Doc's calibration tested for awareness / motivation in the relevant dimension

Consciousness calibration was discovered and presented as a test, simply, of "consciousness." But what does that mean, and how does it work under the hood? Exploring the ontological structure of consciousness illuminates what a calibration result signifies, and, indeed, what was actually calibrated.

Theoretically one might speculate consciousness has no structure, yet, operationally it inevitably expresses through dimensions and is viewed and calibrated through one or more points of observation (cal. 600 ADAP). This applies to Doc's calibrations or anyone's. A level of consciousness is only discernable from a given viewpoint–or many viewpoints simultaneously–which is why point of observation is foundational to consciousness calibration.

A calibration result implies a point of observation has been assumed, whether consciously or not, though it is more useful and informative to know what that is. Not knowing the point of observation in play may result in faulty interpretation or misinformed conclusions about the calibration result. A calibration of motivation, for example, does not imply a calibration of intention, capability or energy, and to interpret it as such leads to false understanding, e.g. Koko the gorilla.

When Doc was not explicitly calibrating for intention, capability or energy, his default point of observation was motivation/awareness, what he called the critical factor, as it is the starting point that activates intelligent or dysfunctional patterns in consciousness. This is how Doc spoke of what his calibrations measured, per Truth vs. Falsehood:

By “Critical Factor Analysis”, it is possible to identify the precise point in a complex system where the least minimal effort can produce the greatest result, e.g., a giant clockworks can be stopped by applying pressure at a very specific point, just as a giant locomotive or battleship can be brought to a complete stop if the correct switch is located.

What Doc didn't explore was dimensions in relation to consciousness calibration. The locomotive and battleship metaphors clearly apply to the physical world, with other dimensions being largely or completely irrelevant. For example, one does not need to be aware of God (crown dimension) in order to stop a locomotive. In this case, the dimension of relevance is the solar plexus.

With Doc's style of calibration, consciousness returns a result in the salient dimension without reference to other dimensions, and that dimension is unnamed, under the hood, though it can be calibrated as an additional test.

Understanding this, we can see the fallacy of applying a one-dimensional, awareness result across other dimensions. For example, if someone has the awareness to stop a locomotive at level 400, it does not mean the person has a 400-level awareness of truth (3rd eye dimension), God, or loving relationships (heart dimension). And certainly it doesn't say anything about other points of observation like intention, capability or energy quality.

So we begin to see that Doc's calibration was a starting point into consciousness research. Why didn't Doc give us the ADAP calibration?

Two reasons. One, Doc's calibration posture is the first–we may say the default–to be encountered in an exploration of consciousness research. With further research, additional postures are revealed, which is the value of learning how the "telescope" that is consciousness calibration works. Two, I suppose the monumental task of introducing mankind to consciousness calibration was already a tall order.