize one key concept. The model supposes that the principal idea of thinking is the idea of forms, i.e. UNIONS OF SOME DISCRIMINATED OBJECTS INSIDE A WHOLE. Already Aristotel said that namely the ability is the most essential for thinking: 'We canseparate the faculty from othe rmental faculties, however, we can not separate other mental faculties from the faculty. Our mind has the abilty to unite any objects into a whole'.
Here is the subtle model:
FIRST LEVEL: two initial faculties of "the thinking that had existed before forms":
Faculty to display activity Facullty to initial discrimination
SECOND LEVEL: three principal faculties of "the thinking of forms" (basic faculties of the thought--idea):
1. Faculty to display purposeful activity including creation and perception of meanings
2. Faculty to create and perceive form qualities and form interrelations including creation and perception of specific (essential) qualities and interrelations
3. Faculty to synthesize and perceive forms as syntheses of other forms including the synthesis for the meanings and qualities of manifestation
THIRD LEVEL: four additional basic faculties (manifesting the principal faculties) of "the thinking of complicated and perfected forms":
4. Faculty to create and perceive beauty of forms
5. Faculty to perform an analysis of forms
6. Faculty to create and perceive similarity of forms
7. Faculty to perform ordered manipulation of forms.
Remark 1. Any option of terms for names of the basic faculties of the thinking meets with difficulties. It is desirable to find names reflecting the synthetic characteristic of the faculties.
Remark 2. The basic faculties of thinking, their groups, and the connections between the groups have an extremely high level of abstraction. Therefore, we can only give a qualitative description of their properties and some examples instead of their explicit formal definition only. Further, we can give such a description of one basic faculty of the thinking from its group in terms of other basic faculties from this group and all previous groups only.
It is well known that the systems approach is an investigation method for complex objects--systems. The systems method tries to include also an organization of functioning in the researcher's mind. If we know the basic faculties of the thinking and their subtle structure, then we immediately obtain a foundation for a real systems approach. The approach makes it possible to reveal all the basic systemic aspects of any domain under the systemic investigation.
The systemic aspects of the entire given domain (or its sub-domain, its segments, etc.) are revealed by asking and answering the following questions:
First,
3. What other objects, and in what way, make the object under the consideration? What kind of structure does this category of objects have?
4. What kind of beauty is realized by the object; beauty being a measure of the simplicity of manifestation of the object?
5. What kind of theory provides for a logical analysis of the object?
6. What properties does the object share with other objects? And what are those other objects?
7. What are the algorithms to manipulate the object?
Next:
2. What are the specific (essential) properties of the object ? What are its specific (essential) relations with other objects?
And finally:
1. What is the meaning of the object? The answer depends on what a variety of forms we will use to estimate its meaning.
Often our thinking does not see the existence of some of these questions or we can not answer them. The cause of such phenomena is contained in a disorganization of our mind, an insufficient development of some basic faculties of the thinking or domains of knowledge.
As an ideal thing, we must realize all basic systemic questions for considering domain, i.e. its meanings, its essential properties and interrelations, beauty, similarities in relation to other objects. We must perform a complete analysis of the domain, understand the structure of its objects, and realize the operations and the algorithms that are used in this domain.
Some well written scientific books are close to this systemic esoteric approach; however, even the best books ignore some basic aspects. In mathematics the systemic esoteric method correlates with the axiomatic method, the set theory approach, and the category theory approach. The systemic esoteric approach is wider and more vague.
Below we give the characteristics of the levels of the structure of the basic faculties of the thinking. In this section we comment a little (see [23]) on a correspondence of this subtle structure and the Tibetan's structure of the basis of Reality, and the Tibetan's subtle structure of the human mind [21,22].
Our two initial faculties correspond to the qualities of the fundamental Duality (spirit and matter). In [22] both these faculties (and faculty 3) are named "main characteristics of mind".
We have mentioned that the idea of the thinking is the idea of forms, i.e., unions of some disciminated objects inside a whole. For the realization of this idea we need the two initial faculties, otherwise, there would be no mental activity or any material supports of initial properties for the forms.
The faculty to display activity gives an activity for our thinking. Man thinks and his thoughts can be realized into the world.
The faculty to initial discrimination is an ability to discriminate the simplest (indecomposable for thought) real or ideal objects together with their initial properties. For example, it is the ability to discriminate the self from the rest of whole. Some symbols can be considered as such objects also. They are primordial fractions from which our thinking will create forms; in particular, the language forms.
Three principal faculties 1-3 correspond to qualities of the fundamental Ternarity (see [21,22,23]). They are abilities of the abstract mind on the Ego plane from [21]. The faculties 1-3 are the abilities of the thinking that are connected with creation and perception of forms. These three "principal" aspects of form are interrelated. Let us recall that we understand any form as a union of some discriminated objects inside a whole.
It easy to see that the thinking of forms needs the two initial faculties from the first level. In fact, any creation of forms is a manifestation of the faculty to display activity. Besides, the concept of union demands the initial discrimination for the unifying objects.
On the second level, the initial discrimination receives an essential development: now we can distinguish the union of elements, the form as a whole and its elements, and the elements themselves.
The Ego creates these sensible forms (in space and time) in order to respond to specific qualities and purposes and to express them by means of forms. Therefore, three principal faculties, 1-3 , correspond to the idea of forms and, of course, they simultaneously correspond to fundamental qualities of the Ternarity. They are the fundamental psychological characteristics of the Ego (soul).
If basic faculties of the thinking 1-3 correspond to the idea of forms, then faculties 4-7 correspond to a realization and a development of this idea. They manifest principal faculties 1-3. Faculties 4-7 express qualities better than purposes and provide the possibility to create and perceive a variety of complex and perfect forms. These four faculties are the abilities of the concrete mind on personality plane corresponding to qualities of the fundamental Quaternarity (the Rays of Qualities) (see [21,22,23]). They are the fundamental psychological characteristics of our personality.
Generally, we can introduce a ZERO LEVEL corresponding to the Single (we can understand nothing about it) and a FOURTH LEVEL,a final level corresponding to the basic Septenarity. The zero level must correspond to some name of the Single; for example, the life energy or the will. Such aspect did not give any properties for thinking. However, if we attract this level, then we can say that the life energy forces us to think. A. Shopenhauer said our mind is a result of the will to a cognition and the will creates thought systems in order to prove a necessity of things generated by it.
It is natural to suppose that on the fourth level we add four additional faculties 4-7 to three principal basic faculties 1-3. As a result, we obtain seven basic faculties 1-7. This final group from seven basic faculties 1-7 (recall that the two initial faculties are absorbed by three principal faculties (1-3) corresponds to fundamental qualities of the basic Septenarity.
WE PROPOSE THAT OUR THINKING IS A SUPERPOSITION OF THESE SEVEN FACULTIES. Figure 1 illustrates the subtle structure of basic mental faculties.
We emphasize that, according to the starting hypothesis, evolutionary unfoldment of the deep fundamental qualities of basic Septenarity results in a corresponding manifestation of the basic faculties of the mind.
___________ | Life | | Energy | _________|_________|__________ | Initial | Initial | | faculty 1 | faculty 2 | _________|_____________|______________|_________ | Principal | Principal | Principal | | faculty 1 | faculty 2 | faculty 3 | ______|_______________|______________|_______________|__________ | Additional | Additional | Additional | Additional | | faculty 4 | faculty 5 | faculty 6 | faculty 7 | |_________________|_______________|______________|_____________| Fig.1We connect a form world with any purposeful activity and assigning of meanings that are generated by such activity. The purposes are some active beings with respect to the qualities of these forms and the relations between the forms. Man possesses an ability to put forward some purpose and to construct a corresponding project. Then he begins a purposeful activity in order to perform the goal. Psychology considers the faculty to display purposeful activity as a pure human ability discriminating him from the rest of whole.
In accordance with our initial concept, we can suppose that these purposes are motived by a manifestation of the fundamental qualities of the basic Reality. For example, they can be motived by a necessity for creation (destruction) of some forms, an expressing of algorithmical activity or beauty, a mastering of analysis tools, etc. The soul and, possibly, the spirit stand behind such purposeful activity. The purposeful activity demands a sequential realizing and understanding of Reality, at least an uncovering of interrelations into the external world and the internal world and their correspondences.
Significance is the main quality of such understanding. Our thinking assigns meanings to all forms and these meanings must reflect an importance of the properties and interrelations into a form world. Of course, such meanings depend on what variety of forms we estimate any given forms. As an ideal, the meaning of a given form must reflect its specific (essential) properties and relations into this variety.
In the previous section we noted that our thinking perceives the external world and the internal world as a network of inter-relations between different parts (of course, these parts have some specific properties) of a single whole.
By this, our thinking perceives an inter-relation of forms as the qualities, characteristics, and singularities of the form that contains these forms as its elements. Indeed, we began to describe the faculty to create and perceive form relations simultaneously with the concept of forms, i.e. unions of some discriminated objects inside a whole.
The unity of elements of the form is their primitive property, since the form itself dissappears, if we take away its unity. In order word, this property of unity can not be generalized. However, the perfect and complex forms exist due to the evolution and improvement of the interrelations of forms. We realize that there are simple, more simple, the simplest properties (properties of forms !), complex, more complex, etc. ones. Let A and B be properties. We declare that property B is more simple than property A, if we need B in order to define A.
Any form has its elements (other forms or the simplest primordial objects). These elements have some properies and take part in some internal relations (for example, in the union relation). Besides, the form itself can have some properties and take part in some external relations with other forms. The form is a support for a set of properties.
We speak about the essence of the form as a set of its essential properties. It is its individual features, its specific colour, that discriminates this form from other form. When one says "the thing is that, that it is", they suppose that they know namely its specific features and inter-elations. A. A. Bailey said (see [24]) about a concept of spiritness:
"Let us regard all manifestations of life as spiritual, and so widen the usual meaning of this word to signify the energies and potencies which lie back of every form in nature and which give to each of them their essential distinguishing characterics and qualities." ([25], i.e. From Intellect to Intuition, pp. 15-16)
Faculty 2 is the ability of the Ego to distinguish and select the essential properities and inter-relations from the vast variety of potential properties and inter--relations for the given form. Such properies and inter-relations usually possess a great beauty. Let us underline that although we have very much inter-relations, our Ego reacts on the most important -- the essential -- properties and relationships.
Lastly, it is important to emphasize that the elements of any form (forms themselves) are inside the form as parts are inside a whole. Therefore, our thought is colored by an order relation between forms.
It is very important that our thinking corresponds to an unlimited variety of forms. The potential infinity is a property of mental synthesis since our thinking creates forms by means of forms and the form class is closed under the following "basic" intellectual operations (thus, we suppose that they are the Ego operations):
1) the singleton operation. It is the constructing of form from any single primordial object or any form. Usually our thinking identifies the singleton (i.e. a form containing a single element) with the element itself. But we realize already that any form containing two elements is distinguished from these two elements.
2) the one-element expansion operation. We can add any primordial element or any form to any given form.
3) the substitution operation. We can substitute any given form for any element of another form. Thus, one form can be elements of other forms.
Of course, for synthesis our thinking uses also other intellectual operations generated by a manifestation of the seven basic faculties of the thinking. Faculty 3 is an ability to generate economical forms (see also the next section) that are adequate supports for inter-relations expressing needed qualities and realizing needed purposes.
Beauty can be considered as some specific "measure" of purpose realization, as an "agent" between forms and their qualities. The form beauty corresponds to an amount of resources that it is paid for its manifestation. This statement is a true one for our thinking; in this case we speak about an amount of mental resources. The less we spend resources for manifestation of the demanded qualities the more beautiful it is.
The minimum amount of resources requires a certain relationship between the whole and its parts. Obviously, the minimal amount of resources (nothing superfluous) needed for the manifestation of form, corresponds to the universal law of energy economy (see [21,22]). It is the minimum of mental resources for form thought. Economy of resources and optimality are specific properties of harmony.
But forms are complicated and perfected. Clearly, that these more complex and perfect forms demand a more much resources for their manifestation. It is known that A. N. Kolmogorov suggested to understand the complexity of a given object as the length of its minimal (we say beautiful) description.
It is very helpful to attract mathematics for demonstrating of beauty. Then we speak of 1) the minimal proof that enlights the essence of problem, 2) qualitative symmetry related with transformation group, 3) completeness and closeness of mathematical objects, etc. A. A. Bailey declared that only mathematics is characterized by the quality of harmony between all sciences. She declared [23] that beauty is "the quality of mathematical accuracy".
Faculty 5 includes an abilty to dissect, to separate, to take apart forms, and to select subforms from forms. For a analysis of a given object we select it from the rest of whole, including a selection of its inter-relations from all possible relations.
In order to analysize its properities and the inter-relations we need an ability to distinguish.
We have indicated a narrow connection of the basic abilities of the thinking. For example, considering faculty 5 to perform an analysis of forms meets faculty 6 to recognize a similarity of forms (see the next section).
Faculty 6 uses, in particular, an ability of an individual qualitative distinguishability of forms. Of course, such distinguishability uses the initial discrimination and the form distinguishability.
But the individual qualitative distinguishability of forms is accompanied by "logical tools", i.e. names for considering objects, ordered pairs for the names, propositions, logical operations for propositions, variables, predicates, etc. These tools are necessary for the recognition of individual qualitative distinguishability of forms and also for recognition of belonging of one form to another form as its element, etc.
Namely, faculty 5 gives tools for the analysis of causal inter- relations between forms. We know that Aristotle described argument system from general to private (deduction) in which our thinking constructs more complex facts by means of the deduction starting from some of the simplest facts. We prove a truth of such complex facts by argument chains, and if the initial facts are true, then we will obtain the true conclusions. As a sequence, our thought can establish an analytic knowledge about different forms.
The similarity and common attributes of forms suppose the existense of the subforms with the same properties. Faculty 6 corresponds to the aspect of their common properties. Various forms can have isomorphic subforms. Any forms have some similarity, for example, it is the common property of counion for all forms.
Faculty 6 to recognize a similarity-generality for forms selects a general quality lying behind them.
The well known faculties of the thinking to generalization and abstraction are founded on the faculty to recognize similarity. Firstly, let us note that some scientists (for example, mathematician G. Hardy) do not distinguish abstraction and generalization. It has a cause. In fact, abstraction is an ignoring of some properties and simultaneously a selecting of other, essential properties. Generalization is a serving of some properties that are common ones for some objects and again an ignoring of some other properties. Namely, the repetition of some properties indicates a possibility of essential inter-relations. So, both abstraction and generalization use abstract concepts (i.e. basic concepts belonging to abilities 2 and 3) and the ability to recognize similarity.
Let us emphasize that when we speak about similarity, we investigate a subtle difference into the similarities between two given forms, while they both have the same generality with point of logic.
The conclusion by analogy is founded on a recognition of general properties for considering phenomena. It is: these phenomena are generated by similar causes or they generate similar sequences.
Lastly, let us note that the ability to recognize similarity is also a base for the conclusion by induction. In this case new facts are generated by our thinking by generalization.
Of course, we know the connection between induction and deduction. Firstly, some facts are accumulated. Then we formulate (by generalization) some representations about the forms and their specific properties. Lastly, we take such representation as an axiom system and analyze it or corresponding deductive model.
There are numerous examples that exhibit the motive of finding a common structure underlying different but similar phenomena.
Namely, this faculty realizes all other basic abilities of thinking, since the algorithmical activity 7 is a perfectly concrete symbolic activity related with form manipulations; it uses names, languages, and different procedures in its activity.
Our thinking works with forms by means of some ordered procedures; it synthesizes and analyzes a given form by some algorithms. A helpful mathematical example is a writing of rigorous proofs from axioms.
Always we have an ordered represented knowledge.
It is very helpful to recall a well-known story about seven blind men and an elephant when we speak of the seveven basic faculties of thinking. As long as we did not see the elephant !
The seven types of htinking correspond to a preavalence of one basic faculty from faculties 1 -- 7; other faculties are second variables. It is necessary to emphasize that the sevn basic mental types there exist not in a 'pure' appearance on the present stage of mankind development. Let us illistrate the seven menatl types labeling every type by its number.
MENTAL TYPE 1. They are ambitious and strong-willed leaders. They aspire to realize oneself and be able to attain their puposes. They bother about meaning of their activity and creations.
MENTAL TYPE 2. They feel essential interelations and qualities; have an intuition concerning the best possible way to realize their intention. Their mind is concentrated on unknown long intrerelations. They have intention to unite including conflict concepts.
MENTAL TYPE 3. They have a wide view on abstract problems. They take into consideration all possible factes of these problems. They apply easily general constructions and various intellectual operations.
Generally, people having these tree types, i.e. 1 -- 3, posesses a wide abstract thinking.
MENTAL TYPE 4. They feel beauty and try to attain beatiful economical concentrated proofs and arguments. They emphasize a beauty in all thinfs and have a highly coloured feeling of prefect forms.
MENTAL TYPE 5. Their statements are adjusted; they are accurated in details and try to attain origins of the smallest facts; they verify constanly and all. They have a very good technique and logic of reasoning.
MENTAL TYPE 6. A parallel with type 2, they have a good intuition. They can recognize similar properties and realize intuitively common consistent unitying lnowledge. They can have a mental fanaticism, highly coloured symphaty - antiphaty.
MENTAL TYPE 7. They try to attain regular procedures and perform accepted customs. Their minds are concentrated on rules of actions and procedures. Alice Bailey said in [22] that they are predetermined to do correct things and assert correct words in correct moments.
It is necessary to emphasize that we can realize specific features of our mental type both by positive and negative aspects of its manifestation. We refer to [4] where M.Robbins gives a description of similar mental types in detail; but we have mentioned that he uses 'mixed' qualities.
We have indicated that at present the concepts of intuition and intellect are vague ones.
Let us illustrate such descriptions (see [25]). R. Descartes said that there are only two actions of our intellect by means of which we can obtain a knowledge without any mistakes. They are: intuition and deduction.
B. Pascal said about 1) espirit de geometric and 2) espirit de finesse. 1 is a power and a straightness of our mind that is manifested by the logic of conclusions. 2 is a breadthness of mind, an ability to see deeply, and to realize a truth by means of an insight. 2 is more important than 1, since "it is impossible to create theories that go to the limit of intuition" (Kroneker).
R. Descartes: "under untuition I understand some concept of clear and careful thought generated by natural light of mind". When one speak about intuition they speak about an insight, a sudden understanding without any rational explanations, some essential step, a very important idea, some wide helpful abstraction, etc. If R. Descartes said that "human mind perceives the truth by intuition power" then B. Pascal said the same about truths perceived by means of the soul.
We have different types of intuition. Firstly, one select an initial-immediate intuition. H. Lebesgue asserted that if we became more experienced in mathematics our intuition becames more refined one. Then the intuition is an undestanding of subtle phenomena. Always any good mathematician wishes to understand an inner cause of success for a long chain of syllogisms. Poincare: "when long reasoning leads us to some simple but unexpected result, we do not soothe rest until we show that we could presee the obtained result (at least in general features)".
Poincare investigated the inter-relation between intuition (the unconscious Self or the Ego) and intellect (the conscious thought). His investigations proved that insight will not be without preceeding conscious reasonings. We do not discover directly the continuous nowhere differentiable function or the Peano's curvature covering square. We obtain nothing from nothing. We need some preceding hard intellectual work. Of course, it is necessary for some intellectual activity after any insights.
Let us indicate how -- in terms of the subtle structure of the basis of the thinking -- we can easily define concepts of intellect and intuition.
At present the stages of subtle psychosynthesis are well known. Firstly, it is an integration of our Personality (phisical/vital, emotional, and mental 'bodies') since there is not a path in oreder to avoid a personal resposibility for itself. Such a stage is well described, for example, by R. Assagioli' psychosynthesis [26]; in contrast to the esoteric psychology, the conventional psychology acknowledges Assagioli' psychosynthesis despite of its esoteric roots (they have different fates so far). Then -- and as a parallel -- a development of the link 'Personality/Soul'. Usually we realize our soul as a manifestation of altruistic love, selfsacrifice, compassion, intuition, insight, clear moments of life (so rare, unfortunately).
The Tibetan's teaching [21,22] implies that the evolutionary development of faculties 1-7 takes place on the abstract mind plane and simultaneously on the concrete mind plane. But there is an evolutional time when faculties 4-7 of any individual are synthesized by faculty 3 (namely therefore number 5 is "the number of mind" and any wise man has a star with five points in the mind).
Faculty 3 is essentially an ability to produce adaptation (i.e. generate optimum forms expressing required qualities (or a purpose)). Faculty 3 as the first mental aspect is considered in [22]. M.Robbins discuss in [4] 'concrete mental faculties within the lower mental field', as he formulates.
Let us emphasize that the terms "optimality" and "economity" are motivated by faculty 4 since the optimality is a quality of harmony.
The synthesis, setting up control of the abstract mind over the concrete mind, corresponds to a link (antahkarana) between the abstract mind and the concrete mind. When an individual uses both the abstarct mind and the concrete mind and can coordinate their work, he has a perfect intellect. Such a coordination of mental activity is "a necessary" condition for revelation of his soul. It is impossible to perform the integration without solving of personal and common problems, performing of own duty, compassion, clearity of life, disenterested serving. A. A. Bailey said that our mind is the key from the human realm to the spiritual realm; it produces their connection.
Thus, it is naturally to consider faculties 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 as the abilities of intellect and faculties 1, 2, 3 as the abilities of intuition. Thus, questions 3-7 correspond to intellect. Questions 1-3 correspond to intuition.
A specific type of intuition corresponds to a prevalence of one ability from faculties 3-7. For example, the intuitive faculty to perceive a conclusion by ignoring of very long chains of syllogisms corresponds to large analytic abilities.
In the previous sections we presented the seven basic faculties of thinking and underlynig subtle structure without any discussion of their relationships with concepts of the conventional psychology. Let us discuss the relationship in short.
It is very easy to see that the conventional psychology considers all our basic mental faculties (possibly, it does not at all basic mental faculty 4; except gestalpsychology) in a mixed mode. It is possible to say that the psychology deals with sequencies of manifestaion of the subtle basis of thinking. The traditional cognitive faculties -- we can read about them in any textbook on psychology -- are, in fact, complex constitutions from our basic mental faculties, their various mixtures (we consider some of them in the sequel). Even 'concrete mental faculties within the lower mental field' from [4] are mixtures. It is obviosly from the list 'Some key functions, operations and characteristic dynamics of the concrete mental faculty within the lower mental field' ([4],page 317): 1. Creating thoughtforms, 2. Power of thought fixation, 3. Concentration, 4. Analysis, 5. Synthesis, 6. Association, aggregation, sorting, 7. Comparision and contrast, 8. Deduction and induction, 9. Correlation, 10. Detection of causes and effects, 11. Manipulation, arrangement, combination, 12. Generalization and particularization, 13. Creative vizualization, 14. 'Signation' and labeling, 15. Symbolization, 16. Memory, 17. Intuition.
Such a phenomenon is not wonderful. Simply the conventional psychology have not any subtle instrument in order to reveal the depth mental stucture. Besides, the most psychologists have not open mind. They consider the esoteric ideas as some exotic vague ones and do not wish spend hours plowing through the exotic theories.
The author hopes that the scholars take the idea about the Fundamental Mind and Its basis, the Septenarity in account as one of possible hypothesis. Then they take our hypothesis about subtle basis of thinking in account. After these two steps they could perform some objective scientific analysis. Possibly, it will prove the central key role of the subtle basis for genesis of all known mental faculties investigated by conventional psychology. Namely these investigations could take off the question about seeming vagueness of choice of basic mental faculties and underlying structure of groups of such faculties. Lastly, it could take off the question about quantity of basic mental faculties (why we have seven basic mental abilities).
Let us describe some of representations of conventional psycholohy concerning mental faculties. We will use our basic mental faculties as a subtle instrument (microscope, telescope, etc.) and see that is a very good one. It illuminates delusive problems in the psychology.
Generally, the idea of forms have been realized by conventional psychology, but possible, not very clear.
R.Solso wrote (see [1]): 'possibly, understanding of world can be only through development of cognitive structure which connects seeming disconnected objects and events as an united concept'.
Russian psychologist L.S.Vygotsky asserted (see [6]) that any pseudoconcept of child is a set of real concrete things: 'child has an intention to connect and lead up under word meaniing any objects in any combinations. He unites the objects on a base of own subjective representations using the universal principle: 'all things are connected with all things'. Child uses words in order to unite some things on foundation of their objective, real existing relations. However, these connections are concrete visual ones that he opens by own personal experience.'
Generally, modern psychology also underlines all principal basic mental faculties 1, 2 and 3. The following definition of intelligence (see [1]) illustrates it: 'Intelligence is a faculty to acquiry, reproduce and use knowledges for understanding of concrete and abstract concepts and relations between objects and ideas and use the knowledge by reasonable way.'
PRINCIPAL BASIC MENTAL FACULTY 1. Conventional psychology selects basic mental faculty 1 to purposeful activity as a pure human feature. John Searl, a philosophist from Berkeley Univ., told that any reasonable human has an 'intention'. R.Solso writes (see [1]): 'Interaction of environment and individual person can not be out of their actions. Namely in the interaction some system of fulfilled meanings and sense are formed. The system is interconnected with his subjective world'.
People form some representation about essence of world and its construction. They use the model for understanding and interpretation of events. Between his seven initial mental faculties L.Thurstone selected the faculty to reveal word meanings; C.Spearmam underlined the faculty in order to understand a text.
PRINCIPAL BASIC MENTAL FACULTY 2. Modern psychology considers the faculty as one of the most important faculties of intelligence. Still classic C.Spearman concluded that the level of general mental energy of a person is uncovered as his faculty to reveal connections and relationships between both elements of his own knowledge and elements of contens of textual problems. It contains also a faculty to reveal connections that are implicitly given by the given contens.
Artificial intelligence (see [27]) underlines the faculty to perceive essential properties from a large, complex world of sensory information. It is very important to underline (it was a milestone in conventional psychology) that intelligence can not be reduced to manifestation of definite cognitive functions or assimilated knowledges. Rather it can be defined as some productive faculty that gives a possibility to reveal new hidden connections and relations into Reality. J.Raven (see [15]) told that the productive faculty is an ability to reveal connections and relationships, make conclusions not represented in given situation.
The idea of productive forms of mental activty was born into the textological approach. C.Spearman supposed that essence of general intelligence is a faculty to make connection between two known ideas; also a faculty to find an new idea, if we know the initial idea and its relation to something that is unknown.
As concern to the faculty to reveal essential properties and relations, let us recall the gestaltpsychology. It asserts that 'appearance of decision is connected with an acquisition some new structure by the perception field. This structure gains that element relations for problematic situation that are essential for its solving. Such reconstruction of situation pattern tends to a 'good gestalt'. It is a clear, divided on parts, meaningful pattern that gives the all basic elements of problematic situation. The decision is emerged on a base of such reconstruction of initital pattern by an insight, suddenly. But the cause lies inside individual. Generally, arbitrary consciousness can not solve the problem, only that consciousness that can 'lift' on level of such understanding can solve. In accordance with our esoteric approach, we explain the phenomenon by characteristics of the second basic mental faculty, i.e. the main faculty of our soul to gain the essential. Gestaltpsychology attempted to explain the phenomenon by instananeous neuro-physiological reasons.
The more deeper insight is, the more stronger the essential features of problematic situation have own actions. K.Dunker (see [28]) asserted that the deepest differencies between people concerning their mental giftedness have a foundation into their faculty to reconstract mental material.
The third principal basic mental faculty is connected with four additional basic mental faculties 4 --7 (see also previous section 6). We have mentioned that the intellectual faculties of conventional psycholgy are mixtures of some of the seven basic mental faculties. For example, one say about faculty to comparision, classification, decomposition, search of 'bottlenecks', etc. Mainly, the mixtures are interrelated concepts of convergente faculty, creativity, ability to adaptation, thinking in concepts, etc.
Let us ephasize that very often psychologists add the principal basic mental faculty 2 to these mixtures.
For example, the set of mental faculties from [30], characterizing intelligence, contains faculty to see relations in problems and faculty to estimate meanings of the relations for problem solving, faculty to an adaptive changing of own behaviour, faculty to deductive and inductive thinking.
Convergente faculties (see [6]) include so called combinatorial properties of intelligence, i.e. the faculty to reveal various connections, relationships and regularity; the faculty to combine components of experience in various combinations (spatial, temporal, causal-effected, meaningful, etc.)
The creative faculty is a faculty to create a set of various original ideas. In the restricted sense it is the divergente thinking, in the broad sense it is the creative intellectual faculty.
The thinking in concepts corresponds to basic mental abilities 2, 3, 5, and 6. Russian psychologist L.S.Vygotsky (see [6]) meant under 'intelligence' in proper sense of the word the thinking in concepts. It is close to our concept of intellect as the synthesis of five basic mental faculties 3 --7 (see section 6). Vygotsky underlined the faculties to selection and abstraction of some properties of objects, their combinations by using of word meanings in different situations. Another Russian psychologist L. S.Rubinstein (see [6]) asserted that the kernal of any mental faculty is the faculty to analysis, synthesis, and generalzation (i.e., in fact, basic mental faculties 5, 3 and 6). The fact that child mastered words means that he has a faculty to generalization.
Vygotsky asserted that because of concepts any person begins to understand connections, relations, interconnections, that are hidden under surface of external phenomena and, therefore, understand regularities govering the reality. Besides, the concepts are means for ordering of perceived world by means of 'a network ' of categorial and logical relations. Knowledge of inner reality and experiencies is appeared simultuiosly with forming of concepts. Forming of concepts means mastering of definite intellectual operations. Vygotsky asserted that the system of assertions revealing the concept is contained (as some convolute type, as potential stage) in the concept structure, in characteristics of its 'similarity measure'.
Also J.Bruner (see [30]) asserted that processes of categorization lie in foundation of different forms of intellectual activity. These processes are some mechanisms for connections of perceptions, representations and ideas. He constructed categorization tests that ask the faculty to reveal similarity of various objects. Early still C.Spearman underlined a key role of the faculty to find similarity for two concepts in order to search connection between the two concepts and realize the third concept realizing this connection. Forming of concepts means the faculty to perceive common properties into a clsss of objects and reveal the rules conneciting these conceptual properties. L.Thurstone [13] selected the faculty to reveal similarity in series of letters, figures, etc.
The basic mental faculty 7 is a subject of particular attention in the cognitive psychology. But still C.Spearman [11,12] underlined processes of manipulations for symbolic material; these processing faculties of intelligence represent information processing, procedures, ways, operations, etc. of intellectual activity.
We finish our description the mental faculties (except basic mental faculty 4) and ask professional psychologists to do it much more better.
Note: This manuscript was received from Russia as translated in Russia. The text has not been changed expect for minor words such as "a" to "the", etc. To communicate with the author, Valerii Polesskii, e-mail to: bst@ippi.ras.ru with Valerii Polesskii as the subject. For suggestions as to the improvement of the English text, please send them to: spircom@emf.net. "If, for instance, there are indeed seven rays, embodying seven types of divine energy, then a man should be able to recognise these types and energies in the particular field of phenomena in which he plays his little part." (Alice Bailey, Esoteric Psychology I, p. XXV)
1. R. L. Solso Cognitive Psychology. Second Edition. Allan and Bacon, Inc., Boston, London, Sydney, Toronto, 1988.
2. R.C. Schank, L.Hunter. The quest to understand thinking. Byte. Apr., P.143-155. 1985.
3. W.K. Estes. Learning theory and intelligence. Amer. Psychologist. V.29. P.740-749. 1974.
4. M.Robbins. Tapestry of Gods. Volume I (The Seven Rays: an esoteric key to understanding human nature). Third Edition. The University of Seven Rays Publishing, 1996.
5. M.Anri. Meaning of unconsciousness for human understanding (in Russian).In: 'Unconsciousness', Saguna, Novocherkassk, 1996
6. M.A.Kholodnaya. Intelligence psychology: Investigation paradoxes. (in Russian) Tomsk Univ. Publishing, Tomsk, and Publishing 'Bars', Moscow. 1997.
7. V.D.Shadrikov. Activity and faculties (in Russian). Logos. Moscow. 1994.
8. R.J.Sternberg (Ed.).Encyclopedia of human intelligence. Macmillian. New York. 1994.
9. T.R.Miles. On defining Intelligence. Brit. J. of Psychology. V.79. P.535-538. 1988.
10. J.P. Guilford. The nature of human intelligence. MC.Graw Hill. New York. 1967.
11. C.Spearman. General Intelligence, objectively determined and measured. Amer. J.of Psychology. V.15. P.201-293. 1904.
12. C.Spearman. The abilities of man. MacMillian.New York.1927.
13. L.T.Thurstone. Primary mental abilities. The Univ.of Chicago Press. Chicago. 1938.
14. J.B.Carroll. Psychometric tests as cognitive tasks: A new "Structure of Intellect". In: L.B.Resnick (Ed.). The nature of intelligence. Erlbaum. Hillsdale. New York. 1976.
15. J.C.Raven. Guide to the Progressive Matrices. Lewis. London. 1960.
16. R.B.Cattell. Abilities: Their structure, growth and action. Houghton Mifflin. Boston. 1971.
17. Hamphreys. Critique of Cattel' theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence. A critical experiment. ?
18. P.E.Vernon. The structure of human abilities. Wiley. New York. 1965.
19. L.Guttman. A new approach to factor analysis: The radex. In: P.E.Lazarsfeld (Ed.).Mathematical thinking in social sciences. Free Press. Glencoe (III). 1955.
20. V.N.Druzhinin. Psychology of common faculties (in Russian). Laterna Vita. Moscow. 1995.
21. A. A. Bailey. A Treatise on Cosmic Fire. Lucis Press Ltd., London, England, 1973.
22. A. A. Bailey. A Treatise on the Seven Rays: Vol. I,II. Esoteric Psychology. Lucis Press Ltd., London, England, 1973.
23. V. P. Polesskii. The Hidden Structures of Thinking and Mathematics. The Esoteric Publishing (to appear).
24. A. A. Bailey. From Intellect to Intuition. Lucis Press Ltd., London, England, 1973.
25. M. Kline. Mathematics: the Loss of Certainty. New York. Oxford Univ. Press. , 1980
26. R.Assagioli. Psychosynthesis Typolgy. Institute of Psychosynthesis. London. 1983.
27. Artificial Intelligence and the Concept of Mind. In: R.Schank and K.Colby (eds.). Computer models of thought and language. 1973.
28. K.Dunker. Psychology of productive (creative) thinking. Psychology of thinking (in Russian). Progress. Moscow. 1965.
29. R.S.Nickerson., D.N.Perkins., E.E.Smith. The teaching of thinking. Erlbaum. Hillsdale. New York. 1985.
30. J.Bruner. Psychology of cognition (in Russian). Progress. Moscow. 1977.