Reflection and Idionomy

Theories that portray 'Consciousness' as disembodied still characterize it as as much a response to a stimulus as embodied responses are often taken to be. As such, its process is likewise heteronomous, i. e. subject to a law that is external, natural, or otherwise. Consciousness of color is determined by optic laws, and, even where removed from the natural world, e. g. in Berkeley's theory, it is determined by the God who communicates it to the perceiving mind. Other theories, which attempt to evade the problem by designating sense-data as simply 'given', are still heteronomic, because the 'given' is still subject to some law of 'giving' or another. As previously argued, these theories are not outright wrong, just limited in scope--they are best suited to unreflective processes. In contrast, outer perception, like behavior in general, is transformed in the context of Reflection. Reflective behavior does not preclude the awareness of a color, but it takes it as having transpired following the opening of the eyes, and the opening of the eyes follow a decision to look for something, etc. So, rather than the awareness of color being characterizable as an instance of optic laws, it is an autobiographical event, characterizable as an instance of whatever theme one has chosen. As such, it is part of an idionomic process.