I once introduced myself to a bunch of cows as Gameteus. Gameteus being the concept that I , as well any other living consciousness , represent half of all creation. The Conscious half of it to be exact. On one side of this Ying-yang grand play is the infinite universe, on the other, the infinite mind. In other words I am what nature does or has so far realized in her effort to attain its optimal state. This idea, if nothing else has the advantage to do away with the ridiculously repetitive and frustrating homunculus argument. As Gameteus, I am no longer the cul the sac of stimuli and responses that I had imagined myself to be. I no longer am a separate entity regarding the rest of the universe in awe and confusion. My seeing , interpreting and reacting to the conditions surrounding me is only the post hoc narrative of a dialogue between the two elements of natures of which I am a conduit and an instrument. Its method differs necessarily from a tree which without narrative reaches for the sun. Gameteus ,as an animated life form necessitates action not only but also anticipation and decision. With it comes a problem, I Gameteus , the conscious half of creation, can only be aware of and be interested in everything that is not really or entirely Gameteus. My function is tied to the dialogue between the two elements and it grows according to their progress. Naturally and probably with good reason, I have not dared to delve into it yet, and probably never will as I lack ability and cannot afford such dedication as it would demand. I suppose it might be proven ridiculous too. But what of it. So it is difficult, however certain things are clear enough at this stage. For one thing it is clear that the tendency for a consciousness unit is to define istelf in contrast to its surrounding and to assume a local consciousness identity fictitious as it may be.
I said to them- Here I am and there you are! Or so it seems because I can see you hear you and touch you, plus I have an endless lines of homunculi ready to attest to this seeing and touching of mine. I see and feel your presence which in turn intimates my presence, and my feeling and seeing . but suppose that your form is not visually experienced and analyzed by me but through me by nature itself? By my nature in fact , and that comparatively speaking you have an easier assignment, yet complex and difficult as my case can be , for me just as for you, it may be already decided what should be my response to you or anything else in base to nature’s plan and only in this context and function will I, virtually or vicariously be made to experience an appropriate vision of it . Suppose that the basic difference between living entities is indeed the different way that they procure sustenance and reproduce, then Nature in a tree will make simple arrangements to move upwards. In a tendril . it will arrest the growth of the molecules that feel a shadow line, in a sunflower it will twist, in you it will seek shade to ruminate, in me it may have to do all kinds of different things . Deceivingly simple things. Even as simple as to direct a hand to a knob and then it might even be moved poetically to see and feel a glint of October on the burnished brass. Just imagine, you sit there in the shade a chew the cud, but not you. And nature in me poetize it may, but not me . For now, Gameteus as you , will just go along for the ride.