I’m also in general in favour of appropriate and correct terminology. Having said that, I think that what is meant by the terms ego-consciousness, and ‘expanded consciousness’ is fairly obvious, even if those are not the ideal terms, and especially if that leads to unnecessarily convoluted and long sentences.

We finally have something we can agree upon. I’m also a panpsychic panentheist. Could you elaborate on what you mean by ‘personal’? I’m assuming that you’re not using it in the same sense as the Christians’ personal God. I tend to call the ultimate Divine Consciousness impersonal, i.e. beyond personality.

You seem to be interpreting neo-Darwinism from a strictly scientific perspective without the accompanying philosophy, where the word ‘purpose’ is something of a heresy/swear-word. That’s a good start. I still think there’s more to it, however.