Special and general NSD

One of the nice things about noticing that reality is nested structured~duality is it provides a very general platform or principle or imagery to self-reflect upon the various types and categories of nested structural coding and signaling and on the various 57 flavors of "consciousness" that people bandy about when talking about various features of consciousness and consciousness studies. 

It is the general underlying pattern. I get the message that many contributors simply do not like to admit that their own expression(s) and models are instances of the category that I have made up. Or they may see the pattern, but don't like my spiritual or religious inclinations, or other of my features or immaturities and attitudes.  What does it mean if [Ralph Frost]  expresses the helpful underlying general principle facilitating paradigmatic change in science? Does that mean that  everything that  the person contributes is correct or valid or must seen as so?

It seems to me that the real issue is whether various researchers can see how it is that reality and everyone else's expressions and model(s)  (besides their own) are instances of nested structured~duality.  Their special case expression, at least for a while can remain a personal exemption or as undecided, but the thing is, to objectively notice that the pattern fits. 

And, if it does, then [Ralph Frost] made a lucky guess and was persistent. And if it does, and the generality of the underlying principle shows itself to you,  some participants may sense that that contribution obviously comes from an underlying source at a deeper, more general  level of organization in the nested structured~duality.  But, does that mean that everything else about [Ralph Frost]  must be perfect and if it is not then the generalization must be invalid?

In discussion here in jcs-online and elsewhere, I believe people in consciousness studies  as a whole would profit by thinking in terms of special and general categories of nested structured~duality (NSD), borrowing, a bit from relativity theories.    The central division or boundary I am suggesting here  is to, for instance, delineate 'rock' or inanimate consciousness from structural coding going on in carbon- and water-based structural coding -- that occurring in the sp^3 hybridized levels of organization.  As well,  mentioning God, 'god', gods, etc.,  and perhaps even space-time, would be indicators of attempting to  reference one or aspects of the general theory of NSD.

I can imagine that  this type of categorization might be troubling to panpsychists or spiritualists who dislike such rational considerations and boundaries. I suppose I can see their point.  However,  if one can consider  it like a trial theory it seems to me this approach might lead to options for falsification of  one or more of the perspectives. Such falsification would help to move the science of consciousness along.

Similarly - communications between special NSD and general NSD levels of organization, to me seem pretty straightforward. Miraculous, but still straightforward. 

Best regards
Ralph Frost

With joy you will draw water
from the wells of salvation.  Isaiah 12:3