From Awareness to Consciousness:
A Novel Exploration Through Dreaming

Ashkan Farhadi MD, MS, FACP, FACG

Abstract

The distinction between awareness and consciousness is often blurred across scientific, philosophical, and psychological discourse. In this manuscript, I propose that what is commonly framed as the Hard Problem of Consciousness is more accurately a Hard Problem of Awareness. Drawing on the Trilogy Theory of Consciousness (TTC), I argue that consciousness is not a singular phenomenon but a structured process composed of three interdependent components: awareness, intention, and self-reflection. Using a personal dream episode as an entry point, I explore how awareness can exist independently of volitional engagement or selfhood, particularly during REM sleep. Neurophysiological evidence—including REM atonia, lucid dreaming, and REM Sleep Behavior Disorder—demonstrates that subjective awareness may be vivid and immersive without leading to conscious action or reflective identity. The TTC framework offers a layered model for understanding these distinctions and highlights the critical role of post-transformation operations, such as Awareness-Based Choice Selection  and appropriation, in the emergence of consciousness. This model is further supported and extended by the Quantum Trilogy Theory of Consciousness, which situates awareness as a universal, field-based foundation. Together, these theories help clarify how and why we can be aware without being conscious, especially during sleep.

Keywords:

Awareness, Consciousness, Volition, Decision-making, Dreaming, REM Sleep, Trilogy Theory of Consciousness (TTC), Quantum Trilogy Theory of Consciousness (QTTC), Lucid Dreaming, REM Atonia, Hard Problem of Consciousness

Introduction

It was early morning, and I was deep in sleep, immersed in a vivid dream. In that dream, I found myself speaking with a childhood friend about a topic that had preoccupied my thoughts for days. The colors, the dialogue, the setting—all were strange, and yet none of it felt unusual at the time. Everything appeared real. The meditation music from my Alexa played clearly in the background. I felt cold in the dream, but it didn’t bother me. I was present—fully immersed in the moment. And yet, I wasn’t conscious.

I awoke—perhaps stirred by the Alexa alarm or by the cold, as the blanket had slipped off during the night. A cool autumn breeze drifted in through a cracked window, and the birds outside were singing the first songs of the day. In that moment, a striking realization occurred: just seconds earlier, I had been fully aware, immersed in a rich subjective experience—an intricate blend of real sensory input and mind-generated virtual scenery. And yet, I had not been conscious in the full sense of the word.

While dreaming, I had experienced awareness—without a sense of self, and without a sense of time. The cold and the alarm music had permeated the dreamscape, but the birdsong was entirely filtered out. Upon waking, the dream’s timeless, selfless immersion was abruptly replaced by a time-bound, self-aware experience: I felt the cold, reached for the blanket, turned off the alarm, and began to pay attention to the birds outside.

This moment of clarity inspired the writing of this essay. I aim to articulate the often-overlooked—and frequently misunderstood—distinction between awareness and consciousness, two terms that are commonly used interchangeably across scientific, philosophical, and psychological discourse. I argue that what is widely referred to today as the Hard Problem of Consciousness is more accurately a Hard Problem of Awareness.

To clarify this distinction, I turn to the Trilogy Theory of Consciousness (TTC) (Farhadi, 2023a,b). According to TTC, awareness is the subjective experience that serves as the foundation for consciousness. However, consciousness only arises when two additional components are engaged:

·      Intention, or Awareness-Based Choice Selection (ABCS)—the mental act of selecting among perceived possibilities.

·      Self-reflection, which emerges through the recursive interplay between awareness and intention, giving rise to a sense of self.

In my dream, although I was aware, I was unable to act or make intentional choices—nor could I reflect upon myself. My awareness lacked agency, volition, and self-reflection.

One might ask: what caused that early morning dream to rise into awareness—or perhaps, to be retained in memory after waking? The answer may lie in two algorithmic processes:

·      Selection of Intelligence Based on Algorithm (SIBA), a filtering mechanism independent of conscious intention.

·      Selection of Choice Based on Algorithm (SCBA), an autopilot decision-making process.

These are hallmark features of the unconscious mind, and are foundational to the operation of artificial intelligence (AI) (Farhadi, 2021). It was only when the discomfort of cold and the rising volume of the alarm crossed a certain threshold that I was awakened. And it was only then that consciousness returned—along with the capacities for choice, action, and self-reflection.

Through the lens of TTC, the following distinctions are emphasized:

·      Awareness is not consciousness.

·      Awareness is a subjective experience and the groundwork for consciousness—but consciousness begins only after awareness transforms into volitional action and self-reflective thought through recursive interplay of ABCS and Discretionary Selection of Intelligence of Awareness (DSIA).

·      In essence, awareness is selfless, whereas consciousness requires the emergence of self through intention and reflective engagement.

The Trilogy Theory of Consciousness (TTC): A Layered Model of the Mind

The Trilogy Theory of Consciousness (TTC) is a cognitive framework that conceptualizes consciousness not as a singular event, but as a structured process composed of three interdependent yet sequential components:

1.     Awareness – the capacity to perceive or experience any form of intelligence arising from internal or external stimuli, as well as various mental functions.

2.     Intention – the mental drive or impulse to act, initiated in response to awareness.

3.     Self-reflection – the capacity to observe oneself as the subject of both experience and action.

According to TTC, a complete conscious episode emerges only when all three components are simultaneously engaged. Awareness alone is not sufficient for consciousness; it must be followed by intention and self-reflection to form the full construct of conscious experience.

Stages of Awareness in TTC

TTC further defines awareness as a multi-stage, dynamic process, evolving through distinct cognitive transitions. Awareness is not merely a byproduct of neural computation but a structured interface between objective mental processing and subjective experience. This process unfolds across four sequential stages:

1. Preselection Stage

Raw information from the external world or internal states is received and processed to generate intelligences—units of information that are cognitively structured and prepared for awareness. These intelligences compete for access to awareness through various filtering mechanisms.

2. Selection Stage

Among these intelligences, one is selected for awareness. This selection can occur in two ways:

·      Through intentional attention, guided by conscious volition, known as  DSIA.

·      Or through automatic, unconscious filtering, referred to as SIBA.

3. Transformation Stage

The selected intelligence, once filtered and processed by the brain's objective systems, is transformed into a subjective experience. This is the critical moment when objectivity gives way to subjectivity—when cognition becomes awareness. The result may take perceptual, emotional, or abstract cognitive forms.

4. Post-Transformation Stage

At this stage, awareness becomes available for volitional engagement. A wide range of mental functions may now be executed through  ABCS, including:

·      Evaluation

·      Memorization

·      Reasoning and comparison

·      Emotional tagging

·      Judging and decision-making

These operations are governed by free will and intentional reflection, forming the basis of conscious cognition.

While some cognitive theories refer to these operations as meta-awareness or “thinking about thinking,” TTC considers them to be the post-transformation layer that initiates consciousness. In this framework, consciousness arises only when awareness becomes coupled with intention and reflective self-monitoring.

Stages of Decision-Making in TTC

In parallel with its model of awareness, the Trilogy Theory of Consciousness (TTC) outlines a three-stage model of decision-making. This model reflects the same structural logic as the awareness process and demonstrates how choices emerge from the interaction of awareness, intention, and reflective evaluation.

1. Preselection Stage

In this initial stage, various pieces of information are actively processed through reasoning, counter-reasoning, and contextual framing. This cognitive activity generates a primary choice option, along with alternative possibilities, all of which are held in a mental space of consideration. These options are shaped by both current awareness and past experiences retrieved from memory.

2. Selection Stage

At the core of decision-making lies the selection process, where one option is chosen among the available alternatives. This selection occurs through two distinct mechanisms:

·      ABCS— a conscious and volitional process rooted in active awareness and intention. ABCS involves deliberate evaluation and is associated with a sense of agency.

·      SCBA — an automatic, unconscious process driven by prior conditioning or habitual responses. SCBA operates without direct awareness, often resembling algorithmic or rule-based decision-making found in artificial intelligence systems (Farhadi, 2025a).

ABCS signifies the activation of intentionality, while SCBA reflects streamlined efficiency at the cost of conscious involvement.

3. Post-Selection Appropriation

Before a chosen option is executed, it enters the appropriation stage—a reflective verification process. Here, the selected decision is assessed against:

·      External reality and current context

·      Predicted consequences

·      Emotional responses

·      Internal belief systems and moral frameworks

Only after this alignment is confirmed does the decision proceed to action. Over time, repeated engagement with ABCS can lead to habit formation, whereby decisions become internalized and shift to the SCBA pathway (Farhadi, 2025d). This transition represents a cognitive efficiency mechanism that bypasses awareness once the decision-making process is well-conditioned (Farhadi, 2025c).

This three-stage model highlights TTC’s core insight: conscious decision-making is not a single act, but a layered progression from awareness to intention to reflection. It is through this layering that true agency emerges—distinguishing conscious action from both reflex and automation.

Awareness, Volition, and Volitional Action in Dreaming

Dreaming provides a natural laboratory for dissecting the components of consciousness. Scientific research increasingly supports the notion that a form of altered awareness—or proto-consciousness—emerges during sleep. In particular, REM (Rapid Eye Movement) sleep is associated with vivid, immersive dreams characterized by a strong sense of presence and perception. Neuroimaging studies have demonstrated that brain regions involved in primary sensory awareness remain active during REM sleep, while regions responsible for executive control and self-monitoring, notably the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, show marked downregulation (Hobson & Pace-Schott, 2002; Siclari et al., 2017).

Dreams can occur during both REM and non-REM sleep, yet in both cases, the dreamer typically lacks deliberative choice or self-reflective evaluation. One of the clearest physiological demonstrations of the distinction between awareness and consciousness arises from the suppression of voluntary muscle movement during REM sleep. This suppression, known as REM atonia, is a protective mechanism that prevents the dreamer from physically enacting internal experiences. Although the motor cortex remains active during this stage, voluntary commands are inhibited at the brainstem or spinal cord level, enforced by neurotransmitters such as GABA and glycine (Brooks & Peever, 2008). Thus, even when the dreamer internally generates an intention to act—to run, speak, or reach—the execution is blocked by brainstem-mediated neural gating (Lu et al., 2006).

More nuanced insight into the relationship between awareness and volition comes from two phenomena: lucid dreaming and REM Sleep Behavior Disorder (RBD). In lucid dreaming, individuals become aware that they are dreaming, and this state is accompanied by a partial restoration of volitional control and metacognitive awareness. Electrophysiological recordings have shown that EEG patterns during lucid dreams resemble wakefulness, though with distinctive features such as increased delta and theta coherence, whereas full wakefulness is dominated by alpha coherence (Voss et al., 2009). Functional neuroimaging studies further demonstrate increased blood flow to frontal cortical areas involved in self-awareness and higher-order cognitive control during lucid dreams (Filevich et al., 2015).

Lucid dreaming, therefore, offers a compelling empirical illustration of TTC’s model, demonstrating the transition from raw awareness to full conscious experience—a shift made possible through the reactivation of intention and self-reflection. It bridges the gap between the first and final components of the Trilogy Theory of Consciousness, showing that awareness alone is insufficient for consciousness unless it is integrated with the volitional and reflective faculties.

Studies on volitional actions during lucid dreaming have also shown that, despite full-body paralysis, dreamers can intentionally control certain muscle groups, particularly the extraocular muscles and facial muscles. Pre-agreed eye movement signals (e.g., left-right-left patterns) and facial twitches have been successfully used to communicate with researchers during lucid dreams, confirming that a rudimentary form of volition can remain intact internally, even when motor execution is largely suppressed (LaBerge et al., 1981; Konkoly et al., 2021).

In contrast, REM Sleep Behavior Disorder (RBD) provides a pathological mirror to normal REM atonia. In RBD, the typical muscle paralysis fails, and individuals are able to act out their dreams—sometimes violently. These episodes confirm that motor programs initiated during dreams are real, and that the suppression of their execution is an active process (Schenck et al., 1993). RBD thus underscores a key insight from TTC: intent alone is not sufficient for conscious action. For consciousness to arise, volition must pass through the recursive loops of reflection and appropriation, as outlined in the post-selection phase of TTC’s decision-making model.

In sum, findings from lucid dreaming and REM sleep disorders reinforce the TTC framework. Awareness during dreaming—no matter how vivid or rich—does not amount to consciousness unless it is joined by volitional activity and self-reflective processing. These empirical insights support the view that the essential signature of consciousness lies in the post-transformation integration of awareness with intention and selfhood.

Awareness and Consciousness During Sleep and Dream: A TTC Perspective

The Trilogy Theory of Consciousness (TTC) provides a structured framework for interpreting cognitive phenomena observed in neurophysiological studies of sleep. During deep sleep, although the brain continues to receive and process information, much of it—except for critical stimuli such as pain, extreme temperature, or alarm sounds—is filtered out before entering active awareness. In these phases, while intelligences may still form, they rarely reach subjective awareness unless they surpass a critical threshold.

In contrast, during dreaming, the brain remains cognitively active. It constructs immersive, hallucinatory, virtual-reality-like narratives—often complete with rich sensory, emotional, and narrative elements. According to TTC, this aligns with the Preselection Stage, where mental intelligences are formed through ongoing internal processing and stimulus integration.

In the Selection Stage, these intelligences compete for awareness. In the absence of high-priority sensory input, the internally generated dream scenarios are typically selected through SIBA —an automatic, unconscious process. Unless overridden by external, critical stimuli, dreams proceed to awareness by default.

During the Transformation Stage, selected intelligences are converted into subjective experiences. This is the point at which the objective neural representations of the dream are transformed into vivid mental experiences—visual, emotional, and cognitive patterns that fully engage the mind.

However, the most critical difference emerges in the Post-Transformation Stage. In waking consciousness, this stage is marked by intentional operations such as reflection, reasoning, memory encoding, judgment, and decision-making, all governed by ABCS. During dreaming, however, this final stage is radically altered or suppressed. The dreamer may perceive implausible events or illogical narratives without questioning their validity, highlighting a fundamental absence of reflective thought or judgment. Without the engagement of intention or identity, the mind experiences awareness, but not consciousness in the full sense.

This observation supports TTC’s central claim: awareness is a selfless, structured, subjective experience that precedes intention and identity—but is not sufficient for consciousness.

Further support for this model arises from its quantum extension: the Quantum Trilogy Theory of Consciousness (QTTC). QTTC metaphorically interprets TTC through Quantum Field Theory (QFT) by describing awareness as quantized excitations of a vacuum field—the Universal Awareness Field (UAF) (Farhadi, 2025b). In this model, awareness is foundational and non-local, while consciousness is the localized, individuated expression that emerges when awareness is shaped by intentional focus and reflective selfhood.

Even in the altered post-transformation stage of dreaming, the automatic functions of unconscious mind such as SCBA are active, which enables reflexive actions like storing dream fragments in short-term memory or producing minor motor twitches. However, the suppression of ABCS during sleep prevents intentional, volitional engagement.

Lucid dreaming, however, presents a unique exception—an arena in which some of the volitional mechanisms of TTC re-emerge. In lucid dreams, individuals exhibit signs of ABCS activation, including awareness-based choice selection and intentional control, yet often remain unable to execute those choices externally due to the lack of post-selection appropriation. This disconnection between intention and execution points to an incomplete or interrupted decision-making cycle. Still, rare cases of successful communication with lucid dreamers—via eye movement patterns or facial muscle responses—suggest the presence of partial appropriation mechanisms not yet fully explained by the current TTC model.

Finally, the transition from dreaming to wakefulness illustrates the TTC pathway in real time. In the earlier example of awakening from a dream, the cold discomfort and alarm music crossed a sensory threshold via SCBA, triggering the shift into wakefulness. Upon awakening, DSIA is re-engaged. Intentional attention is restored, leading to volitional actions: listening to birdsong, locating the source of cold, assigning time, and reestablishing a sense of self. These processes mark the return of consciousness, fully reassembled through the post-transformation stage of awareness and the appropriation stage of decision-making.

In summary, TTC offers a compelling cognitive framework for distinguishing awareness from consciousness, and for mapping the gradual reassembly of conscious experience during transitions between sleep and wakefulness. It highlights how volition and self-reflection—not awareness alone—are essential for consciousness to arise.

Conclusion

This essay has explored the complex relationship between awareness, intention, and self-reflection through the lens of the Trilogy Theory of Consciousness (TTC). Drawing on personal experience, theoretical modeling, and empirical neuroscience, I have argued that awareness is a necessary but not sufficient condition for consciousness. Dreaming, particularly during REM sleep, offers a natural window into this distinction: the dreamer may be deeply aware yet incapable of deliberate action or self-reflection.

Neurophysiological phenomena such as REM atonia, lucid dreaming, and REM Sleep Behavior Disorder (RBD)further support the TTC model by illustrating how the post-transformational stages of awareness and decision-making are either suppressed or selectively re-engaged during sleep. These findings underscore that volition and reflective selfhood are essential for the full emergence of consciousness.

The integration of TTC with its quantum extension, QTTC, suggests a broader ontological view in which awareness arises from a universal, field-like substrate—the Universal Awareness Field (UAF)—while consciousness emerges through the localization of awareness into intention and identity.

In reframing the hard problem of consciousness as a problem of structured awareness, TTC not only provides a novel framework for interpreting mental activity during sleep, but also offers a bridge between cognitive science and the phenomenology of inner experience. It calls for a more nuanced understanding of consciousness—one that begins not with waking, but with awareness itself.

References

·       Brooks, P. L., & Peever, J. H. (2008). Identification of the transmitter and receptor mechanisms responsible for REM sleep paralysis. Journal of Neuroscience, 28(13), 3313–3320. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0077-08.2008

·       Farhadi, A. (2021). There is no “I” in “AI”. AI & Society, 36, 1035–1046. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-020-01136-2

·       Farhadi, A. (2023a). Trilogy: A new paradigm of consciousness. Neuropsychiatry (London), 13(5), 1–16. https://www.jneuropsychiatry.org/peer-review/trilogy-a-new-paradigm-of-consciousness-17097.html

·       Farhadi, A. (2023b). The evolution of consciousness theories. Qeios. https://doi.org/10.32388/PN41X4

·       Farhadi, A. (2025a). Can AI ever become conscious? Journal of Advanced Artificial Intelligence, 3(2), 141–153. https://doi.org/10.18178/JAAI.2025.3.2.141-153

·       Farhadi, A. (2025b). Toward a field-based model of awareness: Quantum Trilogy Theory of Consciousness. Qeios. https://doi.org/10.32388/BTAFUY

·       Farhadi, A. (2025c). Awareness, automation, and the illusion of free will: Rethinking Libet through Trilogy Theory. Qeios. https://doi.org/10.32388/DLUQV1

·       Farhadi, A. (2025d). Awareness-based choice selection: Improving the decision-making efficiency by using known information. Current Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-025-08072-8

·       Filevich, E., Dresler, M., Brick, T. R., & Kühn, S. (2015). Metacognitive mechanisms underlying lucid dreaming. Consciousness and Cognition, 33, 334–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2015.02.011

·       Hobson, J. A., & Pace-Schott, E. F. (2002). The cognitive neuroscience of sleep: Neuronal systems, consciousness and learning. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 3(9), 679–693. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn915

·       Konkoly, K. R., Appel, K., Chabani, E., Mangiaruga, A., Gott, J., Mallett, R., Caughran, B., Witkowski, S., Whitmore, N. W., Mazurek, C. Y., Berent, J. B., Weber, F. D., Türker, B., Leu-Semenescu, S., Maranci, J. B., Pipa, G., Arnulf, I., Oudiette, D., Dresler, M., & Paller, K. A. (2021). Real-time dialogue between experimenters and dreamers during REM sleep. Current Biology, 31(7), 1417–1427.e6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2021.01.026

·       LaBerge, S., Nagel, L., Dement, W. C., & Zarcone, V. P. (1981). Lucid dreaming verified by volitional communication during REM sleep. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 52(3), 727–732. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1981.52.3.727

·       Lu, J., Sherman, D., Devor, M., & Saper, C. B. (2006). A putative flip-flop switch for control of REM sleep. Nature, 441(7093), 589–594. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04767

·       Schenck, C. H., Bundlie, S. R., & Mahowald, M. W. (1993). Delayed emergence of a parkinsonian disorder in 38% of 29 older men initially diagnosed with idiopathic rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder. Neurology, 43(2), 268–272. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.43.2.268

·       Siclari, F., Baird, B., Perogamvros, L., Bernardi, G., LaRocque, J. J., Riedner, B., Boly, M., Postle, B. R., & Tononi, G. (2017). The neural correlates of dreaming. Nature Neuroscience, 20(6), 872–878. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.4545

·       Voss, U., Holzmann, R., Tuin, I., & Hobson, J. A. (2009). Lucid dreaming: A state of consciousness with features of both waking and non-lucid dreaming. Sleep, 32(9), 1191–1200. https://doi.org/10.1093/sleep/32.9.1191

Acknowledgment:

•       Funding: N/A. The author did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work.

•        

•       Conflict of Interests: The author has no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

•       Author confirms that the material presented in this manuscript has not been previously published, nor is it simultaneously under consideration by any other journal.

•       Author's Contribution: The manuscript has only one author.

·