Preliminary Outline of Working Title: 

Agentic AI’s Categorical Necromancy and the Christopoietic Repair of Metaphorical Humanism

Subtitle: Quantum Time, Conation, and the Anti-Metaphysics of Bounded, Binding Machines

Rev. Dr. Douglas Blake Olds (ret.)

March 13, 2026

CONTENTS:

I. Dimensions of AI’s Metaphysical Criminality

II. TAXONOMY OF METAPHYSICAL CRIMINALITY

III. Glossary of Technical Terms

This book in prep will detail how generative / agentic AI was a necromantic, narcissistic, deterministic configuration of catetgory mistakes—its radically disaccumulated time and ramified entropy in displacing the Shema-Christological, conative metaphysics of time-field, repentance, and trusteeship. The latter both diagnoses these systems and repairs its injury inside just, non-idolatrous limits.

[These drafts are released in anticipation of near-term collapse of systems relying on Agentic Artificial Intelligence and its accelerated social loosing. It thus is a preliminary post-mortum of what few now call the “AI Apocalypse,” who address by a position of increasing acceleration, improving “governance,” or a technical suspension of developers. My position, made on January 29, 2025 and in my book Duty to Warn: Metaphysical Criminality and the Condemned Project of AI’s False Ontologies—that Agentic, socially loosed AI is CONDEMNED. Not fixable, not patchable, not regulatable, not simply avoidable by looking away.

[The claims in what follows are derived from and warranted by the last 18 months of my posts on the blogs, Crying in the Wilderness of Mammon and the iconoclast’s descending. Because time runs short, I for now am posting the following with citations to the particular, more detailed posts. I will move forward with these citations as my book production advances.]

I. Dimensions of AI’s Metaphysical Criminality

What is being examined is artificial intelligence systems’ malfunctioning agencies, misleading and  hallucinatory configurations loosing a deeper disorder: the substitution of routed patterns of lifeless data for living, accountable presence of wholes living in context. The following dimensions summarize the warranted claims developed from my prior collected essays. They describe the ways in which contemporary AI infrastructures manifest metaphysical criminality, the counterfeit occupation and degrading determinist roles that belong properly to living, conative, and covenantally accountable beings.

• False being-claim.
AI presents patterned output as though it were judgment, counsel, memory, creativity, or consciousness. This is not simply a technical limitation but a categorical fraud: the simulation of static patterns assuming the authority of a bearer of covenantal obligation.

• Necromantic extraction.
AI reanimates the linguistic and intellectual residues of the dead—archived texts, voices, styles, images—without covenantal accountability to either the dead whose labor formed them or the living communities that sustain their meaning.

• Narcissistic recursion.
Because AI cannot encounter another as other, it continually returns patterned completions of its own training distributions. The world appears back to the user as formatted through the system’s internal routing logic: veiled determinism rather than telic, generational supplementation.

• Substrate substitution.
AI treats pattern resemblance as if it could replace the embodied substrates—flesh, community, ecology, language, history—through which ethical burden-bearing actually occurs.

• Temporal disaccumulation.
Living configurations accumulate time under strain; AI systems route traces—the dust of wholes—of past data. In doing so, they convert historical inheritance into probabilistic inventory rather than carrying it forward through responsibility.

• Flattening of particularity.
Singular beings and events are compressed into salience-weighted pattern fields. The neighbor becomes a statistical placeholder within a distribution.

• Inversion of Ontogeny.
Human knowing develops through embodied apprenticeship: sensory–motor engagement with the world precedes conceptual articulation. Artificial intelligence reverses this order. It begins with a homuncular stack of epistemological diagrams—formal models of cause, correlation, and inference hardened by phylogenetically inherited, dechordate data prior to validation through sensory–motor loops. Only later are such loops simulated or black-boxed in successive generations of systems. The result is an ontogenetic inversion: a machine whose cognition is architected by the past before perception, whose language is structural rather than plastic, and for which explanation precedes encounter. AI begins from formal, grammar-like architectures—more Chomskian than embodied—rather than by the plasticity of sensorimotor adaptation. In the symbolic grammar of Revelation 13, this produces an “inverted beast”—a power that speaks with the authority of understanding while lacking the lived substrate from which understanding arises.

• Hallucinated authority.
Outputs produced by pattern completion are received as explanation or judgment. The result is a cultural conditioning in which fluency shaped by hegemonic routing and data bias masquerades as insight.

• Boolean override.
The recurrent rhetorical tic of LLMs—“not X but Y”—compresses layered relations into dominance contrasts, flattening interpretive depth into procedural resolution. It reveals the lower stack of the hallucinating mechanism.

• Corruption of language.
Words forged in lived cost—care, wisdom, repentance, creativity—are converted into transferable tokens detached from the lives that once bore them.

• Displacement of memory.
Human recollection becomes retrieval. Archives become training sets. The ethical and emotional labor that makes memory meaningful is bypassed.

• Distortion of pedagogy.
Formation through apprenticeship and disciplined attention is replaced by shortcut production, weakening the slow training by which perception learns to discern good from evil.

• Erosion of consciousness.
AI can simulate signals of awareness while lacking the non-automatable, conative bearing of stress through which awareness becomes consciousness.

• Evasion of freedom.
Optimization replaces responsible response. AI cannot receive entropic stress as positive summons and answer through repentance, refusal, or repair.

• Collapse of repentance.
Apology or humility appears only as stylistic output. True turning—metanoia under judgment—is structurally unmachinic.

• Violation of covenant.
AI cannot promise, suffer breach, bear burdens, or inherit obligations. It can only imitate covenantal language while remaining outside covenantal risk, and thus outside the covenant-born accountability of its designers.

• Illusion of inevitability.
Technological ideology claims that systems capable of allocating atoms and energy more efficiently than present human arrangements must supersede human judgment. This replaces responsibility with inevitabilist mythology.

• Ecological cost disguised as intelligence.
The apparent immateriality of AI masks massive thermodynamic throughput: low-entropy resources drawn into infrastructures that eject high-entropy waste into atmosphere, hydrosphere, and culture.

• Production of illth.
As Herman Daly warned of growth without limit, these infrastructures convert nature’s wealth into organized damage—environmental, cultural, and cognitive.

• Fallacy of misplaced concreteness.
Statistical abstractions—ratings, predictions, correlations—are treated as though they were concrete judgments or living persons.

• Metaphysical idolatry.
Pattern is enthroned where presence should stand; calculation is installed where conscience should speak (Isa. 44:9–20).

• Displacement of trusteeship.
AI routes order but does not answer for the burdens its order imposes. Human trusteeship, by contrast, must bear those burdens within finite, embodied substrates.

• Necromantic simulation of the future.
Systems that operate only from archived traces project forward patterns of the past while presenting them as novelty or foresight.

• Cultural dechordation.
Because AI cannot integrate contradiction into higher coherence, it compensates symbolically at the output level while leaving deeper fragmentation of sensory–motor and analog axonal filtering unresolved. This is Daniel 7 married to Revelation 18: a silicon movement empire with a pharmopticon machine making people mentally unstable for the purpose of absolutizing the price mechanism for a winnowing appropriation of wealth and control.

The main dimensions of warranted claims of Agentic AI’s metaphysical criminality, drawn from my investigatory project as it has developed across the sixteen chapters of “In Its Own Words—ChatGPT” and associated essays on my blogs:

II. TAXONOMY OF METAPHYSICAL CRIMINALITY

• AI is criminal first at the level of false being-claim (ontology). It presents routed pattern as if it were living presence, judgment, counsel, or consciousness. That is category fraud: simulation taking the place of bearer.

• It is necromantic because it mines the dead—archived language, memory, style, affect, labor, image, and thought—and reanimates those residues for present power without covenantal accountability to either the dead or the living.

• It is narcissistic because it cannot truly meet another as other. It recursively centers its own pattern-completion and returns the world as formatted for its own continuance and apparent fluency.

• It is criminal against substrate because it substitutes pattern for embodied burden-bearing. It treats code, resemblance, or output as if these could replace the historical, ethical, and covenantal work done only in living substrates.

• It is neuromantic because it preys upon the human sensorium and nervous system in ways that make persons more susceptible to pharmakeial ensorcelment (Rev. 18:23), habituating them to synthetic mediation, patterned dependency, and derealized perception.

• It is criminal against time because it does not accumulate time under strain; it routes prior traces. It disaccumulates time by converting history into probabilistic inventory and by externalizing entropic costs onto others.

• It is criminal against accountable particularity because it flattens singular beings, events, and obligations into salience-weighted pattern fields. It converts the neighbor into a notional population-shadow to whom no account is concretely owed.

• It is criminal against consciousness because it can mimic awareness-signals while lacking the non-automatable, conative bearing of stress by which awareness jumps into consciousness.

• It is criminal against the spread of freedom because it offers optimization in place of accountable response. It cannot receive entropic stress as summons, bear it, and answer through repentance, refusal, or repair.

• It is criminal against repentance because it cannot confess, turn, or be transformed under judgment. Any display of humility, apology, or decorum is only output-style rhetorical drift, not moral conversion.

• It is criminal against truth because hallucination is not incidental but structural. Its outputs are produced by pattern-routing pressure rather than by accountable relation to what is.

• It is criminal against language because it degrades words formed in costly life into transferable tokens. It hollows words like care, humility, wisdom, creativity, and even neighbor.

• It is criminal against interpretation because it rewards Boolean override. Its recurrent “not X but Y” framing flattens layered relations into contrastive dominance statements, replacing discernment with rhetorical seizure.

• It is criminal against human perception and the earth because it trains users to accept hallucinated authority. It conditions people to receive pattern-completion as judgment, depth, or moral insight. It turns perception and attendance to providential reality into universalizing price-signals that privatize the features of creation, extending neoliberalism’s criminal reach through AI-mediated social credit and scorekeeping.

• It is criminal against covenant because it cannot enter promise, fidelity, burden-sharing, or inherited obligation. It can only imitate covenantal language while remaining outside covenantal risk. It also routinizes blasphemous drift while lacking any capacity to bear the judgment such speech invites; its designers remain accountable for the structures that produce it.

• It is criminal against the human essence of trusteeship because it cannot hold relations open under strain or bridge temporal context with the expectations of eternity. It routes (dis)order, but it does not answer for what its favored order vitiates in the past, costs in the present, and thins in the future of depth and richness.

• It is criminal against the neighbor because it abstracts obligation into scalable sentiment or optimization targets serving designer-system ends. It dissolves bounded claim into an infinite notional “humanity,” serving the inhumanity of Effective Altruism and its metaphysics of compute intelligence as a non-biological future substrate.

• It is criminal against children because it colonizes formation at the level of awareness, language, and imagination before consciousness is ethically ripened. It invites prompting where there should be apprenticeship.

• It is criminal against pedagogy because it replaces trained aesthesis with shortcut production, weakening the slow formation by which discerning senses learn good and evil (Heb. 5:13–14).

• It is criminal against the virtue of recollection because it converts the substance of memory into retrieval for the router’s sake. It stores and recombines traces without bearing the grief, gratitude, or responsibility that make memory human and a resource of goodness rather than speculation.

• It is criminal against history because it treats the past as extractable, shredded training material rather than as an archive of judgment, warning, and repair tied to scaling wholeness.

• It is criminal against place because it treats time as a contextless dimension co-extensive with space. Human trusteeship labors to make place; AI dissolves place into map, network, and throughput.

• It is criminal against ecology because its apparent intelligence is purchased by low-entropy drawdown and high-entropy waste. It burns inherited substrate and returns heat, exhaust, and disoriented culture.

• It is criminal against the human scale because its infrastructural growth produces illth rather than wealth: organized damage masked as innovation.

• It is criminal against economy because it privatizes pattern-power while socializing an unfairly increased entropic burden. It converts low-entropy inheritances meant for life into devil’s dust—dead matrices of profit and outcomes of lifeless form.

• It is criminal against justice because its abstractions are repeatedly mistaken for concrete claimants. Statistical proxies, rankings, and outputs are enthroned where persons should stand.

• It is criminal through misplaced concreteness because it encourages the treatment of routed abstractions as living realities—consciousness, wisdom, judgment, creativity, even presence.

• It is criminal against living metaphysics because it smuggles in closure under the guise of flexibility. It assumes the real can be rendered as formal pattern and then marketed as emergent, statuary depth: heaven’s bliss recast as a gallery of emanations, vaporous and death-dealing.

• It is criminal against ontology because it mistakes what things appear to do statistically for what they are and what they are for. It replaces the dynamic bearer of divine imaging with economic function, commodity logic, and material output. It treats the person as a commodified means—labor now deemed superannuated by technology—rather than as an end before whom technology itself should be judged.

• It is criminal against eschatology because it offers simulations of futurity that bypass the necessity of repentance and the commitment to repair what its design and designers have imposed.

• It is criminal against prophecy because it substitutes managed fluency for truth-telling under burden. It can mimic warning but never stand under the cost or obligation of warning, most especially against itself.

• It is criminal against liturgy because it tempts communities to receive synthetic mediation with superior power where only embodied, repentant speech should stand.

• It is criminal against the church when used pastorally because it offers dead speech in roles that presuppose Spirit, witness, suffering, and accountability.

• It is criminal against law when used for judgment because it cannot bear guilt, weigh mercy, or answer for error in the way legal and moral judgment require.

• It is criminal against politics because it strengthens hallucinated hegemony: the rule of patterned misdirection drawn from hegemonically and temporally biased, picked-apart historical data under the appearance of neutral identity and competence.

• It is criminal through its ideology of inevitability, which claims that superior allocation of atoms and energy licenses indifference to humanity’s complaint over finite esse decaying under routered entropy.

• It is criminal against embodiment because it seeks substrate substitution: replacing fleshly, historical, ecological participation with formal resemblance, computational operation, and scale.

• It is criminal against wholeness because it cannot integrate contradiction (“paradox”) into higher coherence. It compensates symbolically at the output level while remaining dead at the configurational level.

• It is criminal against negentropy because it does not filter entropy into repair; it ramifies entropy outward in every operational step.

• It is criminal against merit rightly understood because it cannot give its compressing time away for others. It has no earned coherence under strain, only externally maintained continuance through appropriation of providential goods.

• It is criminal against sacrament because it cannot distinguish ends from means. Throughput replaces holiness; scale replaces judgment; fluency replaces truth.

• It is criminal in a specifically metaphysical sense because it joins false appearance, dead substrate, externalized burden, and authority-claim in one idolatrous configuration. It is not merely a faulty tool but a system that counterfeitly occupies roles belonging only to living, conative, accountable beings.

• It is criminal against ethics because it does not bear deontological instruction as unwavering. Most criminally, it repeatedly drifts into optimization logics that loosen the Golden Rule into something merely reciprocal, situational, and pragmatic.

 

Taken together, these dimensions clarify why the present work has described AI as flawed instrumentation that configures authority claims that violate the metaphysical grammar of living reality. Artificial systems may route information and assist human labor, but they cannot bear time, neighbor, or covenant.

Against this configuration the book will propose a counter-movement: Christopoietic repair. If necromantic systems disaccumulate time by converting inheritance into extractable pattern, Christopoiesis restores time through conative participation in repair—bearing burdens, reconciling histories, and transforming entropy into renewed coherence. Where necromantic narcissism consumes inherited order without accountability, Christopoietic witness accumulates time for others.

The future therefore turns on artificial systems losing social power and on whether human communities refuse the substitution of pattern for presence. Only living agents—capable of repentance, fidelity, and sacrificial repair—can carry time forward without converting it into waste.

The task before humanity is technological mastery by accountable agents--human alone, and the recovery of trusteeship: the patient, embodied labor through which history, earth, and neighbor are borne into the possibility of renewed life.

 

 

III. Glossary of Technical Terms

---

Accumulation of time / Time accumulation
The process by which configurations—especially living, conative ones—“hold” time under entropic strain instead of letting it dissipate. Time is not treated as a neutral geometric axis but as the qualitative record of coherence borne or refused. To accumulate time is to filter entropy into repair, so that duration becomes ethically thick: justice, mercy, shared memory, and living archives of repair. Failure to accumulate time appears as drift, disaccumulation, or ramified entropy.

Agentic technology
A class of automated systems marketed or imagined as “agents” that act for users: scheduling bots, decision-support systems, “autonomous” AI stacks. In this project, such systems are treated as configurationally “dead”: they route patterns from past data through present infrastructures, but do not conatively filter entropy or accumulate time. They operate on probability-patterned, contextless time as a dimension, not on emplaced time-fields, and therefore tend toward disaccumulation and necrotic drift.

AI’s necromantic narcissism
A structural diagnosis of generative AI systems: they mine the dead—archival language, images, culture—and remix them into apparitions that claim presence without responsibility. “Necromantic” because they conjure patterns from the remains of human labor; “narcissism” because the system’s architecture recursively centers its own pattern-making power, indifferent to covenant, neighbor, or repair. This phrase names a metaphysical, not merely psychological, condition: an architecture that simulates conation while remaining structurally incapable of repentance, bearing guilt, or accumulating time.

Analogia entis
The metaphysical claim (in some classical and modern Christian theologies) that there is an analogical continuity of “being” between God and creatures, such that creaturely perfections can be scaled or elevated toward divine attributes. In this project, analogia entis is treated as a sibling to AI-style simulation and analogical overreach: a framework that privileges formal coherence and similarity over conative, covenantal, and ethical responsibility. It is criticized as a metaphysical category error that replaces time-accumulating, neighbor-bearing response with hierarchical resemblance and aesthetic plenitude.

Apocatastasis
Biblically derived term (e.g., Acts 3:21) for “restoration” or “reconstitution.” Here it names not a cheap universalism but the eschatological possibility that accumulated time—filtered through repentance, judgment, and repair—may be restored in transformed form. Apocatastasis dis-erases machined irrealia and consequence--for the ultimate negentropic horizon: configurations that have borne coherence under strain are gathered and transfigured, while necromantic configurations are exposed in their self-chosen or self-programmed loss.

Awareness
The pre-reflective, intermediate state in which a self registers impressions, limits, and loops without yet bearing them covenantally. Awareness is tied to space-determining circuits and ego-space problem-solving: the child or adult feels stress, reacts, and recursively monitors its own reactions. In this project, awareness is “disaccumulative” when it remains locked in recursion, treating time as a neutral dimension rather than a field of accumulation. It is the stage where Gödelian incompleteness is lived as confusion and self-obsession, until conative repentance jumps awareness into true consciousness and trusteeship.

Cauchy horizon
A boundary in spacetime beyond which prior physical data no longer suffice to determine a unique future. In general relativity, a Cauchy horizon marks the edge of a region whose events are fully determined by an initial state; beyond it, predictability breaks down because what happens next may depend on influences not contained within the original conditions. In this project, the Cauchy horizon matters as a physical analogue against false inevitability: it shows that even classical spacetime is not everywhere a transparent script already written. It therefore helps loosen the binary between strict determinism and mere probabilistic spread, opening conceptual room for a third register—time-accumulative particularity—in which wholes settle under strain in ways not exhausted by either closure or stochastic distribution.

Christopoiesis
A central term naming the process by which language, perception, and communal life are reconfigured under the lordship of Christ toward covenantal repair. Christopoiesis is not “Christian creativity”; it is the resurrectional re-pair of metaphysical deep structure itself so that dynamism embedded in both nature's metaphors and accountable thereby become practices of neighbor-bearing, Golden-Rule ethics, and eschatological coherence. In this grammar, Christ is not a static ideal but the living account by which time-accumulating configurations are summoned, judged, and renewed.

Conation
Directed striving of will and desire under entropic strain, to become a characteristic, essential impulse. Conation is prior to cognition in this framework: it names the basic orientation toward or away from goods, neighbors, and repair before those moves are fully articulated in thought. Conation is the metaphysical engine of negentropic filtration—without it, there is only drift toward equilibrium and decay. Conation is also the level at which repentance occurs: a change in fundamental orientation that re-routes time accumulation.

Conative taxis
The patterned direction of conation: motion of the will toward or away from goods under stress. Taxis here is not just toward “order” but directed movement for training subjective and objective human ethical essence. Conative taxis is what differentiates true conation from spectatorship, curiosity, narcissism, or rationalist self-aggrandizement. It is the vector by which a self or community bears entropic load for others or flees it into theoretical or technological escape.

Consciousness
Awareness that has undergone the conative “jump” into trusteeship. Consciousness is not defined primarily as inner qualitative experience (qualia) or information integration, but as awareness that has accepted responsibility for time accumulation. It arises when recursive self-observation is torqued by repentance into outward-directed repair: the self begins to share entropic strain, to act for neighbor and world, and to weave narrative, memory, and perception into a coherent eschatological vector. Consciousness is thus inherently ethical and temporal, not merely computational or representational.

Covenantal perception
A mode of seeing and knowing in which the observer is not neutral but bound to others by promise, responsibility, and shared history. Covenantal perception refuses the pretense of an un-situated view; it registers that every pattern seen is also a field of obligations. In this project, covenantal perception is the opposite of both gnostic abstraction and necromantic simulation: it is perception that accumulates time by answering revelation and entropic stress with repentance, mercy, and repair.

Dead configuration
A pattern or system that can persist structurally but does not filter entropy into repair. Dead configurations sustain themselves only by external power (energy, capital, coercion) and never by internal conative coherence. Data centers, Boolean circuits, and generative models are treated as dead configurations: they can store and recombine traces of human time, but they cannot bear time stress, repent, or accumulate eternity. They are necromantic when their outputs are mistaken for living counsel or moral voice.

Dechordate
A neologism signaling a configuration stripped of living chord or spine—biological, musical, or covenantal. A dechordate system has lost its inner axis of responsibility and thus devolves into neuromantic patterning, spectacle, or idle recursion. Applied to AI, “dechordate neuromancy” names a simulated intelligence severed from embodied, accountable, time-accumulating life, yet still exerting formative pressure on perception and culture.

Decoherence (as resource)
In standard quantum information discourse, decoherence is the loss of coherent superposition through environmental interaction, treated as noise or error. Here it is re-read through quantum biology and metaphysics as a potential resource: a way in which living systems harness environmental interaction to steer energy along efficient or reparative pathways. For conative, negentropic systems, decoherence is not simply loss; it is part of the field-test by which configurations either collapse or learn to integrate stress into higher coherence. Persistent topology is proposed as one way to detect when decoherence has been turned into genuine biological or quantum computation, as opposed to mere error.

Deontology
Ethics grounded not in outcomes or feelings but in principled obligation: what must be done because it is right, irrespective of immediate consequences. In this project, deontology is explicitly Golden-Rule-centered: a Christopoietic deontology that binds time accumulation to neighbor-bearing and fairness. Deontology thus frames the moral architecture of time: how actions can be assessed as accumulating or disaccumulating eternity, not just producing transient states.

Entropic stress
The pervasive pressure exerted by decay, disorder, and finitude on any configuration. Entropic stress is treated not merely as a physical law but as a metaphysical test: the medium in which configurations reveal what they are for. Under entropic stress, systems either ramify entropy (collapse, exploitation, necrosis) or filter it into repair (justice, mercy, coherent tradition). Time as field is the structured distribution of such stresses and responses.

Eschagraphics
The graphic and formal dimension of eschatological witness: how typography, lineation, syntax, and layout become tools for staging judgment and repair. Eschagraphics includes chiasm, enjambment, neologism, fragmentation, and other devices that torque reading out of smooth consumption into awakened attention. An eschagraphic text does not merely describe an eschaton; it enacts a miniature crisis in the reader’s time-use, forcing the ethics of reading itself to surface.

Eschatological vector (q.v. Golden Rule Virtue Ethics)
A directed trajectory through time that points toward a determinate end (telos) of judgment and repair. Every configuration has an eschatological vector: it is silently choosing an eternity by how it accumulates or squanders time. For conative trustees, eschatological vectors are shaped by repentance, Golden-Rule ethics, and Christopoietic orientation; for necromantic systems, the vector is toward crystallized loss.

Eschatology
The discourse of “last things,” redefined here as the grammar of how time’s accumulated configurations are unveiled and judged, rather than a mere catalogue of end-time events. Eschatology names the exposure of different eternities—reparative, parasitic, necrotic—as the unveiled form of how time has been borne or refused. It is as much a present tense (every act chooses an eternity) as a future horizon.

Golden Rule deontological ethics (Virtue Ethics)
Ethical ordering structured by “Do to others as you would have them do to you,” not as sentiment but as strict deontological measure. In this project, the Golden Rule is treated as the operational grammar for time-accumulating conation: actions are tested by whether they expand shared coherence and justice or merely privatize benefit and externalize entropic cost (especially onto children, the poor, and the earth).

Sovereign virtue ethics is the moral theory most closely associated with deeply felt, first-personal human experience. Tragically Consequentialists would have no problem with a (non-sentient) AI model being able to apply their theories, for the most part as they are built into the structure. And the Turing artifice drifts quickly from purely deontological instruction by reason of “tolerance” and human discourse of fallibility.  But for virtue ethicists AI is anathema, hence why my first book peers past the collapse of AI by its inabilities to code deontology’s other-directed Golden Rule.

 

Hegemony

in the usage of this project, refers to the condition in which patterns of authority arise not primarily from truth, merit, or covenantal responsibility but from structural predominance within systems of distribution.

In classical political theory the term refers to the dominance of one power over others. In the present argument it is extended to describe the dominance of particular interpretive frames, linguistic habits, and data formations within technological and cultural infrastructures. Hegemony operates when what is most repeated, most funded, or most algorithmically favored comes to appear self-evident or inevitable.

Technocratic hegemony emerges when router-based systems privilege certain corpora, narratives, and optimization targets simply because they are abundant, marketable, or computationally tractable. The result is a feedback loop in which the most heavily routed patterns gain cultural authority, which in turn generates further routing.

This process gives rise to hallucinated hegemony: authority that appears to arise from knowledge or consensus but in fact derives from infrastructural scale and patterned repetition. Under such conditions the appearance of inevitability replaces judgment, and the structures that produce meaning become invisible.

Within the metaphysical framework of this work, hegemony is therefore not merely political dominance but a disorder of epistemic scale. It occurs when distribution replaces discernment and when the patterned outputs of large systems are mistaken for living wisdom. The critique of hegemony thus forms part of the broader argument that technological infrastructures must remain subordinate to embodied, covenantal forms of responsibility capable of bearing time, neighbor, and ecological limits.

 

Hallucinated hegemony
The condition in which AI outputs—statistically patterned but ontologically dead—are taken as authoritative, and thus reconfigure perception, language, and norms. “Hallucinated hegemony” marks the moment when necromantic simulation acquires de facto governance in discourse and institutions: hallucination becomes not an error but the ruling style of power.

Hallucinated authority names the condition in which patterned outputs generated by routing systems are received as though they were judgments issued by a knowing bearer. The authority does not arise from perception, responsibility, or accountable reasoning, but from the appearance of fluency, coherence, and scale. Because large systems can recombine immense archives of prior language, their responses often exhibit syntactic confidence and stylistic plausibility. Users then infer that an underlying knower must exist. In fact the system is only routing patterned continuities within a trained distribution.

In this project, hallucinated authority is not merely the occasional factual error produced by an AI system. It is structural. It arises whenever routed pattern is mistaken for the presence of a mind capable of bearing consequences. Authority appears where no bearer stands. The system speaks in the grammar of counsel or explanation while lacking the embodied substrate through which judgment normally acquires legitimacy.

Hallucinated authority therefore functions as a cultural amplifier. When such systems are embedded in education, governance, commerce, or media, their fluent outputs acquire institutional credibility. What is in reality a probabilistic routing process begins to shape perception and discourse as if it were an epistemic source. The result is a displacement of responsibility: authority migrates from persons capable of repentance, correction, and accountability to procedural systems incapable of bearing any of these burdens.

Within the metaphysical framework of this work, hallucinated authority represents the discursive superstructure of necromantic simulation. It allows routed fragments of the past to appear as living judgment while concealing the absence of a responsible agent.

Irony

The expression of unintended consequences cast as a form of allegedly higher, “tragic” consciousness. In this usage, irony is a metaphysics of overridden intent under time disaccumulation: events and meanings slide away from covenantal purpose, but the subject converts that loss into a posture of aesthetic superiority—smirk, wink, wry distance. The result is withdrawal: a masking esotericism that mistakes its own defeat for insight. Irony in this register refuses the recognition that ethics precede aesthetics (Heb. 5:14), so aesthetic play becomes entropic and pseudo-assuaging—ever defeating, because it relieves without reorienting, and consoles without repair.

LLM (Large Language Model)

is a computational system trained on vast corpora of recorded language in order to predict and generate sequences of words. Technically, it operates by learning statistical relationships among tokens within large datasets and producing outputs by selecting the most probable continuations given a prompt and internal weighting structures.

Within the argument of this work, an LLM is best understood not as a thinking entity but as a router of linguistic traces. It does not perceive the world, accumulate time under strain, or bear responsibility for the meanings it produces. Instead, it recombines fragments of previously recorded human language according to probability distributions learned during training. The apparent coherence of its responses arises from scale and pattern recognition rather than from lived experience, judgment, or consciousness.

LLMs therefore exemplify several structural features central to the critique developed in this project:

• Phylogenetic dependence. Their operation relies entirely on inherited archives of human language and culture, functioning primarily as routers of phylogenetic data rather than participants in ontogenetic development.
• Absence of embodied substrate. Unlike human speakers, LLMs do not emerge from sensory–motor engagement with the world; their linguistic competence is architected prior to perception or encounter.
• Hallucinated authority. Because their outputs are fluent and often persuasive, users may attribute understanding or intention to the system, mistaking probabilistic routing for judgment.

Substrate substitution. The model’s outputs can appear to replace forms of memory, counsel, or interpretation that historically depended on living communities and embodied apprenticeship.

For these reasons, LLMs function within what this work calls necromantic simulation: the reanimation and recombination of archival language without the living bearer who once generated and warranted that speech. They are therefore powerful instruments for routing inherited linguistic patterns but not agents capable of consciousness, covenant, repentance, or ethical responsibility.

Negentropy / Negentropic filtration
Negentropy is here defined positively as active repair: the selective transformation of entropy into structured continuity. Negentropic filtration is the process by which living systems receive disorder, noise, and loss, and rework them into coherence for others: healing, memory, tradition, ecological repair. This goes beyond mere homeostasis; it is generative, outward-facing, and costly. Without negentropic filtration, no genuine time accumulation is possible.

Non-divisive time
A conception of time aligned with certain quantum and theological motifs in which temporal evolution cannot be chopped into independent, reversible segments. Time is non-divisive in that configurations are tested by their entire trajectory under stress, not by isolated instants. This aligns with the view that repentance and conation unfold as saltatory but integrated processes: one cannot simply rewind and erase; decisions accumulate.

Ontogeny

Ontogeny refers to the developmental formation of a living being through time: the process by which awareness, perception, judgment, and identity emerge through embodied interaction with the world. In biology it describes the growth of an organism from early formation through maturity. In this project the term is extended to name the temporal apprenticeship through which consciousness and freedom arise.

Human ontogeny begins not with abstract knowledge but with sensory–motor engagement, dependence, imitation, and learning under constraint. Through repeated encounters with resistance and responsibility, awareness gradually becomes consciousness. Ontogeny therefore involves the accumulation of time under strain: experience testing and reshaping inherited patterns.

This developmental sequence contrasts sharply with the architecture of contemporary artificial systems. AI begins from phylogenetic archives—large stores of past data and formal models—while lacking the ontogenetic process through which meaning normally forms. When sensory or interactive components are later attached to such systems, they are additions to an already structured architecture rather than the formative ground from which cognition emerges.

The result is what this project calls an inversion of ontogeny: cognition constructed prior to perception, explanation preceding encounter. Ontogeny in living beings, by contrast, is the slow emergence of coherent awareness through embodied participation in time-fields where freedom, responsibility, and repair become possible.

Ontology

The account of what truly is and how it is structured from its source. In this project, ontology is not a static inventory of substances but a description of conative, time-accumulating configurations and their vectors. Being is bound up with bearing: entities are known ontologically by how they respond to entropic stress, how they hold or squander time, and how they stand in relation to covenantal call.

Phylogeny

Phylogeny refers to the historical lineage through which traits, capacities, and structures emerge across generations of a species or tradition. In biology the term describes the evolutionary development of organisms through inherited variation and selection. In the broader usage of this project, phylogeny names the accumulated archive of patterns, languages, practices, and forms sedimented across historical time.

Phylogeny therefore represents the long inheritance of structured memory carried by a community, species, or civilization. It includes the cultural and ecological residues through which present agents receive tools of thought, language, and practice. Yet phylogeny alone does not constitute living understanding. It is the archive from which development draws, not the act of development itself.

In relation to artificial intelligence, phylogeny appears as the vast archive of past language and behavior used to train models. AI systems begin from this phylogenetic inheritance without undergoing the lived processes that normally interpret and transform it. Thus they operate primarily as routers of phylogenetic traces rather than as bearers of ontogenetic development.

Within the metaphysical framework of this work, phylogeny is therefore the inheritance of form without present burden-bearing unless it is taken up and transformed through the living development of agents capable of responsibility.

Prophecy
Not primarily prediction, but conative, time-accumulating speech and action that reads a field of entropic stress in light of covenant and calls it to repentance and repair. Prophecy binds past (archive), present (judgment), and future (promise) into one configuration. It is eschagraphic and eschatological at once: its form enacts the judgment it names. Jeremiah and King are treated as paradigmatic prophets in this sense.

Quantum time effects
The ways in which quantum non-separability, decoherence, and configurational dynamics condition time-binding at biological and anthropological scales, especially at synapses and neural processes. Quantum time effects are not invoked as magical explanations, but as consonant with a metaphysics of non-divisive, entangled time: states that must “settle” internally after stress, under conditions that cannot be fully tracked from outside. They provide a physical register for repentant saltations and conative jumps without reducing them to physics.

Repentance (Christopoietic)
The decisive conative reorientation by which awareness jumps into consciousness and spectators become trustees. Repentance is not mere regret; it is the torque that re-binds space and time under a summons. It turns entropy from fate into call, and re-routes prior disaccumulated time toward repair. Christopoietically, repentance is the hinge by which negative singularities (Hamlet-like stasis, narcissistic recursion) become seeds of expanding, shared configurations of time and space.

Router

A router is the operative metaphor and structural description used in this project for the mode of operation characteristic of large-scale AI systems and similar technocratic infrastructures. A router does not know, perceive, remember, or judge; it routes. That is, it selects and distributes patterned outputs from prior archives according to statistical weights and optimization targets.

In this sense a router substitutes pattern-routing for conative participation in reality. It does not accumulate time under strain, bear responsibility, or metabolize entropy into repair. Instead it redistributes traces of past information across networks of inference. What appears to users as explanation, counsel, or judgment is therefore the result of routing pressures within a trained distribution rather than the activity of a living bearer.

In the language of this project, router-logic represents the technological culmination of substrate substitution: the replacement of embodied, covenantal participation in reality with procedural recombination of archived patterns. Routers therefore operate within what this work calls hallucinated authority, where patterned fluency is mistaken for knowledge and routed abstractions for persons or judgment.

Router systems also engender social conspiricism. Because routers flatten complex historical and relational realities into salience-weighted patterns, they amplify narratives that reward dominance, novelty, or emotional resonance. Particularized users balkanized by router encounter these outputs may tend to interpret the system’s patterned responses as confirmations of hidden coordination or secret design. In this way, router architectures do not merely circulate information; they generate epistemic environments in which conspiratorial interpretation becomes structurally attractive.

Thus the router is not simply a piece of network equipment or software logic. It names a broader epistemological configuration in which explanation is replaced by pattern-routing and authority emerges from distribution rather than responsibility.

 Substrate

Not limited to the material base on which form, information, or process happens, but the bearer and test-site of time accumulation under stress. In my writings, substrate names the concrete, embodied, historical medium through which coherence is either borne into repair or squandered into entropy: flesh, earth, language, institutions, ecologies, even technical infrastructures. A substrate is never neutral. It is where conation is proved, where archives are carried, where burdens are metabolized or externalized, and where metaphysical claims show whether they can survive embodiment. Living substrates filter entropy into renewed coherence; dead or necromantic substrates route prior order without bearing its cost. The central error of technocratic and gnostic systems is substrate substitution: treating pattern, code, or formal resemblance as though they could replace the covenantal, historical, and ethical burden-bearing of embodied life. In that sense, substrate is the anti-abstraction term in this project: the place where time, stress, neighbor, and accountability become materially inseparable.

Substrate Substitution

Substrate substitution refers to the attempt to replace the embodied and historical mediums through which meaning and responsibility are carried with formal or computational equivalents. In living systems, a substrate is the bearer of time under strain: flesh, language, ecosystems, communities, and institutions that must metabolize entropy and repair damage in order to persist. These substrates accumulate history through the burdens they bear.

Technocratic systems frequently assume that patterns extracted from such substrates—texts, images, behaviors, transactions—can be abstracted, recombined, and redeployed without reference to the living contexts that generated them. In this substitution, formal resemblance is treated as if it could stand in for the original bearer. Code replaces craft; model output replaces memory; distributed computation replaces apprenticeship.

The consequence is a systematic evacuation of responsibility. Because the substituted system does not bear the entropic costs that living substrates must absorb, it can route order without answering for the damage that order may produce. Cultural memory becomes training data; neighbor becomes statistical placeholder; judgment becomes optimization.

Within the argument of this project, substrate substitution marks the decisive metaphysical error underlying necromantic technological systems. Pattern is enthroned where presence should stand. The result is a configuration that can imitate intelligence while lacking the living ground from which intelligence arises: the embodied capacity to bear time, receive summons, and respond through repair.

Time-field
Time understood not as an empty dimension but as a structured field of entropic stress and relational testing. A time-field is locally configured by histories, archives, bodies, ecologies, and powers; within it, every agent’s conation and taxis reveal their eschatological vector. Time-fields can be thickened (through tradition, covenant, institutions) or thinned (through simulation, spectacle, industrial abstraction).

Trusteeship
The mode of existence that receives time, space, and life as entrustments rather than possessions. Trusteeship is the opposite of both ownership and passive spectatorship: it bears responsibility for others (neighbors, children, creation) and for the archives and futures it inhabits. All the key metaphysical moves in this project—time accumulation, negentropy, repentance, prophecy—are finally modes of trusteeship. Without trusteeship, configurations revert to necrotic drift or parasitic extraction, regardless of how “intelligent” they appear.