On any assumption, even the most reductive, consciousness has a destiny. If it is something that has arisen then in its not insignificant interventions in the way things go the question of 'how it plays out' is a worthy one, even if the 'it' has only a secondary status to the 'things' that go on. If, on the other hand, its arising makes no sense, since arising only happens in and for consciousness, then its destiny, the revealing of its latent possibilities is even more in question. In any case the current form in which it is known is only a provisional one. It is significant that its blossoms into a peculiarly original relation to individual selves, but that would appear to be no more than the cutting edge of its reach. This need not be understood in developmental or historical terms so much as the caprice of its auto-affection. If, as some like to say, it is the universe awakening to itself, then it is the nature of the universe that becomes more strange. At any rate, this social and mental plurality of individual 'I's in no way exhausts its essence.