The Attractor Self: Gyroscopic Dynamics of Selfhood and Identity

Exploring and Mapping: Nested Realities, Emotional Drives, and the Path to Integrated Identity

Genesis

“Do you think there is a core self? I am not convinced”. Sitting opposite of me, a beautiful dark haired woman with piercing blue eyes and a teasing smile, in the sweltering August Belgian heat of 2021. Until that moment, this concept was but some disparate thoughts and observations that hadn’t come together in a model yet. The question posed on this first date opened the door to a free flow synthesis from the model emerged. I already had many experiences that showd me a fluidity of identity, and a certain conservative element. Which I tried to explain. “Well, you know, considering what we know about biology in terms of micronutrient deficiencies and how it influences mood, perception and behaviot, it is changing something”.

She leaned back and the skepticism and a hint of joy on her face as we were sparring it out. “If everything from genetics to social programming mediates our layers, doesn’t that make the ‘core’ redundant? Doesn’t that make the self just an illusion shaped entirely by biology and environment?” The gloves were coming off. “Nature and nurture go together of course, but they are together in a unique remix of sorts that shapes your individual neural architecture and your personality, the expression there of is influenced, shaped and impacted by all these other factors. But it is shaping something that stays present, no matter, or rather, something constant, as people experience this constancy. So that’s hardly an illusion. It’s a red thread of experiencing the self:” She leaned and cocked her head with that inquisitive gaze, mixed with some skeptism and the thrill of our intellectual sparring.

That conversation definitely sparked something that paved the way for this model. Which Over the next 5 years, I spent refining little by little, like a complex neuropsycholigcal puzzle I only had the managed to build the other frame from, and was intuiting a how the puzzle would fit, with the occasional glimpses of the larger picture. The most rudimentary version of this mode was made clear to by my experiences with a host of factors in my biology and neurology that impeded on my personality and identity. Much to my own credit, I intuited many factors that played their respective roles without any serious depth in terms of understanding of these mechanisms. That is to say, I understood how micronutrients, organ systems, brain areas and certain circuits were key aspects of this, but at that time I hadn’t discovered the immense depths that would become apparent in researching neuroscience, cognitive science and affective neuroscience.

A significant aspect for the conceptualization and visualization was that I felt the dynamism was missing from most models. I very often kept running into gaps, misalignments and misfits of models when trying to overlay them on the immense amount of variance I experienced and my clients did. So I set out to bring together elements in a way that made sense and that has high predictive validity. Since a huge part of my job is mapping people’s being, from the psyche to their biology, I wanted a model that could afford doing so. Which meant it had to be robust and be able to stay coherent or consistent with the change, growth and complexity reflected on my clients and myself.

The elegance of the gyroscopic model lends itself to its dimensionality and dynamism. It represents a 3D space in which we find ourselves, and allows layers to contract and expand (a fundamental natural “law” that governs brain function and biological adaptability). Inside the model it had to be able to represent the “hardware” and “software” aspects, or the thin boundaries between how the brain changes and infers identity, and why the brain and identity have become what they are in the first place. This is effectively the basis for applied neuropsychology (how the brain works and changes), and neuropsychodynamics (why the brain got the way, developed that way). It also had to represent the variant and the invariant, in other words, what changes or what doesn’t change. Or even better, in a model that Karl Friston, the professor of neuroscience who conceptualized the Free Energy Principle , brought forward: the conservative and the dissipative.

Lastly, as I developed the idea of the core self more I ventured into hypothalamic drives, which were “strangely” reminiscent of Plato’s model, that you see to an extent in Freud and Jung (my book The Path To Your Aspirational Self goes into more depth on this), which had some convergences with a model that Paul Conti uses in terms of drivers of behavior (which infer personality and identity). It became clear there are indeed fundamental drives, and it was Stuart Sims who graciously showed the way by making me aware of Jaak Panksepp’s work in affective neuroscience with his seven primary emotional systems (which will be outlined in the following section. Alongside the work of Mark Solms, which bolsters and solidifies the work of both Sankepp and Friston, a lot of the pieces fell into place in that what makes the core self a core self to begin with. It turned out that a lot of this groundwork was already done, I just didn’t know, like in Jaak Panksepp and Mark Solms seminal paper The “Id” Knows More than the “Ego” Admits: Neuropsychoanalytic and Primal Consciousness Perspectives on the Interface Between Affective and Cognitive Neuroscience - PMC which we will revisit later.

The real magic happened when I was able to pull it together based on the incredible work of Karl Friston and Mark Solms, with Solms are already integrating Pansepp’s seven emotional systems. Friston’s model of conservative (stable) and dissipative (fluctuating) elements perfectly matched my gyroscope: the core as a resilient attractor state, pulling you back after trips, sleep, or trauma.I had a significant sense of pride and validation of my self-conceptualized model converging with a neuroscience giant, which then turned out to compliment what Panksepp and Solms had already figured out more than 10 years before I ever thought of this, which I also found humbling.

This model isn’t just theory to me, it’s a tool. It helps me map clients’ complexities, blending applied neuropsychology (how to change the brain) with neuropsychodynamics (why it’s wired that way). And now, it’s yours to explore.

The terms sound big, I know, and I’m not just throwing them out there without good reason. They encapsulate important approaches and troubleshooting for the human condition. Despite their complexity and scope, they can be summarized as follows:

Applied neuropsychology mainly asks: How do we change the brain? As such its model of the human is the person as a neural system, where the mind ≈ brain function and problems = dysregulated circuits, insufficient resources, and maladaptive habits.

That also means that its limitations, constraints and weaknesses lie in the realm of affect and identity. Which means it, as a model and approach, can become overly reductionist, as such it “struggles” with meaning, identity, narrative, symbol (since that model is not built for it), and often treats symptoms without touching why this pattern exists in this person.

Which leads us into neuropsychodynamics as it asks: Why did the brain have to become this way in the first place? It assumes that neural patterns are shaped by unconscious conflict, attachment history, and identity formation. Thus, the model of the human is the person as a meaning-making organism, with the brain as an expression of lived history, symptoms as adaptive solutions to earlier developmental constraints.

The ability to map lies at the intersection, or rather, at the integration of these two approaches, since we rely on both to figure out and map how we function across the board. Before we move on, as much as I adore my model, models are just models, not every sense-making profile, encoding profile, and or neurodevelopmental phase will align with every aspect of the model. I use what works for my clients and myself, so as long as it is functional and gets results, I’m pleased. I’m aware there are other models, so there’s no point in pointing that out. Also, these layers and layers are all interconnected and interdependent, which was an aspect that was hard to visualize but is proposed as the dynamic bidirectional (or multi-directional relation) between all layers and dimensions. Since the stage is set, let’s explore the scope of the layers.

The dimensions

Horizontal: multi-aspectual self (different roles).

Effectively situating in the ontology of being a human being with all the complexity in that layer.

Vertical: nested consciousness.

Putting us in a hierarchy of different forms of minds from the micro to the macro.

Core self as attractor state: gyroscope model.

Let’s dive in!

HORIZONTAL DIMENSION

This dimension show cases how the “local” ontology works, which is the entire socio-political-cultural and religious matrix and how those levels inform and shape identity and personality.

1. Core of self

2. Relational/social

3. Digital

4. Aspirational

5. State

6. Environment/Arena (physically)

I go into detail about all of these in my book The Path To Your Aspirational Self. Although I added certain expansions based on Mark Solms and Jaak Panksepp’s work, which are added here, so this is the updated version.

CORE OF SELF (horizontal × vertical in the self sense)

Core Self (Axis - Conservative Attractor State) Stable essence beyond conditioning: authenticity, consciousness, will, presence.

Panksepp’s Primary Emotional Systems (Hypothalamic Drives):

• SEEKING: Curiosity, expectancy, reward-seeking (drives exploration and goal pursuit).

• RAGE: Anger, aggression (motivates defense against frustration/threats).

• FEAR: Anxiety, avoidance (signals danger for survival).

• LUST: Sexual/reproductive desire (promotes bonding and propagation).

• CARE: Nurturance, empathy (fosters caregiving and social bonds).

• PANIC/GRIEF: Separation distress, attachment (handles loss and social connection needs).

• PLAY: Social joy, rough-and-tumble (builds skills, hierarchy, and fun bonding).

• Introjects, personality traits, character (inhibitory + valuation + reward systems—e.g., SEEKING shapes reward biases).

• Belief/narrative/perception complex (affects color lenses, e.g., chronic FEAR biases threat perception).

• Archetypes (e.g., warrior archetype linked to RAGE/PLAY).

• Platonic/Freudian/Jungian Psyche Divisions (Mapped to Panksepp’s Drives):

  • Appetitive/Id/Shadow (Instinctual/Desiring/Unconscious): SEEKING, LUST, RAGE (raw impulses).

  • Spirited/Superego/Self (Moral/Aspirational/Ordering): CARE, PLAY (empathy, transcendence through bonds).

  • Rational/Ego/Ego (Mediating/Integrative): FEAR, PANIC/GRIEF (balances threats/loss with reflection).

  • Horizontal Integration: Core of self (primary), with drives influencing relational (e.g., CARE/PLAY), aspirational (e.g., SEEKING), and state aspects.

  • Vertical Integration: Brain wiring/dispositions as neural substrates for these drives (e.g., dopamine pathways for SEEKING).

  • Dynamics: As the attractor, drives maintain constancy (e.g., pulling back post-psychedelics via affective homeostasis). Aligned rings expand expression (e.g., unlocking PLAY for joy); contraction amplifies dissipative flux (e.g., RAGE in disorder).

This core of self is what I consider the conservative element (“form”), and your states, thoughts, emotions, feelings, etc, being dissipative (flux). This is why I call the gyroscopic model of the self, following that biology, neurology, and state as rings around your core of self that contract and expand, allowing you to express more of your core of self (shifting in favor of a conservative state), or less when contraction happens (a highly dissipative state).

So the Self as an attractor state means that constancy of identity is maintained here, and integrated from the various layers, so you always come back to your Self when we come out of different states such as sleep, anesthesia, psychedelic trips, or other altered states. Essentially, the attractor state is a stable pattern of neural activity toward which a dynamical system, our brain, tends toward its intrinsic wiring and external inputs (nature/nurture).

Once the entire system enters this state, it resists small perturbations and tends to return to it, much like a ball rolling into a valley and settling at the bottom. In words, it is what is constant or stable for your experience of yourself, hence the word “core”.

I would emphasize the Platonic-Freudian-Jungian divide of the soul/psyche is a part of the core of Self.

With its divisions:

Platonic: Appatative Part -> Spirited Part -> Rational Part

Freudian: Id → Superego → Ego

Jungian: Shadow → Self → Ego

The instinctual, desiring, and unconscious substratum of being = Appetitive / Id / Shadow.

The moral, ideal, and aspirational principle that seeks order, virtue, and transcendence = Spirited / Superego / Self.

The mediating and reflective faculty balancing impulse and ideal, integrating the psyche into wholeness = Rational / Ego / Ego.

Effectively this is the gist of the paper of Marks Solms and Jaak Panksepp I mentioned in the beginning: The “Id” Knows More than the “Ego” Admits: Neuropsychoanalytic and Primal Consciousness Perspectives on the Interface Between Affective and Cognitive Neuroscience - PMC , Freud already developed an astoundingly coherent and precise model with account for the drives that Panksepp found. Reading through the papers I found the quotes of Freud’s conceptualizations highly impressive considering he didn’t have access to modern neuroscientific research. Solms and Panksepp effectively, shore up the gaps and correct some mistakes of Freud in the way attributed certain functions, but the model stays largely intact. It’s not a leap to integrate the Jungian model there, because he’s working off the model of his mentor. It might appear to be leap to overlay these models over Plato’s model, although the convergence is so high I don’t think it is a mistake to place it in the modern neuroscientific context. Especially not when we look at Plato describes these parts. He inutited this tripartite division from his own observations, reflections, and whatever guidance or support he had from his teachers and peers.

This is where a lot of philosophical and psychological work would take place. The work isn’t exhaustive to this part, it extrends unto all the extended elements that go into the Self. Since the self is indeed extended into its environment and other people, which speak to it’s multi-aspectuality.

2. Relational / Social

The relational or social layer of the self represents how much our sense of identity is shaped by interactions with others. Every person we encounter creates a “generative model” of us—a neural network in their brain that predicts our behavior based on past data points (conversations, actions, body language). They unconsciously project this image back onto us, reinforcing our habits and self-perception. This creates a massive anchor.

This layer encompasses your interactions in relationships, communities, and society, how validation, conflict, or bonds shape self-perception. CARE and PLAY drives thrive here (e.g., nurturing ties expand empathy), while RAGE or PANIC contracts under toxicity. In the rings, it’s prominent in the environmental/social layer: supportive networks sync rings for expansion; isolation creates friction.

3. Digital

Your online identity, social media personas, virtual interactions, and informational inputs, forms a modern extension of the self. It amplifies state fluctuations (e.g., dopamine hits from likes boost SEEKING, but trolls trigger FEAR/RAGE). This layer intersects with neurological and environmental rings: balanced digital habits rewire neuroplasticity for expansion; overload leads to dissipative chaos.

4. Aspirational

This is your “ideal self”, visions of growth, virtue, and transcendence, driven by SEEKING and CARE. It pulls the core toward evolution (e.g., pursuing meaning expands rings), but ungrounded ideals can contract under failure (amplifying PANIC). Tied to metaphysical and neurological layers, it’s where philosophy meets neurofeedback.

5. State

Moment-to-moment fluctuations in emotion, arousal, and cognition (e.g., flow vs. fatigue) directly modulate drives like joy from PLAY or anxiety from FEAR. This layer overlaps with the state ring: breathwork or HRV training expands positive states; stress contracts them. It’s highly intervenable, making it key for centering.

6. Environment (Physically)

Your tangible surroundings: light, sound, nature, or urban chaos, influence biology and neurology (e.g., EMFs disrupt circadian rhythms, heightening RAGE; green spaces boost CARE via calm). In the outermost ring, alignment fosters expansion; pollution or noise creates contraction. This layer grounds the model in embodiment. This is the arena aspect that builds the agent. There is a lot to be said about phenotypes and genotypes in terms of how they respond to different arenas.

For more on this, you can read The Path To Your Aspirational Self which goes into the entire Agent - Arena feedback loop. The next dimension to situate us in is the vertical dimension and its implication for nested conciousness.

VERTICAL DIMENSION

Reflects how we’re ontologically connected to multiple layers of existence, from the smallest to the biggest aspects of life and reality.

• Mitochondria

• Cells (and Genes)

• Microorganisms

• Tissue systems

• Organs

• Organ brains: heart and gut since they have neurons

• Brain wiring, connectivity, dispositions setting the stage for our own concousness

• Meta-cognition

• Metaphysical lower dimension: spirits, guides, angels, daimons, ancestors, collective unconsciousness

• Metaphysical higher: gods, God, universal consciousness

This gives us some sense of how disturbed our sense of self is, or can be (depending on your neural complexity). All of this is based on the premise of transjective communication, when certain substances or states allow us to communicate with different levels of nested conciousness, whether that is microscopic or cosmic. With that understanding, it leads us to the distribution of the rings and how they would be represented in the rings as follows:

Ring 1: Biological Layer (Innermost - Slow Spin, Strong Gravitational Pull)

Foundational physical substratum; modulates Panksepp drives via bodily states. Disruptions cascade, e.g., hormonal imbalances heighten RAGE or dampen LUST. Components:

• Genetic predispositions, circadian rhythm, hormonal balances (e.g., testosterone amplifies LUST/RAGE; oxytocin boosts CARE), nutrition, sleep, microbiome, physical health, peptides, internal chemical messaging, trauma stored in body/brain (e.g., somatic FEAR responses).

• Horizontal Integration: Influences core traits and state (e.g., hormones affect aspirational drives via SEEKING).

• Vertical Integration: Mitochondria, cells/genes, microorganisms, tissue systems, organs, organ brains (heart/gut—e.g., gut microbiome links to PANIC/GRIEF via vagus nerve).

• Dynamics: Optimized biology expands drive access (e.g., good sleep enhances PLAY); disruptions contract, shifting to negative affects like FEAR.

Ring 2: Neurological Layer (Second Ring - Adaptive Spin)

Bridge between biology and cognition; trainable to regulate drives (e.g., neuroplasticity retrains habitual RAGE responses). Components:

• Brain structure, neuroplasticity, neurotransmitter balance (e.g., dopamine for SEEKING; serotonin modulates FEAR), Default Mode Network (DMN) activity, conditioning, habitual patterns, subconscious associations, neuropsychological narratives.

• Horizontal Integration: Shapes relational/social (e.g., conditioning affects CARE expression) and aspirational (e.g., rewiring for sustained SEEKING).

• Vertical Integration: Brain wiring/connectivity/dispositions, meta-cognition (reflecting on drives, e.g., noticing PANIC patterns).

• Dynamics: Interventions (e.g., meditation dampens FEAR, boosts PLAY) expand the system; imbalances contract, fostering chaotic drive fluctuations.

Ring 3: State Layer (Third Ring - Fastest Spin, Highly Responsive)

Moment-to-moment fluctuations; directly expresses/modulates drives as emotions (e.g., joy from PLAY in flow states). Components:

• Emotional states (fear from FEAR, joy from PLAY, shame from PANIC), stress/arousal (sympathetic amps RAGE; parasympathetic calms), cognitive states (focus via SEEKING, fatigue dulling LUST), breath, HRV, sleep/hydration/nutrition influences.

• Horizontal Integration: State (primary), intersecting with digital (e.g., online triggers RAGE) and environment.

• Vertical Integration: Overlaps with organ brains (e.g., heart influencing CARE via HRV).

• Dynamics: Responsive changes expand positive drives (e.g., breathwork enhances SEEKING); disorder contracts, amplifying negative ones like PANIC.

Ring 4: Environmental/Social Layer (Outermost Physical Ring - Variable Spin, Exerts Pressure)

External interfaces; shapes drive expression through context (e.g., social validation boosts CARE/PLAY). Components:

• Social context (relationships via CARE/PANIC, conflict triggering RAGE), cultural/religious programming, societal narratives, physical environment (light/sound affecting arousal), economic/political conditions, online/informational inputs (e.g., media amplifying FEAR).

• Horizontal Integration: Relational/social (primary), digital, environment, aspirational (e.g., cultural ideals channel SEEKING).

• Vertical Integration: Influences meta-cognition through inputs.

• Dynamics: Alignment expands drives (e.g., supportive environments foster LUST/PLAY); misalignment creates friction, contracting to survival modes (FEAR/RAGE).

Ring 5: Metaphysical Layer (Optional Outer Ring - Ethereal Spin, Transcendent Influence)

Beyond physical, integrates drives with higher consciousness (e.g., collective unconscious archetypes linked to CARE/SEEKING). This follows a Neoplatonic model. Components:

• Lower: Spirits, guides, angels, daimons, ancestors, collective unconscious.

• Higher: Gods, God, universal consciousness.

• Horizontal Integration: Enhances aspirational and relational via transcendent drives.

• Vertical Integration: Metaphysical dimensions (primary).

• Dynamics: Mindful integration expands holistic drive expression; unchecked leads to overload.

With the gyroscope's rings now in place we can start to bring it all together. Although before I offer the conclusion and the synthesis, I want to hihlight one less aspect, and that is the nature of the attractor state for the core of self, and how interdependent all these different layers are.

The Attractor Self

Sort of saving the best for last, why the self as an attractor state?

Because this is the set of information that everything self-organizes and self-structures around, like a gravitational well. In my previous article, The Invisible Scales of Choice I wrote about this in terms of habits and priors, because behaviors have an identity/personality element. This became clear to me when I read through some of Friston’s work and Dynamical Systems Theory (DST), In DST, an attractor is a stable state or set of states toward which a system evolves over time, resisting perturbations and “pulling” trajectories back (like a ball settling in a valley). Which aligns or converges with Friston’s perception recursive biomimetic self-organization, because it has to organize around something, that something being a hierarchical Markov blanket, a boundary that integrates multi-scale information (from subcellular to environmental) to minimize variational free energy (surprise/uncertainty), and of course, adding Solms and Pankepp’s work to this about how affect drives consciousness and personality rooted in the brainstem extending into the limbic system.

The self thus gravitates, organizes and structures itself around those elements. It also speaks to the stickiness of the whole “thing” which grounds the explanation mechanistically why so many people struggle with perceptions, beliefs, narratives, and habits. A lot of perpetuation in pop psychology and new age spirituality assumes a top down imperative that is positioned as an “overwriter” that can just supersede all of biology on will. Which is ridiculous if you really think about. This doesn’t negate that the mind or psyche ahs serious power in influencing biology, obviously it does, it is a two way street. Since so much of consciousness, personality, and identity is rooted in the subconscious structures of the brainstem (PAG), it stands to reason one has to work at that level, or speak to those structures to be able to properly change the things that flow forth from identity, such as your narratives and beliefs, as they aren’t just cognitive but deeply emotional as well.

Which is why I outlined the core of self as the center as it illustrates perfectly how things emanate from there and gravite towards it. In another Mark Solms paper The Hard Problem of Conciousness and the Free Energy Principle he shows that lesions in the PAG (brainstem) “shut off” or wipes consciousness.

“Consciousness is obliterated by focal lesions of the brainstem core—in a region conventionally described as the extended reticulothalamic activating system (ERTAS). Recent findings indicate that the smallest lesions within the brain stem which cause total loss of consciousness (i.e., coma) are located in or near the parabrachial nuclei of the pons.”

Which tells us something of the primacy of the whole matter, where decorticated animals and individuals were still conscious but highly emotional, as their brainstem now lacked a “brake” (top down inhibition). The complexity now emerges of the influence of each ring on our personality and identity, as they all influence and shape all these elements I already mentioned such as beliefs, narratives, perceptions, and behaviors. The bell that gets rung the most is that people often come with this “it is not x it is Y” when it comes to affording change, or that is is one thing rather than the other. When the casual chain of consciousness and personality is already established. And most importantly, that EVERYTHING matters in building the construct of identity. Depending on what you struggle with, the degree or intensity of the layer and element will matter. They all influence each other, and every layer is involved with the other in some form or shape. So if you pull on thread, they all respond in some sense. The challenge remains at addressing the issue either a the right layer, or in an integrated fashion. I’ll outline an example below.

Let’s say your brain methylation of B6 is undermethylated, that effectively means it is not metabolism B6 very well, which has been shown to significantly impact mood (state) and thus shift perception and those affective drives. That’s not an identity issue. When we introduce higher amount of B6, and balance other potential resource issues, all of a sudden the person in question notices they FEEL differently, behave differently, and thus expresses themselves as identity in their external patterns and internal perceptions differently. Then the question emerges, was this present from birth, is that a familial thing? Or is it an extension of some type of adverse childhood experience, or even a traumaticexperiencein adulthood? Since it’s been show that methylation can change with various therapies, such as:
Vinkers et al. (2019) Soldiers with PTSD (N=44) using EMDR or tf-CBT
Carvalho Silva et al. (2024) Depression patients with ELS using EMDR
Yehuda et al. (2021) PTSD patients using PE with hydrocortisone

All of which saw various changes to methylation. And thus how the patient/client felt and behaved. Depending on your sensitivities and gaps, those will exert the most dominance of various elements of your identity and states, which is why this model came to be in the first place, because it helps to map where the issues are and even what scale.

Ultimately, this sets the stage for the book I am writing, properly exploring and mapping all these elements in how they shape personality and identity. This book doesn’t have a working title yet, though the outlines have already been created, and significant parts of it are being written in what I consider to be a “horizontal integration” which includes the books I already wrote and the upcoming one, The Intuitive Self: unlocking subconscious wisdom through interoception, intuition and emotion. All of the writing on Substack and X are microexpressions of the intention of working towards the book. It helps with structuring the conceptualizations that eventually make it into the books.