Keeping that metaphor in mind, mind that this post is by necessity entirely metaphorical, albeit in as clear a form as I can figure at the moment.
This is my best explanation of the factor most fundamental to my peculiar personality and brand of genius. However weird it sounds, what I'm describing isn't unique to me, but it's probably almost unheard of in the manner I'm describing it because of its extremely abstract nature.
I've always had a very strong form of synesthesia, in a manner which doesn't lend itself as easily to description as the well-known ideas of "colored letters" or "seeing sounds" (though even those descriptions don't entirely convey what's happening in those cases either, which is one of the reasons why so many synesthetes don't realize for a long time that synesthesia is what they have), though I suspect that all cases of synesthesia include some degree of stimulation across my primary medium (and for that matter, I suspect that all people have synesthetic senses, but usually at a level too mild to notice, not to mention with personalities that are frequently not as sensory-oriented). It is, however, in the nature of my primary medium of synesthesia to have a less intense echo out into every other sense, which is most prominent in the connection between audio, visual, tactile, proprioceptive and affective senses as those are the strongest senses for humans. So I'll see and feel, internally and externally, anything I hear, but more prominently I'll experience the stimulus reflecting into my primary medium and reflecting out from there into the other senses and vice versa.
I don't know of any word that points at my primary medium. "This is to the mind as proprioception is to the body" might be an okay analogy. It's a sense which reflects the flow of everything that's going on in my head, whether my sensory input, my verbal and non-verbal trains of thought, memories, exchanges between persona control, et cetera; A sort of quintessence of mind, if you will. In the way that you can describe sight, hearing and touch as all giving you a spatial image, I can describe the parts of this sense as having some manner of spatiotemporal interconnections, and I can describe the objects within this quasi-spatiotemporal field as having several spectrums of qualities akin to things having flavor, color, texture, et cetera, qualities which I think might be what the word "numinosity" points at. Emotions are closer in nature to numinosity than any physical sensation, as emotions are a property felt around internal thoughts related to objects rather than being a more kind of external, objective sensation. If you know what it's like to have intuitive or psychic information pop into your head, that is much closer. As another way to try to point in that direction, think of how the feeling of deja vu occurs on a level that seems somehow similar to an emotion, but different. Take the difference between emotion and that deja vu feeling, and keep going past it in that direction.
Another attempt to describe it is as an abstract medium of "events," kind of like the underlying narrative meaning behind the way things happen. As I sometimes say, "The laws of physics are consistent, but they are only consistent in order to evoke suspension of disbelief." It's the kind of thing people talk about when they describe the properties of the world as being a medium for carrying out God's will, such as in the case of theists who wholeheartedly support evolution and the rest of the scientific progresses which have fundamentalists crapping their pants.
It is possible that having an intense degree of the sense I'm attempting to describe, but in a lower "resolution" and with a less emotionally stable personality (and perhaps with less intelligence and a smaller knowledge base) is fuel for many forms of schizophrenia.
The result of this medium being more prominent in my consciousness than verbal and other forms of thought is that I'm oriented very strongly towards anything "meta." It allows me to accurately perceive patterns between things superficially unrelated, overcome opposites and paradoxes, approach problems from the root, appreciate art, understand why people are not evil, soak up meaning from spiritual systems and entertain stoners. It prevents me from focusing on most specialized skills long enough to great at them, but that's an acceptable sacrifice when I'm able to distinguish MacGuffins from actual happiness. It also leaves me with the bulk of my thoughts nigh-untranslatable into essay format, but there's not really much of a need to. The circles I write around the center are still somehow appetizing to people of certain tastes.