Conceptual animism (CA), is the name for the hyperstitional possibility that agency does not lie in any putative subject but rather only in the symbiosis of conceptual entities within a local space. This local space (the human site as heuristically separate from the conceptual entities), will be known as the regional processor (RP) to indicate this sense of discretion which assimilation, interaction of conceptual entities takes place . The paper will initially explain the hyperstitional notion and its relvance here before explaining the two basic versions of conceptual animism. Subsequent to this we will attempt to show the following reasons to facilitate the hyperstitional insertion of CA: i) Conceptual shot-throughness ii) Autopoiesis. iii) The facticity of thought iv) the dimension of religious/occult thoughtii characterised by what will be known as informational interference (elsewhere known as omens, synchronicity, signs)
That conceptuality is essentially autonomous and uses the space heuristically known as the regional processor as agents for its accretive forms can be a hyperstitional claim.
1. Element of effective culture that makes itself real. 2. Fictional quantity functional as a time-traveling device. 3. Coincidence intensifier. 4. Call to the Old Ones.
We should also note that such a theory is inherently bifurcated. Version one places the conceptual creatures mode of transmission purely within the regional processor. In this version the transmission happens only through communication (speech, writing, body signalling, environmental interpretation) between others and through thought, ideas happening/appearing in the locality. That is, concepts reside in the regional processor... > In the second version the notion of an essential separate existent conceptual sphere (potentially not spatio-temporally restricted) exists autonomously to the regional processor - though they can plug straight into it. This results in a kind of parasitic/symbiotic Platonism.
...the regional processor as territory is also the dialectical/logical battleground for heterogenous CA entities, experienced by the processor as ‘thinking’.
Some regional processors become apparently conscious agents for certain ideologies (conservatives, liberals, communisists, materialists, idealists) whereas some of us are more passive, neither actively supporting the status quo or railing against it. These RPs too are controlled by less radical notions, the God of Baking will attempt to take as greater charge of a RP as it can.
You might want to argue that immersion in practical activity often acts as a conceptual quietener (a la Zen), but any alteration (improvement) to the activity, any reflection on the activity, any anticipation of the activity on the concept are all driven by the conceptual power’s assertion of its own (dialectical) being
Many actions that RPs engage in run with seeming control, emphasising the self script, much that we do has this appearance though. However there are good examples that show near autonomous conceptual interaction. One such instance is illustrated by the doubt machine. The notion here is the closest to something that reinstantiates a thinker. It is not intended to drag this notion back into the system though other than as the transcendental continuity of a RP (mentioned above). The doubt virus is a program that runs the script ‘for any x, can I be certain of it?’ amidst a sea symbiotic other concept creatures....So we want to say something like this: RPs (philosophers) think of doubt as method, but here we want to characterise it as more like a CA, an autonomous conceptual formation deeply related to fear