The image of a complex interconnected and coherent structure that internally transforms into a different form, like a multi-dimensional cat's cradle, without repetition is a sort of mandala which fascinates the mind on the highest cognitive level. It is perhaps not so much a theory of being as a sort of striving for self-reflection.

As the hierarchic coherence brain networks is relaxed subjective experience becomes more intense and vivid and anarchic. If experiencing were a faculty it would therefore function in the opposite way to the senses. The 'background' to ordinary awareness is not like a dark screen but something like a continuous explosion, like the sun.

Soul may be thought of as that aspect of the self that bridges the moment and the entirety of time, that looks toward timelessness without positively attaining it, but embraces the deep past and the deep future. Freedom is not an alternative for soul but a possible expression of it. It is not an emotion or a mood, but is somehow related to certain emotions and moods. You can speak of the soulful and the soulless, of loss of soul and its surrender, its recognition or the failure to recognise it as the language adequate to soul is lost and found (language and soul are a pair), it may be hidden, the language we have chosen may elide it, although soul itself is always present.

There is much in the way of mental life that behaves in a quantum-like way: you can be in a superposition of a yes and a no, allowing both to project their alternate worlds until at some point you choose what you had perhaps already decided. This kind of vagueness, like negative capability, has its creative uses. This phenomenology does not apply to the ethical, you cannot be in a superposition of good and evil intentions, to dwell in moral ambiguity is already evil, the good is always definitive. Practical reason is classical, speculative reason, quantum.

Being in experiencing and being aware of being in experiencing are two different things and only contingently associated. All of your concepts about experience are located in relation to awareness of experience and take it as a kind of object. Nothing illuminates simple experience at all beyond is own disclosure and so it is also not clear what relation the awareness has to it, how it comes to be such awareness. The latter could be off in a world of its own with no relation at all to what it pretends to be examining.

Freedom is something other than what is needed to give moral weight to decisions, it has nothing to do with 'what if...' and other such moods and modalities. It is needed simply in order for the world to appear, and so is inescapable.

Thought is a kind of physical process, an echoing, re-echoing friction of whispering flows of information, of concepts forming and decaying. Among them, and holding a special place are those of consciousness and the self, but these in themselves are not products of this process or dependent on it. The opposite is true, thought can only exist because of consciousness, which it hinders and goads and ultimately serves.