Case File — Subject 12
Bosch Institute for Consciousness Studies Experiential Cognition Initiative Internal Document — Restricted Circulation
Subject ID: 12 Date of Intake: 14 March Clinician of Record: Dr. H. V. Bosch Session Duration: 47 minutes Classification: Experiencer (Tier I)
I. Presenting Concern
Subject 12 reports a recurring perceptual event occurring exclusively during transitional sleep states. The subject describes the event as “true,” “felt,” and “undeniable,” while acknowledging no external evidence of occurrence.
The subject does not classify the event as a dream.
The subject insists: “It was there. I know it was there.”
II. Phenomenological Description
The subject reports the appearance of a figure positioned at the foot of the bed. The figure is described with unusual perceptual coherence:
Height: Approximately 5’10”
Proportions: Human-adjacent, symmetrical
Texture: “Like a person, but not quite”
Depth: “I could tell how far away it was”
Presence: “It was in the room, not in my head”
The subject emphasizes that the figure did not speak, gesture, or approach. Its presence was defined entirely by being perceived.
When asked to elaborate, the subject stated:
“It wasn’t doing anything. It was just… there.”
III. Motor-Sensory Interaction
The subject reports attempting to move during the event. Movement was initially restricted (“like pushing through syrup”), followed by sudden release of motor function.
Upon movement, the subject observed:
The figure moved in perfect synchrony.
The movement was momentary.
The figure vanished immediately afterward.
The subject describes this moment as “the collapse.”
Clinician note: This is consistent with prior experiencer reports. The collapse appears to occur when real sensory feedback overrides internally generated phenomenology.
IV. Emotional Tone
The subject reports:
No overt fear
No panic
No sense of threat
No belief in external entities
Instead, the subject describes the event as:
“A presence that shouldn’t be real, but was.”
Clinician note: The absence of fear is notable. The subject’s affect is calm, reflective, almost reverent. This aligns with the Initiative’s hypothesis that emotional neutrality increases phenomenological stability.
V. Cognitive Interpretation
The subject insists the event was:
not a dream
not a hallucination
not imagination
The subject states:
“It was an experience. I don’t care what caused it.”
Clinician note: This phrasing is identical to Subject 7, Subject 9, and Subject 11.
VI. Pattern Consistency
The following elements match prior experiencer reports:
Foot-of-the-bed positioning
Human-adjacent proportions
Momentary motor-synchrony
Immediate disappearance
Neutral emotional tone
Assertion of truth without external reality
Use of the term “presence”
Refusal to classify the event as dream or hallucination
Clinician note: The consistency is statistically improbable under spontaneous conditions. Further analysis recommended.
VII. Recommendation
Subject 12 is cleared for Phase II observation. No intervention required. No external referral recommended.
Clinician note: Subject 12 demonstrates ideal phenomenological receptivity. The experience appears stable, coherent, and replicable.
Filed by: Dr. H. V. Bosch Director, Experiential Cognition Initiative
This appears to be Dr. Bosch's assessment of a Night Terror Case at the Institute.
