The preceding scenario furnishes objective definitions of minds in general and of sensory knowledge, as follows.
Past and future situations only rise in the context of minds. They do not ex-ist outside of psyches: outside of minds only present situations occur. Past and fu-ture situations are only imagined, in a simplified way and certainly diversely. In this way – namely, by their being imagined now – their reality is in fact a part of the present situation; in this it exhausts itself. In other words, past and future situa-tions lack any other relevance for extramental reality, since they are neither found, nor do they cause effects, except as assemblages of mental contents envisaged by minds. Thus, all nature is actual only at a given instant, and each present situation determines its own time transformation; nonexistent situations cannot causally de-termine any transformation whatsoever. In this context, because any supra-quantum indeterminacy in it is found to apply to future events, when determining each next macroscopic transformation the actual or last situation is tantamount to its entire preceding history.10 In contrast, minds change quite differently: minds, existentialities or psyches are the realities that transform themselves only on a se-lection of their respective antecedents, not necessarily on all of them. Turning the scales, the things we find situated amid minds in nature (or things that compound the gap among minds’ operative immediacies, or hylozoic hiatus; namely, all ex-tramentalities such as winds, rocks, fungi, trees, and computers, for which a varia-tion in quantity or distribution of motion cannot occur as an effect of internal forces) inevitably use all of their history, tantamount to the last situation, to trans-form themselves as time elapses. Thus while all their yesterdays pack into their now, all our tomorrows are ours to shape. In finding the brute fact of this selection, physics finds in nature the gnoseological apprehension and ability to inaugurate causal series, enacting such selection. Both are found to come conjointly, in dis-crete pops-out, whose efficient actions and reactions become the natural phenom-ena we are trying to describe.
Gnoseological apprehension of sensory mental contents, in general i. e. the act of knowing or noetic act independently of who the mind is that performs it, is the feature of efficiently causal interactions whereby the enacted structureless reac-tions intonate the reacting entity on ranges whose manifestation exhausts the causal efficiency. This knowledge or gnoseological apprehension grasps certain phenomenal reactions, namely intonations of the self-knowing being, which cause to discontinue the outer causal series that had led to them. Such a series of effi-cient causal determinations comes to an end by producing intonative reactions, i. e. phosphene-like manifestations that are both phenomenal (that is, in which a sensa-tion is known) and inefficient to continue the series.