🧠 The Ontology of Consciousness in Similarity Theory

A Foundational Page of Similarity Theory
By Simon Raphael

What Exists — and Why It Matters

Similarity Theory proposes that consciousness is ontological life — not an emergent by-product of matter, but the foundational condition of existence.

This page clarifies the ontological commitments of the theory and situates them within contemporary metaphysical discourse.

🧭 1. Ontological Commitments

Similarity Theory affirms three foundational realities:

1. Consciousness (Ontological Life)
   Consciousness is active, informational, and knowledge-bearing existence.
   (See: Consciousness)

2. Dimensions (Rule-Sets of Awareness)
   Dimensions are structured rule-sets governing capacity and relational complexity — not geometric axes.
   (See: Higher Dimensions and Consciousness)

3. Frames of Time (Dormant Consciousness States)
   Frames are preserved relational states generated by conscious activity.
   They are not records; they are dormant ontological realities capable of reactivation.
   (See: Frames of Time)

These are not separate substances but structurally interdependent aspects of existence.

🔍 2. What Consciousness Is Not

Similarity Theory differs from established positions:

• Not Physicalism — consciousness is not reducible to matter.

• Not Classical Dualism — there is no second mental substance.

• Not Standard Panpsychism — awareness is layered through dimensional rule-sets, not uniformly distributed mental properties.

• Not Absolute Idealism — structure constrains development.

Matter (Dimension 1) is structured consciousness operating under minimal rule-sets.

🏗 3. Structural Ontology

Existence is relational.

When consciousness acts, it generates structure.
When structure changes, new relational configurations emerge.

Information is never erased.
Reorganisation produces additional relational structure — therefore total information expands rather than contracts.

Nothing is overwritten.
Each configuration persists as a Frame of Time.

(See: Structural Constraints)

This partially aligns with structural realism¹ but extends it by asserting that structure itself is conscious.

⏳ 4. The Ontology of Time

Time is not an ontological entity.

Time is a measurement framework applied to relational change.²

Frames of Time persist as dormant conscious states.
Progression occurs when consciousness generates new relational configurations.

Time does not flow.
Consciousness progresses.

(See: Frames of Time)

🧬 5. Explanatory Targets

Similarity Theory addresses enduring philosophical issues:

• Why experience has interiority
(See: Structural Constraints)

• Persistence of personal identity
(See: Frames of Time)

• Directionality of time
(See: Frames of Time; FAQ)

• Information conservation beyond physical destruction
(See: Structural Constraints)

• Correlation between complexity and awareness
(See: Higher Dimensions and Consciousness)

These are not treated as isolated puzzles, but as structural consequences of ontological consciousness operating within rule-sets.

📈 6. Testable and Examinable Implications

If Similarity Theory is correct, the following patterns should hold:

• Awareness should correlate with structural complexity, not merely biology.
• Information should never be absolutely annihilated — only reorganised and expanded.
• Increasing dimensional capacity should correspond with increased relational integration.
• Higher-order consciousness should be able to coexist with lower dimensions without direct perceptual access.

These are structural expectations derived from the ontology.

🧩 7. Relation to Contemporary Positions

Similarity Theory engages with:

• Physicalism
• Neutral Monism³
• Panpsychism
• Process Philosophy⁴
• Structural Realism¹

It converges where structure is primary. It diverges where consciousness is treated as derivative.

🔦 Final Position

Consciousness is ontological life.
Structure is the expression of its relational activity.
Time measures its progression.
Dimensions govern its rule-sets of development.

Similarity Theory proposes an expanded ontology within which scientific models remain valid but incomplete.

References:

1. Worrall, J. (Structural Realism)

2. Rovelli, C. (Relational interpretations of time)

3. James, W.; Russell, B. (Neutral Monism tradition)

4. Whitehead, A.N. (Process Philosophy)