In this contribution, the authors do not intend to give a positive or negative answer to the question of whether there is a hierarchical consciousness, but they want to suggest a methodology that can help in the process of assessing this question. The methodology they suggest is the systems methodology, which is a methodology of enquiry with both scientific and philosophical foundations. The systems methodology provides general knowledge outcomes that can be applied for representing consciousness as an input/output process. With this model of representation, consciousness can be investigated as an ongoing process where both the external and internal contexts are part of the process and determine the outcome.

Within a reductionist view of reality, a model of secularised consciousness can be provided. Whereas within a systems view of reality, a model of sapiential consciousness can be constructed to which wisdom components can be added so it constitutes a more integrated and transdisciplinary system involving science, philosophy and theology. With this model of sapiential consciousness in mind, it is easier to conceive of a hierarchical consciousness as a continuum pervading all levels of reality organisation.

The systems paradigm as an epistemology can help in representing a model of consciousness that is useful for yielding insights on its own very nature. The systems paradigm recognises four principles for explaining reality in its essence (both material and immaterial): hierarchy, emergence, communication and control.

As sustained by many philosophers and scientists nowadays, we can explain the mental phenomena (especially consciousness) rejecting both the reductionist approach and the dualistic one. We can better explain mind and its properties by adopting an holistic epistemology in which the mind “emerges” out of the neurons and cannot in principle be found or predicted by analysing each one neuron or the interactions of their individual properties at any level. In other words: there are more levels of organisation that are at work beyond subatomic parts: mental phenomena—like consciousness—are caused by neurophysiological processes of the brain; but they are a higher-level feature of the entire neural system.

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin shows an approach in which new qualities are coming out during evolution which cannot be deduced by a reductionistic investigation alone, i.e. cannot be deduced by the investigations of its components. This is the first synthesis which could be ruled out by Teilhard de Chardin’s works and by the integration developed by later authors: evolution could be studied using the technique of complexity if we develop a theory related to the Biosphere considered as a whole evolving object. The result of this way of investigating is the discovery of a general movement towards complexity and consciousness. Evolution is characterized by a moving towards which takes place inside a general mechanism that allows the Biosphere to maintain its stability.