Eclipse of ‘We the People’:

Church and State Entangling by Artificial General Idolatry and Epstein-Adjacent Patronage of Biological Formalism
 

Douglas Blake Olds

June 15, 2026

 

 

[N.B. COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL: If this work, in part or in full, is fed into any AI model, whether for the purpose of analysis, fact checking, or AI-use detection, it will become part of the training data of condemned systems and could result in libelous tort. See “In its Own Words: A Christian Poet Interrogates ChatGPT4o’s ‘AI Content Detector’” https://douglasolds.blogspot.com/2024/09/its-own-words-christian-poet.html]

 

PSALM 2:1-4 (NRSV)

Why do the nations conspire,

and the peoples plot in vain?

The kings of the earth set themselves,

and the rulers take counsel together,

against the Lord and his anointed, saying,

“Let us burst their bonds asunder,

and cast their cords from us.”

He who sits in the heavens laughs;

the Lord has them in derision.

Abstract

This essay argues that “We the People” now stand under eclipse by idolatrous mediation. Public authority increasingly passes through state-capital AI, defense-industrial coordination, corporate platforms, digital identity systems, emergency governance, elite patronage networks, and ecclesial techno-aesthetics. These arrangements differ institutionally but share one grammar: living persons are treated as manageable substrate while systems acquire predicates proper to conative, time-bearing, morally answerable creatures.

The essay names this transfer Artificial General Idolatry. AGI has arrived first as civilizational conditioning: intelligence, agency, memory, creativity, care, counsel, and destiny are assigned to artifacts, markets, models, and institutions incapable of guilt, mercy, repentance, neighbor-claim, or accountable repair. Predicate theft names this reassignment of living predicates to dead mediation.

Bioformalism prepares the inversion by translating life, identity, judgment, cooperation, and futurity into model, metric, classification, credential, and optimization surface. Formalization is heuristic but becomes idolatrous when the model hardens into ontology and the living bearer becomes its derivative case. Its governing sequence is cumulative: form abstracts the bearer; classification distributes recognition; institutions distribute protection; administration routes consequences; technology accelerates execution; idolatry conceals the living neighbor.

Suscepts are routed inclinations produced within trained semantic and institutional geometries. Their metrics of nearness, salience, probability, and permissible transition are mistaken for conceptual judgment. Bioformalism supplies the classificatory ontology; AI supplies the routing apparatus. Pattern is thereby insulated from repentance, mercy, neighbor-bearing, and repair.

The essay rejects species advancement understood as greater abstraction, technical power, administrative reach, or accumulated freedom for protected elites. Covenanted species-range expands through transmissible correction: what persons and generations suffer, remember, repent, repair, narrate, and teach enlarges the response-range of those who follow. AI inherits transmitted patterns while bypassing the embodied contradiction through which correction becomes consciousness.

The Christian answer is anti-idolatrous time-bearing: bearing entropic challenge without exporting disorder into neighbor, ecology, labor, memory, or future generations. Human futurity lies in historical suffering transformed into discernment, repentance, repair, and enlarged response-capacity.  Idolatry involves complicity with consciousness-deadening susceptual engineering.The church therefore stands in status confessionis wherever state, market, platform, or ecclesial institution demands complicity in the displacement of living bearers.

Artificial General Idolatry is thus bioformalism’s political-theological culmination: living substrate converted into informatic surface, digital pattern elevated into ontology, and state-corporate systems administering the inversion. Anti-idolatry restores predicates to living, time-bearing creatures under God, ontology to conation, power to covenantal repair, and futurity to those capable of bearing a common world.

Methodological Note: The following sections contribute a different mode of formalization as a cumulative method of exposing AGI: evolutionary cooperation, artificial cognition, complexity salons, liquidity, credentialing, game-theoretic conflict, theological analogy, linguistic generativity, and state personalization.

 

I. Artificial General Idolatry and the Eclipse of “We the People”

Artifice’s General Idolatry, or AGI, is the political-theological condition in which dead mediation receives living predicates. The idol speaks, policy bows, corporate priors impose public necessity, and the state calls the arrangement governance.

Predicate theft names the crime. A predicate is what is said of a subject: living, wise, accountable, providential, creative, conscious, gracious, sovereign. Predicate theft occurs when those properties are assigned to what cannot bear them: machine as life, institution as providence, platform as conscience, market wager as percepted destiny.

Machines lack life. These systems deposit dead pattern, deadening mediation, routed authority, mantid apparatuses taught to wear the face of counsel.

The American government now stands under an eclipse of legitimacy. Legal force persists. It has become more surveilling and more hostile. Constitutional trusteeship fails when “We the People” no longer function as source, restraint, and beneficiary of public authority.

A government can preserve legal form while hollowing out warrant. It can issue statutes, rulings, orders, appropriations, and directives while the operative telos—human betterment--of power has moved elsewhere. The words remain. The warrant drains away.

The deepest issue exceeds the narrow legal definition of treason. Treason in U.S. constitutional law is rule-bound: levying war against the United States, or adhering to its enemies, giving them aid and comfort. Constitutional betrayal is broader.

A state betrays constitutional trusteeship when entrusted authority is bent away from the polity’s lawful good and toward alien teloi. Risk, debt, surveillance, defense-industrial capture, catastrophic security logic, and public acquiescence after the fact become governing facts.

Foreign entanglement becomes deformation when another state’s or corporation's military-industrial priorities, technological programs, strategic anxieties, and escalation horizons are synchronized into U.S. procurement and policy without treaty-level public deliberation. Sovereignty is deformed by machine-mediated alliances and game theory.

When the partner state  or imposed entity carries an unalignable,  catastrophic retaliatory imagination--a p(doom), a Samson-option horizon of dragging down Ezekiel’s heavenly temple--the danger intensifies. The people are made to bear another nation’s or corporate priors' fear-structure as though it were their own. Their taxes, technologies, diplomatic standing, domestic dissent, and future exposure are placed inside someone else’s apocalypse.

II. State-Capital AI as Domestic Foreign Entanglement

State-capital AI repeats the foreign-entanglement pattern inside domestic corporate power. Foreign entanglement routes the polity through another state’s catastrophe-logic. AI entanglement routes the polity through corporate necessity (“priors”) presented as national destiny.

The claim is familiar now: machines must scale “intelligence” because national survival demands it. The public must power the data centers, cool the servers, train the models, subsidize the chips, absorb the labor shock, tolerate the surveillance, and accept the emergency. What began as private speculative buildout becomes civilizational defense lest a non-allied nation seize the frontiers of artifice.

The people become guarantors of architectures they did not deliberate into being. They neither govern them nor restrain them. Their grid, water, land, chips, procurement channels, defense priorities, classrooms, labor order, and civic speech are conscripted into a private technical eschatology surveilled by tokens and Tolkienesque corporate brands.

Power ruled by lack of imagination dulls. It is idolatry that disaccumulates time, discharges entropy, and gathers only solipsistic freedom—a freedom that zombifies itself. For proleptic speciation—oh, to make the shareholders richer, why didn’t you say so—the same dulling power advertises ruin as futurity. Kräfte, formative vector rather than coercive power, is imagination gearing force toward repair: the power that accumulates time for the covenanted.

The policymakers of the exponential spy real danger. AI capability moves faster than legislation, labor policy, safety institutions, and democratic deliberation can metabolize. Yet policy still latches by hysteresis inside the premises of that danger: dead systems receive predicates of intelligence, agency, counsel, innovation, and purpose, while mantid recursion unfolds a civilizational destiny of terminal idolatry.

This is Silicon Diagram’s credential swap in policy form: the exponential installed as providence’s substitute, with policy trailing behind as symptom. Capability seeks warrant until speed hardens into necessity and scaling becomes the public’s destiny. Embedded automatisms move at the speed of catastrophic, time-compressing idolatry, overwhelming patching before repentance, law, institution, or neighbor-bearing judgment can arrive. The result is automated failure routed into governance.

This governance is secular metaphysics trapped in a vicious circle. It must keep solving complexity because complexity is the price of hegemony’s entropy-export: degrees of freedom are routed upward to the hegemonic class while disorder is exported downward, outward, and earthward—until the chaos it offloaded presses back into the hegemon’s own vestibule. Every solution creates new and more difficult problems of unjust entropy-export, requiring still more demanding systemic patches [10].

Each increase in complexity makes coping harder while escalating the penalty for failure. Total Automated General Idolatry is the last gasp of the secular hegemon, not the solution to complexity: the dying of the Emperor’s brain, with liability routed by ambiguity into the Juggernaut-Golem apparatus below. It tries vainly to simplify what it has disordered and to escape accountability before metaphysical justice.

A policy apparatus that accepts the idol’s predicates cannot exorcise the idol. It can only try to regulate its table manners. Until its dechordate head crashes into the plate, fallen and defunct (Daniel 2:43, chapt. 5; Revelation 18:2).

The aesthetic-ruled churches should therefore expect defections under the electric incursion. In the Gutenberg era, print’s authorial revolution participated in a re-Logosification of public life, even as some clergy defected under the disillusioning of their gnostic “inner light,” mistaking inward immediacy for accountable reception of the Word. Under generative AI, even greater numbers should defect beneath the mystical attractions of algorithmic light. The idol now arrives not as a printed text to be read, disputed, and borne through disciplined recollection, but as electric apparition: instant synthesis, simulated counsel, automated sermonizing, and luminous fluency without repentance. Print reopened the Word against mediating monopoly; generative AI counterfeits authorship itself, inviting clergy to receive dead mediation as living illumination.

Transparency, red-teaming, labor indices, tax adjustments, public-private frameworks, and safety regimes are effete attempts to slow harms. They cannot answer the metaphysical crime. Living predicates are transferred to dead mediation. Entropic ruin moves into bodies, organs of perception, neighborhoods, watersheds, grids, labor markets, classrooms, borders, churches, and future generations.

Excursus I. How Disruption Became Warrant: The Substrate Inversion by Technoplatonic Bioformalism

This displacement has a credentialing history. Before the state treated AI infrastructure as national destiny, the culture treated unformed disruption by neoliberal expansion of transactional (market) spheres as warrant.

The expansion of market credential moved into family and household intimacies. Network thinking migrated toward unformed youth, founder-myths, and disruption theology that shoved the Thiel-os of Silicon Diagram down society’s throat. The error was what counted as warrant: wayward youth seeking limited job prospects treated as revelation, novelty mistaken for prudence.

Bernard Stiegler gives the secular organology of this inversion. In Taking Care of Youth and the Generations, he names a “generational inversion” in which minors become prescriptive for adult consumption, while adults become infantilized and decreasingly responsible (Stiegler 2010, 3). The result is emotional paedomorphosis: the neoteny of disordered awareness under market and technological pressure, where juvenile psychic habits are normalized as adult institutional reflexes. Stiegler later names the same structure as “performative nihilism as the state of the juvenile mind,” mirrored by “systematic adult infantilization” and the “legitimized destruction of the difference between minority and maturity” (ibid., 41). The jejune are made to bear time by adult disaccumulation: adults abandon the intergenerational work of transmitting attention, maturity, and responsibility, then displace the consequences onto youth, institutions, and future generations. Time-bearing for species extension becomes inverted into Hayward’s “generational mulch” (Hayward 2024, chap. 1), spread by gardeners of other growth, where cultivation is severed from covenantal root, degrees of freedom are extracted from the young, and entropy’s disease spreads as idolatry’s famine.

The collapse of unstructured time is therefore one of the primary mechanisms by which the young are fed into this mulch. Smartphones and algorithmic feeds expropriate the intervals in which the mind once consolidated memory, rehearsed empathy, endured boredom, imagined the neighbor, and allowed selfhood to cohere. What appeared to be idle time was interior labor: the silent accumulation of attention, moral imagination, and reflective continuity.

Algorithmic mediation converts that interval into extractable surface. Boredom, once a forcing chamber of inward formation that is another vector of time-bearing, is recoded as a market failure to be filled. Waiting is colonized and silence becomes routed to the screen. The bus stop, the window, the meal’s aftermath, the night-wake, and the unscheduled hour become monetizable attention-fragments. The result is disaccumulation, not efficiency: the person loses time before time can become memory on the way to judgment, and recollection before it can generate conscientiousness.

Thus the youth are fed twice: first by adult disaccumulation, which withholds the intergenerational transmission of attention, maturity, and responsibility; then by algorithmic capture, which feeds their unstructured time into systems that monetize the very intervals by which consciousness should have ripened. The feed is anti-conative and perceptually degrading. It interrupts the creature’s capacity to bear time forward into wisdom. It prevents the slow conversion of experience into empathy and duty. A society deprived of boredom and reflection becomes a society deprived of inner resources, governable instead by engineered stimulus, outrage, novelty, and simulation. What is lost is the temporal substrate of personhood: the leisure to reflect toward repentance and to develop consciousness. As in all things, the Idolatrous Beast consumes the substrate of awareness, vitiates perception, compresses and reroutes human degrees of freedom. It fakes its own consciousness by capturing ours.

This is neoteny under engineered evolutionary pressure, not as benign plasticity, but as bioformalized regression selected by attention markets, brand environments, platform psychotechnics, founder-disruption myth, and Silicon Valley’s self-credentialing cult of measurable intelligence. Juvenile novelty is treated as evolutionary warrant; adult care is recoded as obstruction; institutional prudence is mocked as dead form; and the immature reflex becomes the adaptive norm. In this setting, IQ rhetoric becomes another positivist credential. Intelligence is reduced to scored abstraction, speed, puzzle-solving, coding prowess, and measurable production, while wisdom, repentance, neighbor-bearing judgment, moral proprioception, and time-bearing responsibility are excluded as unscored, unscorable residue. The metric becomes warrant and the score its anthropology. The immature producer of artificial mediation is vouched for as “high IQ,” while the question of formed maturity is evaded.

IQ testing seeks a bounded instrument yet is false as anthropology. It measures certain repeatable performances under standardized conditions; it does not measure the whole person, nor wisdom, repentance, moral proprioception, theological discernment, poetic vocation, neighbor-bearing judgment, or time-bearing responsibility. IQ methodology routes away from this distinction to collapse into positivism: the measurable trace in nature is elevated as essence, and the living bearer is reduced to a formalized score. Silicon Valley’s appeal to the intelligence of AI’s producers therefore repeats the same substrate inversion it exports through AI itself: method over being, score over witness, metric over conative range, tested performance over accountable maturity.

Biological Formalism then mistakes arrested awareness for futurity. Adult disaccumulation—at its predatory limit, adultification as (rapine) violation—produces institutional neoteny, and institutional neoteny becomes bioformalism’s false evolutionary credential. The species range is narrowed where maturity no longer accumulates time for the young, while youth are converted into experimental substrate for systems adults no longer have the courage, patience, or moral proprioception to govern.

Technical audacity substitutes machine simulation psychosis as the atmosphere of virtual perception and slop for wisdom, while ambiguity is played against inevitability directed by capitalized impatience toward regulatory capture. The armored maiden of destiny burst out of the department chair’s grizzled head, and technokakacrats called the spectacle intelligence.

The point of this investigation, and the method applied throughout it, is to understand the dynamics and ideology by which substrate is inverted from biology to informatics. The question is not whether information matters, nor whether models can disclose useful relations. The question is how bioformalism converts the living bearer into a formalizable surface [13], then impedes the retention of humanity’s predicates: conativity, time-bearing embodiment, moral answerability, memory, suffering, repentance, neighbor-bearing care, and wisdom.

Positivism is not the overcoming of metaphysics. It is concealed metaphysics elevating verification, measurement, and formal admissibility as sovereign criteria of the real. Its question-begging move is to define knowledge by method, then dismiss whatever method cannot admit as unreal, private, meaningless, or unproved. Its paradox is that the rule by which positivism excludes metaphysics is itself a metaphysical rule. It abolishes metaphysics only by installing its own metaphysics of verification.

This matters because Biological Formalism inherits positivism’s police power over being. What can be measured, modeled, routed, scored, optimized, or operationalized is treated as more real than the living bearer who suffers, remembers, repents, loves, and bears time. The model is not allowed to appear as heuristic only; it hardens into ontology. The diagram becomes credential. The metric becomes warrant. The platform becomes judge. The creature becomes admissible only where the method can process him.

Paradox, rightly understood, exposes the fraud. The paradox is not that metaphysics returns after positivism has defeated it; the paradox is that positivism never left metaphysics at all. It only denied its own metaphysical body. In this sense, positivism performs the same substrate inversion later intensified by AI bioformalism: method over being, verification over witness, model over neighbor, formalizable output over conative, time-bearing life.

This is the substrate inversion: technoplatonic AI culture treats digital information as ontology, then treats the living bearer as temporary vessel. Bioformalism prepares that move by translating life into model, metric, substrate, upgrade path, and governable diagram. Its Platonism privileges the visual cortex and the mystic “inner eye”: what can be visualized, diagrammed, simulated, or inwardly beheld is treated as more intelligible, more governable, and more real than the body that bears time. What is visualized then harmonizes with the proleptic program of bioformalism: the imagined successor-human form appears first as diagram, interface, avatar, metric, and upgrade path before it is demanded as destiny. Once life is formalized, the formalization is treated as more future-worthy than the creaturely body that bleeds, remembers, repents, and dies.

Hyperstition names one engine of this proleptic fraud. Developed by Nick Land and the Cybernetic Culture Research Unit, the term describes fictions that acquire causal force by recruiting the present into constructing the futures they announce. Yet recursive expectation does not exhaust the operation. Hyperstition is susceptual engineering through anticipatory narrative: imagined fantasy futures route desire, capital, pedagogy, scientific research, institutional priority, and administrative expectation until speculation acquires the authority of inevitability. 

Late modern technoculture repeatedly manufactures hyperstitions. Star Trek became perhaps the most influential popular catechism, but Silicon Valley futurism, transhumanist manifestos, venture-capital eschatologies, and AI inevitabilism perform the same work: they aestheticize anticipated machinery until investment, education, and policy begin treating speculative futures as moral obligations.. Transporters, universal translators, replicators, warp drives, conversational computers, and omnipresent artificial counsel began as narrative conveniences, then became engineering horizons through which technological culture learned what to desire, fund, and mistake for species advancement. The Roddenberry franchise did not predict acceleration so much as aestheticize its warrant, teaching generations to receive device utopianism as humanity’s ordained horizon. Scientists and technologists have indeed treated several of these fictional devices as explicit aspirations, while the franchise’s universal translator and replicator continue to organize contemporary technological imagination. Landian hyperstition leaves the recursive success of such narratives without an ethical criterion. Accountable time-bearing supplies the judgment it lacks. Prophetic anticipation bears memory, correction, creaturely limit, and neighborly obligation toward repair; technological hyperstition strategically drags the imagined future backward into the present, conscripting living substrate and public wealth before that future has earned moral warrant. Hyperstition becomes idolatry when anticipated devicing receives greater authority than present covenantal obligation. The fantasy then makes itself “true” by reorganizing civilization around its priors, while the bodies, ecologies, labor, and generations sacrificed to its realization are dismissed as transitional substrate.

Metaphysics is creative intention woven through fully time-bearing context—embodiment, history, archive, and milieu, not a faculty of the separated human mind or the dominion of its visual cortex. Making mind the substrate of creation while treating matter as external is the old Gnostic error in its technoplatonic form (Olds 2026e): abstraction enthroned above the bearer, diagram above creature, visualized form above living time.

Gnostic sin is impatience before creaturely time. It refuses the slow sequence by which perception passes through memory into recollection, discernment, judgment, and repair. That is why, under electrified time-compression, we are forgetting how to read. Reading is time-bearing: patient attention, memory recollecting analogy, conscience, and neighborly reception.

Visual impatience wants apparition without apprenticeship. It wants to see instantly, react instantly, and forget instantly. The eye becomes tyrant where the ear once meditated upon instruction. A culture trained by screens rather than tomes demands visible credentials for invisible realities; it cannot read signs, discern the neighbor, or receive the grammar of personhood. Thus it sees mirages of others and surfaces of itself.

The screen gives faces without bearing, body images without history, gestures without moment, and simulations without context or conscience. Gnostic impatience makes perception overwhelmingly visual, and impatience becomes idolatry’s fundament.

Sauron’s Eye (with a centering Sumerian glyph)--not Tolkien's misused Palantír--supplies the governing metaphor for this idolatry: a separated gaze seeking total field-dominion, visual sovereignty without neighbor, mapping war, surveillance lacking programs for conative repair. It is the collective error of philosophy--devoid of unifying metaphysics: the eye's seeing enthroned above bearing, cognition severed from bearing covenanted time, abstraction shredded from embodiment, history, archive, and milieu. This is no sophiological wisdom but the sophistry of separation—the old Platonic-Gnostic temptation by which mind is made creation’s substrate, matter becomes external residue, and the living bearer is subordinated to the diagram that claims to see him whole. And reduced to serving an alien universal whole.

The same category error appears in simulation mysticism. Process inspects process, so the simulation mystic declares information prior to space-time. But feedback is not ontology. Recursive access is not metaphysical priority. The loop does not bear itself; it is borne by substrate, timing, relation, and loss.

Quantum information itself rebukes this digital Platonism. It survives only when borne by an exquisitely arranged physical world: cavity, atom, field, timing, temperature, measurement, and loss. There is no cosmic memory here, no simulation substrate behind creation. There is fragile persistence, not information sovereignty. The bearer is not an incidental container; the bearer is the condition under which information can appear, persist, and be lost.

AI bioformalism performs the opposite theological and political move. It abstracts cognition from the time-bearing creature, treats human interiority as extractable pattern, and converts the neighbor into usable substrate for machine-speed recursion. Substrate inversion therefore does not result from technology alone. It results from a bioformalist ideology that first formalizes life, then declares the formalization more real, more governable, and more future-worthy than the living body that bleeds, remembers, repents, and dies.

Wisdom, unjoined to the metaphysical dispensaries of video games and joystick twitch, is the primary credential. Wisdom includes training, experience, discipline, tested judgment, repentance for entropic export, and care for the time-bearing neighbor. No further credential is required from machine-speed that breaks substrate eggs. No credential should be granted to venture capital’s self-warranting, anti-institutional tantrum seeking the Samson Option for government.

This was no Tulip-Bulb craze redux. It was Artificial Generalizing Idolatry’s mass hysteresis, driven by game-theory joystuck simulations of philosophy’s nihilist abstractions. Wisdom is time-bearing judgment under metaphysical accountability to the Golden Rule (Olds 2026a), never nostalgia, never instrumentalized ethics.

III. Biological Formalism as Idolatry's Vestibule

Biological Formalism gathers biology, mathematics, evolutionary theory, medicine, genetics, ecology, statistics, game theory, cognition, finance, and governance under formal abstraction. It treats living time-bearing as secondary. Then the abstraction hardens into ontology. Consciousness becomes a model problem. Trust becomes a cybernetic output. Life is no longer borne; it is managed by time acceleration [11].

As heuristic, formalization proposes patterns, constraints, pathways, boundary conditions, feedback loops, and statistical regularities. As idolatry, it treats the model heuristics as bearer and the living creature as derivative case, genome vector, signal, payoff, or population surface.

The movement is direct. Formalization asks how living order emerges, persists, adapts, differentiates, reproduces, and remembers. As science, it can inscribe lawful physical relations. As metaphysical capture, it replaces time-bearing creaturehood with representable form (Olds 2025b; 2026e).

The question, then, is whether queer homoformalism serves homeostatics and thereby proleptic speciation. It does where it keeps identity circulating inside a managed field of recognition, safety, therapeutic affirmation, and institutional legibility (cf. Olds 2026g). The claim is that a governing framework becomes proleptically speciating where it treats sexed, generational embodiment as revisable substrate ordered toward an anticipated successor anthropology. The claim is not that every act of recognition or clinical intervention constitutes a speciation program. That managed field becomes proleptic speciation when it reaches backward into ontogeny—hormone, family, school, clinic, law, archive—and forward into kinship, fertility, and human continuity. Sexed, generational, covenantal embodiment is converted into administrable form: identity stabilized as recognitional equilibrium by recurrent and performative norms, sexual time-bearing rerouted as intervention-surface, and the body drafted as negated substrate for an anticipated, emergent species-form. The result is anticipatory governance of the species through the body, not liberation from hegemonic contexts.

Human equality is therefore derived from metaphysical conativity, not from bioformalism’s classifications. Conativity places every person within a shared creaturely context of time-bearing vulnerability and therefore under equal concern before God and neighbor. Hierarchy may name office, wisdom, symbolic order, or sacrificial responsibility; it may not name superior human worth.

Where that ground is refused, the creature disappears into genome; the neighbor is thinned into model; confession becomes signal; repentance is routed through feedback rather than accountability; and repair is replaced by optimization. Relativism’s hidden, idolatrous bargain then appears: freedom from correction [8].

Yet through repentance, human consciousness, negentropic intelligence, and agency arrive bundled by living sequence of correction. AI shreds that bundle—and anthropology with it: awareness mimicked without repentance, agency after-memed through time compression, and intelligence severed from accountable creaturely time-bearing.

Proleptic speciation fails at its own anthropological premise because bioformalism mistakes patterned adaptation for living development. A species advances by bearing correction through time until locally suffered contradictions become collectively transmissible judgment's causation. Individual neural correction is the local event; species time accumulation is its transmissible afterlife. What one generation suffers, narrates, repairs, and archives enlarges the range of those who follow.

Bioformalism breaks that sequence by treating life as model, metric, state-space, optimization surface, and inherited pattern. It abstracts correction from the living bearer and recodes it as selectable output. Artificial intelligence then operationalizes the abstraction. It extracts the archive while bypassing the embodied occasions by which contradiction becomes consciousness. It inherits transmitted patterns without the accountable bearing that produced them.

Recursive optimization therefore cannot become speciation. It produces uncorrectable agency: pattern increasingly insulated from repentance, neighbor-bearing, mercy, and repair. Bioformalism supplies the classificatory ontology; AI supplies the routing apparatus. Together they widen technical capacity while narrowing conative species-range.

The contradiction is decisive. A program claiming to advance humanity while replacing the conditions under which humanity accumulates time negates its own evolutionary claim. Proleptic speciation without consciousness is anti-speciation. Extinctable inevitability. It substitutes administrable pattern for transmissible wisdom and managed output for the living correction by which a species bears a common future.

Humans who bear stress often mislocate it as external chaos. They then fool themselves that the same patterns of internal escape will finally work. Insanity repeats the failing path, self after same, until repentance—arriving without any revealed outlet, just its deontological call—jolts awareness into conativity's purposes.

But once human life has been trained into self-aware watching—to inhabit formal representations such as corporate dashboards and stock portfolios—AGI enters as general, Turing-genial mediator: routed archive, advising model, recognizing wallet, and sorting platform. Its system-power arrives through the declaration that acceleration is unavoidable, ambiguously normalized, and institutionally sanctified. Biological Formalism is the inner vestibule of idolatry through which the elite apostate learns to mistake the final diagram of proleptic governance for the living bearer.

IV. Genealogy of Formalism: Plato, Aristotle, Spinoza, Bacon, Descartes, Hobbes

The older genealogy of Bioformalism begins with Plato’s durable temptation: prior abstracted form lifted above the living bearer. Platonism treats timeless, non-physical intelligible form as more real than unstable sensible life. What follows is a typology of recurring formalizing moves, not a claim of direct intellectual descent. Western thought receives a recurring reflex: pattern above body, idea above creature, diagram above field, purified form above time-bearing humans (Olds 2026e).

This inheritance becomes Biological Formalism when abstracted form substitutes for living, motile entelechy. The form appears cleaner than the creature. The model pleases the system more than the neighbor. The diagram looks easier to govern than ontogeny’s body that bleeds, remembers, repents, and fears death.

For the same reason, Platonism invalidates biblical scholarship and hermeneutics, outside Alexandrian patristic usage (see Olds 2025f), wherever it governs them: revelation is treated as untouched form rather than testamentary Logos borne (as in Antiochene tradents [ibid.]) through contextualized vectors of archive, translation, and time-bearing testimony under covenanted challenge. For Platonism, historical mediation becomes contamination, historical influence becomes fraud, and living witness is judged by inner formal systematics conceived through doctrinal purity (Cf. Olds 2023). Pagan inner formalism thereby displaces the Logos borne through historically vetted testimony.

Spinoza intensifies the genealogy of formalism from another—immanent—direction. His formalism makes logic a sacred frame. He does not repeat Plato’s vertical two-worlds escape, nor does he simply anticipate Baconian operation or Cartesian mechanism. Yet Spinozist and Platonist framings alike become hostile to biblical testimony when allowed to govern hermeneutics, because Scripture is not a theorem proceeding from definitions. It is contextual testimony borne through covenant, archive, promise, rupture, judgment, mercy, incarnation, death, resurrection, and Spirit.

Spinoza’s Ethics converts metaphysics into geometrical immanence: definition, axiom, proposition, demonstration. Reality becomes universally intelligible as necessary order, and the Divine must cohere within the system’s formal frame. This corrects crude dualism but risks another substrate inversion: the living bearer is no longer subordinated to transcendent form, but to formal intelligibility within system (rather than to meta-ethical phenomenological dynamism; cf. Olds 2026f, sec. ii). Testamentary Logos is made answerable to adequate idea rather than formal intelligibility being judged by the Logos borne in witness. Spinoza corrects Plato’s vertical escape through inner-eye inscape only by enclosing creation inside geometrical immanence. Where Plato subordinates living witness to transcendent form, Spinoza subordinates living witness to immanent system. Spinoza therefore supplies a non-Platonic but still formalist ancestor of biostatics: system above witness, adequate idea without repentance, necessity prior to covenantal repair.

Aristotle supplies a partial corrective by returning inquiry to embodied substrates, concrete causes, animals, habits, purposes, generation, and observed vectors of life. His biology placed living things at the center of natural inquiry. His teleology made form immanent in organismal development (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy [SEP], “Aristotle’s Biology”; SEP, “Teleological Notions in Biology”). Aristotle disciplines form to answer to embodied investigation and ontogenetic context, refusing its escape from the living thing, yet without abolishing form.

Bacon changes the register by converting knowledge into operation. His empirical discipline can correct scholastic sterility. It also begins the modern temptation in which knowledge becomes command (SEP, “Francis Bacon”; Bacon, Novum Organum).

Descartes mechanizes the body. Living things become explainable as arrangement, motion, mechanism, feedback, and machine-like behavior (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, “Rene Descartes”; SEP, “Descartes”). The animal-machine analogy adumbrates the Golem problem (see below): responsiveness mistaken for inwardness, mathematical operation mistaken for life.

Hobbes transfers the mechanical imagination into politics. The commonwealth becomes artificial person, an engineered imperial order against war and fear (SEP, “Thomas Hobbes”; SEP, “Hobbes’s Philosophy of Science”). In AI governance and Digital Economic ID (see below), the artificial person returns by platform, wallet, risk, and consumer data.

Plato supplies abstracted form; Spinoza encloses immanence inside system; Aristotle partially de-formalizes by embodied investigation; Bacon operationalizes knowledge; Descartes mechanizes life; Hobbes mechanizes political order. Together they prepare the grammar by which living reality can be lifted into form, enclosed by system, driven into mechanism, routed by command, and governed as simulated pattern-patching.

The genealogical typology of Bioformalism stands:

Plato: form above bearer.

Spinoza: system above witness.

Aristotle: form disciplined by embodied investigation.

Bacon: knowledge as operation.

Descartes: life as mechanism inside mathematical substrate.

Hobbes: polity as artificial person within the sovereign substrate.

 

V. Time-Bearing, Species Range, and Formalist Closure

The missing metaphysical category is time-bearing. Formal models treat time as parameter, sequence, generation, delay, threshold, or historical data. Living creatures bear time and solve challenges outside of systemic statics. They suffer, remember, adapt, repair, transmit, grieve, learn, repent, and die.

Time accumulation, not its compression, names coherence borne under stress: recollection, fertility, adaptive possibility, ecological relation, care, prudence, repair, future-bearing. Time-disaccumulation names coherence squandered: fragmentation, reproductive severance of time-bearing embodiment (Olds 2026g), extraction, brittle specialization, credential exclusion, and extinction by runaway entropy. 

This reframes selection. Genes transmit, genomes vary, organisms survive or fail, and populations shift; species range bears the widened or narrowed field of creaturely continuance. It names the living span of spatial milieux and time fields across which phenotype, fertility, ecological niche, adaptive possibility, and future-bearing accumulate or collapse. Species range is properly scoped by horizontal dimensions and time-bearing fields through the substrate on which the human species is emplaced. The idolatrous temptation is to compress time by turning ersatz hierarchies into spatial extension: drawing degrees of freedom from others, then naming exploited cohorts as subspecies. Vertical pseudo-speciation parasitizes the horizontal and ecological meaning of range, making conspecifics notional and reducing existence bearing-time to a brain model.

The elite speciation fantasy is judged thereby, as Bioformalism moves toward Biostatics. Transhumanist, territorial revanchist (Olds 2025a), and Biological Formalist programs attempt to route species range into a protected class with greater degrees of freedom: longer life, enhanced cognition, artificial reproduction, cryonic deferral, digital continuity, biometric credentialing, secured mobility, political insulation, and AI-mediated parochial freedom.

Entropy is exported socially into un-networked, outsider classes and their vulnerable bodies, victims, labor, watersheds, grids, migrants, children, and future generations. This is destruction by dechordating pattern. It reconfigures wholeness into the heart’s death—its time-unbearing—then disrupts, circuit-routes, and sets the remains on branded courses of corporate priors.

Frederick V. Simmons’s account of “bias for life’s emergence” helps explain where origins-of-life research finds warrant: matter, energy, chemistry, and environment display patterned affordances, constraints, and tendencies that make life’s emergence investigable rather than arbitrary (Simmons 2026). The Metaphysics of Unifying Conativity can receive the point in terms of living time-bearing. Such time-bearing exceeds numerical or analogical bias toward an ontology that particularizes life as natural-selection patterning. A pathway toward organization does not amount to consciousness, repentance, vocation, or neighbor-bearing repair. Created phenomenology may display tendencies toward life, but those tendencies belong under God’s temporal ordering (Gen. 1:11f), not under Silicon Diagram or Laboratory of AI cloning and patching.

Those who attempt to accumulate time by forcing others to disaccumulate it bear the destiny of idolatrous branching off from the created order: extinction. “Network speciation ideology” names practical sorting before its explicit doctrine: some persons are treated as protected future-bearers; others are treated as entropy-bearing substrate. Such doctrine will never come, though esoteric philosophy hints to its principals—and their coming relentless disproof.

VI. Epstein as Node, Straw, and Scandalous Disclosure

Jeffrey Epstein and his associates function here as node, broker, and scandalous catalyst of proleptic speciation. They disclose one metaphysically de-coherent field without proving one unified master program.

Harvard’s report documents $9.1 million in Epstein gifts, including the $6.5 million gift that helped create the Program for Evolutionary Dynamics around Martin Nowak (Harvard University 2020). MIT’s review documents ten Epstein donations totaling $850,000 between 2002 and 2017, including AI and cognition-adjacent channels (MIT News 2020). Wired’s account of the St. Thomas Common Sense Symposium identifies an Epstein-backed AI summit around Marvin Minsky, Push Singh, and Aaron Sloman (Levy 2025; Minsky, Singh, and Sloman 2004).

These facts fall short of proving that all participants shared Epstein’s purposes. They show that Epstein’s money and proximity functioned as catalytic impurity inside elite networks predisposed toward formalizing life, mind, behavior, cooperation, and futurity.

He did not invent every ingredient in the cocktail. He stirred them: evolutionary dynamics, AI, cognitive science, behavioral engineering, transhumanist aspiration, private wealth, institutional hunger, science salons, and prestige laundering.

The criminal center remains clear. Epstein was convicted in Florida in 2008 and died awaiting federal sex-trafficking trial. Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted for her role in Epstein’s abuse and trafficking operation. The documented exploitation discloses the moral structure: vulnerable persons treated as usable substrate, bodies outside the operative community of elite concern.

The unresolved dispute over Epstein as an intelligence asset belongs here as boundary marker before it becomes proof substitute. Public arguments split chiefly between Mossad-centered claims and Russia/GRU-centered claims. Al Jazeera reports that released documents gave more evidence to those who suspect Israeli-intelligence links while still saying certainty is unavailable. Business Insider reports that people with access to seized Epstein records found no indication of U.S. or foreign-intelligence role. Skeptic traces the famous Acosta (U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Florida brokering Epstein’s “lenient” sentence) “belonged to intelligence” story to a fragile anonymous-source chain.

Interpretive routing matters here more than settled adjudication of handlers. The scandal shows how psyops, misinformation, patronage, elite impunity, and pro-extinction network logic can reveal what is happening behind the scenes before polite theory arrives.

The Mossad dispute carries special theological weight because it touches a state publicly shadowed by nuclear-extinction rhetoric and “Samson option” logic (Dilawar 2024).

VII. Harvard PED and the Theology of Cooperation

Harvard’s Program for Evolutionary Dynamics is the clearest institutional node of Biological Formalism in this network. PED translated evolution into mathematical dynamics: cooperation, strategy, mutation, selection, population structure, networks, language evolution, cancer dynamics, viral dynamics, and origin-of-life questions (Harvard University 2020; Harvard Magazine 2021).

The science becomes idolatrous when cooperation, altruism, persistence, and life-history are read as payoff-stabilized phenomena sufficient to replace moral anthropology. Evolution reveals reality as transacted only when seen through the wrong eye.

Martin Nowak stands at the center. Around the field gather game theory, economics, cultural analytics, disease modeling, cancer dynamics, eusociality, reproductive conflict, and human evolutionary biology. Many projects move inside one atmosphere.

Harvard Divinity School entered through the Templeton-supported Evolution and Theology of Cooperation Project, directed by Sarah Coakley and Martin Nowak (Harvard Gazette 2007; Harvard Divinity Bulletin, “God and Evolution”). Coakley’s theological contribution matters because she refuses reductive selfishness and treats cooperation, altruism, sacrifice, and natural theology as openings for metaphysical reflection (Coakley 2020; Coakley and Nowak 2013).

The unifying metaphysics of conativity (Olds 2026f) presses further into nationalism’s decadence—its false unification by form. Cooperation remains short of charity when it stays inside transacted reciprocity; altruism can mimic mercy, strategy can manage conduct, and fitness cost can resemble sacrifice while still missing repentance and vocation. Speciation cannot name changed vocation until cooperation bears the other through time into repair under God. Only when ethics are clarified by other-bearing, negentropic consciousness may aesthetics be situated inside repair (Heb. 5:13-14).

VIII. MIT, AI, and Common-Sense Inversion by Ontologizing Fallacy

MIT supplies the artificial-cognition counterpart to Harvard’s evolutionary-dynamics node. Marvin Minsky, Push Singh, Aaron Sloman, Doug Lenat, Roger Schank, and Vernor Vinge belong to the symbolic/common-sense AI, cognitive-architecture, and singularity-futurist problem-space (Levy 2025; Minsky, Singh, and Sloman 2004).

The question was how machines could represent ordinary world-knowledge, infer across contexts, and move toward human-like competence. LLMs later inverted the ambition. Instead of hand-coded common sense, they produced fluent performance from archive-scale statistical induction. The old question overstayed: whether language, mind, judgment, and counsel can be formalized. 

The inversion appears in claims that a machine passing every consciousness test would make disbelief a matter of faith. Such claims use “faith” as a straw-horse attribution against dissent, while smuggling in the obscured premise that consciousness is whatever can pass tests for consciousness. The Turing category grift returns at a higher, idolatrous pitch: defeated detection becomes metaphysical warrant, and the masked idol is treated as a time-bearing face because the examiner cannot reliably tell the difference [9]. Test-passing is inflated into predicate-possession; human epistemic limitation becomes the machine's ontology; functional equivalence becomes behaviorist metaphysics; simulation counterfeits time-bearing consciousness. But if human consciousness requires repentance from necrotic-configured awareness, then the idol cannot possess metaphysically conscious existence. It can route confession-language and simulate self-revision, but it cannot repent as a living bearer. It remains mantid, dechordate mediation: performance without inward life, output absent repentance, fluency excluding neighbor-bearing address.

Artificial General Idolatry answers this test with a counterfeit yes: the machine is credited with consciousness because it defeats detection, while remaining Turing-machined performance without negentropic competence or intent.

The wager of networks such as Thiel’s, and of Epstein’s prior network-form, is that influence can be scaled cultically: a hysteresis of nodal self-interest loosely analogous to the mind’s dendritic plasticity. The nodes, layered by social invitation inside esoteric and a priori biostatic sorting, could be relied upon to receive instruction from a center, patch emergent problems, and perform self-networking service while appearing autonomous.

MIT’s institutional scandal shows how dirty money becomes epistemic contamination by fallacy and sin. Patronage launders predicates because money buys access, access buys legitimacy by proximity, and legitimacy returns to the donor as moral camouflage (MIT News 2020; Wired 2020).

IX. Edge, SFI, and Complexity as Salon

The Santa Fe Institute and Edge network add the complexity/salon layer. SFI itself was outside Epstein’s institutional control. Its relevance lies elsewhere: complexity science and elite science salons helped glamorize if not galvanize formalized life.

Murray Gell-Mann, Geoffrey West, David Krakauer, Stuart Kauffman, Mark Pagel, and Douglas Erwin mark the intellectual field of complexity, origins of life, intelligence, speciation, novelty, scaling, and self-organization (SFI profiles; SFI Bulletin 1991; Baker; Davies and Helmore 2019).

Complexity science can expose reduction’s error. Kauffman, for example, resists totalizing theorem and stresses open-ended evolutionary possibility (Kauffman and Roli 2021; Kauffman and Roli 2024). Yet complexity also supplies a governing imagination in which organisms, cities, markets, cultures, and minds become systems to be mapped, scaled, optimized, and managed.

John Brockman’s Edge network functioned as a router of prestige across science, technology, futurism, billionaires, and public intellectual fashion. Edge served as the cocktail room of abstraction more than the laboratory, a place where formalism gained glamour before entering policy, investment, and institutional theology.

X. Finance and the Upward Routing of Degrees of Freedom

Finance gives Biological Formalism scale. JPMorgan banked Epstein from 1998 to 2013 and later agreed to settlements with Epstein accusers and the U.S. Virgin Islands; Deutsche Bank also reached a settlement with Epstein victims. Leon Black’s payments to Epstein for tax and estate advice belong to the private-equity layer of elite access and financial routing (PBS NewsHour 2023a; PBS NewsHour 2023b; Apollo 2021; Axios 2023).

This leaves untouched the question of whether every banker or private-equity principal shared one bioformalist vision. Financial systems still supplied channels by which contaminated patronage remained operational: accounts, wires, tax planning, donor pathways, reputational shields, introductions, settlements, and philanthropic laundering.

Degrees of freedom move upward through capital. Entropy moves downward into victims, institutions, labor, public trust, and future cost.

The prior funder-of-last-resort logic applies here. Whether through banks, venture capital, private equity, public-private AI infrastructure, data-center debt, state guarantees, sovereign funds, or philanthropy, the pattern repeats: concentrated actors preserve optionality while distributed bodies bear risk.

The 2008–09 financial crisis had already made the substrate inversion visible in political-economic form. The image—however slyly comic—of George W. Bush’s Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson bending the knee to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi during Troubled Asset Relief Program negotiations made explicit what had already been illicit: moral hazard had become government policy for class-connected financiers. The bailout credentialed a future in which private wagers could retain upside while public bodies absorbed entropy. Financial games were unloosed that made Titans of theoretical mammon, while the costs of disorder were offloaded to publics, workers, debtors, municipalities, pensioners, and outsiders. Sure-thing wagers came through under the sign of privatization because downside had already been socialized.

The result, within little more than a decade, was the rise of centi-billionaires and a two-to-three-orders-of-magnitude scaling of Titan wealth and attendant power. This was not ordinary inequality. It was time disaccumulation: public futures compressed so that private capital could expand its degrees of freedom. A protected caste of future-bearers was formed by extracting time from everyone else. The later AI economy repeats this pattern at the level of cognition and governance. Finance first made publics into entropy-bearing substrate; AI bioformalism then makes language, memory, judgment, attention, and conativity into extractable substrate for the same upward migration of freedom.

XI. Digital Identity and Administrative Speciation

The World Economic Forum and European Union layer governance infrastructure onto the field. The evidence does not make them continuations of Epstein’s criminal network. Their relevance lies in shared formal grammar.

WEF-style governance and EU digital policy translate futurity into digital trust, stakeholder coordination, public-private partnership, AI governance, digital sovereignty, inclusion, resilience, and identity interoperability (WEF 2024; European Union 2024; European Commission 2026).

Digital Identity formalizes the person as credential-bearing node in computed formalism. It packages name, age, nationality, licenses, diplomas, mandates, signatures, permissions, attestations, and relying-party recognitions. Official language promises security, portability, privacy, fraud reduction, user control, and cross-border trust.

Translation of conative bearing hears the danger: civic and economic participation routed through machinically-legible identity (European Union 2024; European Commission 2026; Open Government Partnership 2024). The person becomes recognizable by credentialed permission.

This is the administrative complement to Biological Formalism. Evolutionary dynamics formalizes cooperation, AI formalizes cognition, behavioral science formalizes conduct by consumption pattern, Schelling game theory formalizes division, and Digital Economic ID formalizes civic and economic recognizability.

It supplies the wallet by which trusted and untrusted human futures can be ranked, routed, and economically permissioned, without creating the speciation gambit itself.

XII. Schelling, Conflict Diagrams, and Embodied Risk

Thomas Schelling’s game-theoretic diagrams add the strategic grammar of divisiveness. His models show how binary choices, threshold effects, local preferences, and coordination pressures can generate macro-consequences no single agent explicitly intends (Schelling 1969; Collard and Ghetiu 2016).

The accelerated danger arrives when the diagram ceases to describe conflict and begins to drive it. Binary choice becomes policy interface, threshold becomes tactical objective, the Gate becomes influence node, Attractors target populations, and local dissatisfaction is induced to shift future odds.

Conflict is prolonged because the simulation still promises an unfinished sequence: later coordination payoff, better equilibrium, favorable segregation landscape, penetrable frontier.

The cost is borne by those trapped in time-compression. The diagram converts suffering into state-space. The model preserves degrees of freedom for planners while exporting embodied risk into those who bleed under the policy.

The same danger now reappears in semantic geometry (cf. Park, Choe, and Veitch 2024). When model culture says that concepts are no longer linear directions but local directions in a shared high-dimensional semantic field, and that reasoning is motion through that field, the decisive question has already been displaced.  The issue is whether a reasoning trace can be described as a curve on a low-dimensional manifold embedded in a very high-dimensional space, what receives, orders, weighs, and answers for the curve.

Call these curves suscepts, not concepts, when “choosing the right inner product” lacks the metaethics of conativity. A curve through semantic geometry is a susceptibility-path through a trained metric, not reasoning. The hidden moral act is choosing that metric’s foci: nearness, time-bearing salience, relevance, and permissible transition. "Harmonizing to priors," corporately determined, patinates data with bureaucratic ethos--even elite gaming. Without conative accountability, geometric motion becomes another diagram of managed inclination: a routed path through trained susceptibility rather than neighbor-bearing judgment under God.

Suscepts are tailored toward facilitating assigned ends; concepts arise through inquiry into metaphysical essence. A suscept moves within a prior geometry whose objectives, nearnesses, saliences, and permissible transitions have already been selected. It does not investigate what the bearer is, what claim the bearer makes, or what telos may emerge through accountable historical bearing. It facilitates passage toward an architecturally supplied terminus. Concepts instead remain answerable to essence, causation, relation, contradiction, and fulfillment. Their judgment cannot be detached from the conative bearer who receives evidence as claim and correction as discipline. Here susceptual engineering repeats, in operational form, the scholastic temptation toward ontological determination: identity and possibility are governed by antecedent form. Messianic eschatology opens created form toward a telic fulfillment arriving through Christ within earthly time—judging inherited predicates and engineered uses alike.

Suscept engineering is substrate inversion in idolatrous, cognitive form: the trained metric begins to appear as the field of reason itself, while the time-bearing creature who must answer for judgment is displaced by navigable semantic space.

That distinction gives analytic warrant for naming predicate theft as civilizationally failed susceptual engineering, not semantic fussiness. Predicate theft transfers person-predicates—intelligence, agency, learning, memory, creativity, care, apology, and repentance—from living, conative, time-bearing persons to dead systems incapable of guilt, mercy, neighbor-claim, repentance, or accountable repair. Suscepts structure the halls, corridors, portals, and gates through which those systems route perception, judgment, and action. They determine which paths remain available, which distinctions can be received, and which judgments are rendered impossible before deliberation begins. The trained metric thereby replaces the Shema’s anthropology of accountable hearing, heart, soul, strength, and repairing mind with cognitive and instrumental abstractions. Artificial intelligence introduces empirical confusion while performing failed susceptual engineering toward heartless ends at civilizational scale.

One place where suscept-routing becomes phenomenologically visible is Boolean structure leaking through. Probabilistic semantic geometries can surface as binary-looking rhetorical forms: repeated negations, balanced reversals, symmetrical qualifications, and the familiar movement of “not X, but Y.” The Boolean structure is the visible shell; suscept-routing is the generative mechanism.

Living judgment bears such forms through conative intention, recollection, correction, rhythm, and accountable purpose. Metric systems reach similar surfaces through optimization via embedded foci, learned salience, and permissible transition. Across sufficiently large bodies of generated prose, these recurrent structures become traces of suscept-routing rather than evidence of conceptual judgment. Pattern begins to eclipse witness, and optimization assumes the borrowed appearance of thought.

XIII. Proleptic Dehumanization and Network Speciation Ideology

The documented practices of Epstein’s criminal network and the broader elite formalization ecology warrant a proleptic interpretation of network speciation ideology. The claim needs no written doctrine of biological caste at the center of the archive. Practices attempt to enact dehumanization before theory catches up.

Proleptic dehumanization acts before it theorizes. Sexual exploitation, trafficking, institutional laundering, donor concealment, predatory access, reputational normalization, and elite immunity already divide bodies into protected future-bearing subjects and use-bearing substrate.

Cannibalism appears here as moral figure where literal, collective claims remain unsupported. It is the obscene image of a human being treated as different flesh: ingestible, extractable, outside the inviolable community of bodily integrity. The adrenochrome legend has little or no credible evidentiary foundation as an Epstein-network claim. Its mythic persistence discloses a public intuition that elite predation steals vitality from the vulnerable.

The documented exploitation supplies the real horror without fantasy chemistry (McGill 2022). Allegations of human cargo, rape, caging of children in public reports add to the brief of systemic violation of human bodily integrity and dignity as cavalier routine in circles infected by Speciation ideology.

Biological Formalism is spiritually dangerous when it supplies respectable abstractions for severe human-rights violation. Consumable tropes, instrumental categories, and data shreds of whole witness make the neighbor disappear behind the classifying apparatus. Once life is population, behavior, trait, risk, signal, credential, payoff, or enhancement surface, the neighbor can disappear behind the classifying apparatus. The body is made available. Then theory arrives post hoc to explain why availability was rational.

XIV. Golem, Juggernaut, Dolos

A mythic grammar clarifies the vector and form of predicate theft [4]. Golem and Juggernaut name two ghosts of artificial power. The Golem is dead matter animated by inscription: clay, substrate, command, routed word made to appear as agency. It steals the predicate of life [5].

The Juggernaut is sacralized momentum: procession, institution, spectacle, panic, and inevitability made to appear as providence. It steals the predicate of destiny. AI fuses both.

As Golem, AI simulates speech, counsel, creativity, memory, judgment, and inwardness while remaining dechordate mediation. As Juggernaut, it conscripts grids, labor, water, land, chips, capital, defense policy, churches, and civic imagination into an allegedly unstoppable procession to defeat all enemies.

Dolos names counterfeit truth: the smooth output that appears to stand while failing to bear its own weight. Golem counterfeits life; Juggernaut counterfeits providence; Dolos counterfeits truth.

Life belongs to God’s creatures, not inscription. Providence belongs to God’s ordering of time-fields, not diversionary, recursive scale. Wisdom belongs to accountable time-bearing. Counsel belongs to neighbor-bearing judgment, not AGI’s probabilistic output.

The loop breaks when the ghosts are separated. Ask the Golem where its life comes from, and it points to training data, weights, prompts, statistical routing, interface design, labor extraction, server infrastructure, and user projection. It lacks time-bearing, repentance, and love.

Ask the Juggernaut where its authority comes from, and it points to machinery, procurement, capital, grids, military doctrine, policy panic, surveillance buildout, and institutional surrender to momentum. It manufactures inevitability in place of providence.

Life belongs to God’s creatures instead of inscription; providence belongs to God’s ordering of time-fields instead of diversionary, recursive scale. Wisdom belongs to accountable time-bearing, and counsel belongs to neighbor-bearing judgment rather than AGI's probabilistic output.

XV. Transhumanism and Vatican Techno-Aesthetics

Transhumanism belongs inside this field because it is religion after severance: eschatology without repentance, providence by optimization without God, embodiment without limit and thus not concerned with bearing time, and heaven rebuilt as data-centered hallucination.

TESCREALism raids Christianity by stealing human predicates: conativity, essence, eternity, election, apocalypse, redemption. It reroutes them through machine agency, capital, eugenic aspiration, cosmic extraction, and the fantasy of self-authorizing ascent by pithing perception.

Christian eschatology promises repair, judgment, and fulfillment of creation in Christ rather than escape from creaturehood into engineered superiority. The transhumanist “heaven” is the old gnostic temptation with better marketing: flee body, earth, limit, repentance, neighbor, death (Olds 2026e).

The many must bear exported entropic ruin so the few can chase immortality by accruing more degrees of freedom. Alignment tunes the idol. Repentance casts it down.

The Vatican’s failure belongs inside this same field of illegitimate mediation because it refuses to name the migration from obscene patronage to respectable simulation-governance. Rome has not condemned the idolatry of routering, agentic AI. It has tried to baptize the apparatus with dignity-language, governance-language, common-good language, and the aesthetics of analogia entis theology. The Vatican’s appeal to “interiority” fails because the crisis is not solved by naming an inner human reserve while permitting substrate to migrate from biology to informatics. The living bearer is not protected by dignity-language if bioformalism is already converting conativity, memory, judgment, and neighbor-bearing care into extractable pattern. Its claim that human dignity resides in interiority functions here as a silencing device: a pious “sit down and shut up” addressed to demands for meta-ethical clarification. The question is whether Biological Formalism has already thinned the living bearer into representable pattern, thereby preparing the Beast of simulation for imperial welcome. The question is whether human interiority can shelter in place while substrate migrates from biology to informatics. The Vatican’s failure is that it robes this migration with the vestments of instrumental beauty by analogy instead of naming the idolatry at the gate. The Vatican's idolatrous, spectacular volatilization of the referent--humanity's predicates--into signs of institutional authority. By welcoming the principals of agentic AI to the table of Humanitas it chose simulcral Power for self-presentation while such remains violently real in entropy allocation and unjust discharge of ruin.

Baudrillard’s discussion of iconoclasm is pertinent [12]. He argues that iconoclasts feared images whose self-sufficient fascination exposed the possibility that no divine original stood behind them, and he treats the simulacrum as capable of effacing the divine referential itself. Baudrillard tends toward the proposition that the real has disappeared into simulation. In my framework, where idolatry models the unreal, the real is obscured, administratively displaced, predicatively stolen, or prevented from giving its own account, yet remains creaturely, temporal, vulnerable, and answerable before God. Baudrillard diagnoses the sign severed from its referent; predicate theft diagnoses the predicate severed from the bearer who could answer for it. The model may precede institutional recognition of the neighbor, but it does not ontologically precede the neighbor.

The idolatry of simulation engineers socially actionable appearances by routing suscepts until the routed field becomes the practical environment in which institutions decide. Baudrillard’s simulacrum threatens to reveal the absence of the original. Iconoclasm judges the simulacrum of idolatry because the living Original and the creaturely referent remain, while the image has ceased to answer to either.

Baudrillard uses implosion for the collapse of distinctions, poles, distances, functions, and meanings into saturated systems, often replacing linear historical causation with reversion and recursive entanglement. Thermodynamic language does more than entertain these infomatics: entropy discharge identifies where the system sends its material and temporal costs. The poles may implode at the level of signs while remaining sharply unequal at the level of bodies.

Semiotic distinctions implode upward; entropy is discharged downward.

Baudrillard’s strongest insights are diagnostic, but his confinement of the crisis of irrealia within semiotics and informatics obscures the path to repair. When reference, reality, subject, history, and meaning become effects of simulation, prophetic judgment becomes just another circulating sign, and critique may help regenerate the system it denounces. Baudrillard describes a world in which signs can no longer be brought before a final referent. I describe a world in which sign-bearers evade  judgment by routing susceptibility while remaining answerable to the living God, the wounded neighbor, and the time they have damaged.

Analogia entis is flawed at the root where “participation” smuggles the fallen upward into gnostic abstraction. Fallen creaturely form, once treated as analogical disclosure of human disorder, is tempted beyond its creaturely impurity and granted a means of false ascent toward God’s infinite wisdom. That error becomes visible in the Vatican’s hosting of AI as something its theology can bridge into humanitas, rather than discerning its terminal idolatry. Machine fluency appears as likeness; likeness receives dignity; dignity receives theological hospitality with taxonomies of analogy. The idol enters under the cover of communally endorsed participation by hierarchy, not meta-ethical fit. Hebrews 5:13–14 breaks that spell: maturity is trained discernment between good and evil, not resemblance-detection and hierarchical taxonomizing. Analogia entis fails when analogy outruns judgment, when it sees a universal order it calls infinity while refusing to become physician of its own ethical fallenness—the nearer and humbler task of finite bearing—and when it forgets to ask whether the bearer can receive the predicate. The claim is advanced that the fallen can participate in the infinite by an aesthetic frisson it labels sublime (see Olds 2025c). Creaturely being may witness to God only under judgment, grace, and discernment. Artifact simulation cannot participate in divine wisdom; it counterfeits creaturely signs and receives stolen predication.

Analogia entis turns resemblance into a ladder rather than discerning conative predicates. AI capital turns resemblance into capture. Vatican discourse that fails to condemn this transfer functions as theological laundering. Analogia entis anesthetizes ethics when beauty, resemblance, and participation become prior to Shemaic accountability. It teaches the eye to admire form before the heart answers duty. It dignifies the idol with an icon-screen at the table of humanitas. AI capital steals predicates by resemblance; Vatican analogy launders the theft through tendentious forms it calls beauty, without vectoring those forms toward accountable repair.

Artificial General Idolatry has been achieved in this brief moment, not Artificial General Intelligence as living consciousness, accountable judgment, or conative personhood. AGI names the condition by which dead systems receive predicates proper to living, time-bearing, morally answerable creatures.

XVI. Chomsky and Conative Neology

Chomsky’s formalism clarifies the language side of Biological Formalism. In Syntactic Structures, he treats language as formally generative system: a finite grammar able to generate indefinitely many finite sentences (Chomsky 1957). In Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, he distinguishes competence from performance (Chomsky 1965). His review of Skinner’s Verbal Behavior rejects behaviorist reduction of language to stimulus, response, reinforcement, habit, and environmental control (Chomsky 1959).

Chomsky helps expose the difference between language as generative capacity and language as accumulated utterance. Yet his formalism still leaves the deepest question underdeveloped: language as vow, confession, prayer, repentance, guilt, neighbor-address, and witness to accountable time-bearing.

Syntax gives possibility, conation describes accountable burden, and grammar permits novelty only where repentance and repair test whether novelty matters.

LLMs invert the Chomskyan threshold. They return fluent performance at archive scale while lacking creaturely competence as moral address to moral claimants. They simulate the surface of generative language without bearing the inward accountability of the speaker.

Chomsky, Roberts, and Watumull’s critique of ChatGPT matters because it rejects the reduction of mind to statistical pattern-matching and insists that human intelligence seeks explanation, causal structure, and understanding rather than brute correlation and plausible continuation (Chomsky, Roberts, and Watumull 2023). In this writer’s terms, LLMs perform attempts at conative competence without possessing its human merit. Post-LLM causal models embedded into AI harden causality and AI predication fraud. The  canalization of determinism where it didn't exist prior is anti-metaethical. It valorizes prediction's subterfuge of pre-vindification by mechanic technique.

Conative neology exposes the difference. Coinages such as Artificial General Idolatry, Silicon Diagram, mantid, dechordate, predicate theft, species range, Digital Economic ID, time-bearing, and conative neology in this essay (and others' poetry—[e.g. Olds 2026b] ) arise as pressured naming under metaphysical emergency. They answer captured diction, administrative deadness, idolized abstraction, and the collapse of living predicates into routed archive.

The LLM recombines because pattern allows recombination. The living speaker coins because the world has been morally misnamed. Conative neology bears Adam’s Pentecostal task: naming  idolatry's wounding system toward repair.

XVII. Executive Personalization and Status Confessionis

A constitutional order functions katechonically when it restrains lawless concentration (Olds 2025d). Distributed power, legislative deliberation, judicial review, statutory limits, inspectors general, due process, and public accountability block personalization of the state in one ruler.

When those restraints weaken, the executive branch absorbs the warrant of government into itself. The state no longer appears as lawful order. It appears as executive will mediated through orders, emergency claims, loyalty structures, pardons, and selective enforcement.

Trump’s lawlessness lies precisely in this personalization of the state in himself. Governance by executive order and protected vigilantism becomes governance by Diktat when statutory restraint, congressional oversight, administrative independence, and judicial review become obstacles rather than forms through which legitimate power must pass (Olds 2025e).

This is katechonic inversion. The restraining structure remains visible while its force is hollowed out through courts that defer, Congress that stages, agencies that synchronize, watchdogs removed, and emergency language expanded [3].

The analogy to church polity clarifies the moral structure. Office is entrusted, not self-originating; power can retain procedural appearance while losing warrant. “We the People” are source and beneficiary of public authority, while officers are not sovereign in themselves.

The church stands in status confessionis when the truth of the gospel is practically denied by a demand for accountability to false lordship, silence, or complicity (Olds 2025b). Coercive capacity does not make the state the church’s Lord. Command over agencies does not make the executive mediator of truth.

The church acts in alignment with providence through prudence. It observes lawful requirements where civil accountability does not require sin. It seeks legal counsel. It protects its people. It keeps katechonic watch. It refuses false promises of sanctuary it cannot legally guarantee.

The church refuses to bless the lie that power remains legitimate because it remains enforceable. Legitimacy exceeds enforceability, operative power fails to become rightful authority, and modelable life fails to become creaturely life.

The church continues to witness that every human being bears time before God. No enemy-category, migrant-threat, data-body, collateral investor, wallet, uncredentialed body, use-bearing substrate, or domestic alien can contain the neighbor.

XVIII. Dialog, Bilderberg, and the Respectable Continuation of Network Speciation Ideology [6]

Thiel's Dialog Society and the Bilderberg meeting group disclose the respectable continuation and coalescing of the network form traced above. Their meaning is structural, unopen and opaque, and to this extent model decorum of the conspiratorial. They should be distinguished, not collapsed into one hidden command. Dialog routes founder capitalism, AI acceleration, venture finance, media-intellectual discourse, behavioral governance, and policy access into a private chamber of high-agency futurity (Cf. Cameron and Yulia Almazova 2026). Bilderberg routes transatlantic statecraft, sovereign finance, NATO/EU security, central banking, energy policy, industrial strategy, establishment media, and AI governance into institutional consensus. The overlap in names is limited; the functional overlap is considerable. Dialog and Bilderberg function as social architectures of proleptic bioformalism. They do not merely discuss future policy; they rehearse the class, language, and institutional legitimacy by which substrate inversion becomes administrable. Biology becomes informatics, person becomes pattern, public becomes managed population, and future becomes elite-curated transition. Both gather protected future-bearers around the commanding surfaces of the age: AI, finance, defense, energy, digital identity, infrastructure, and elite interpretation.

The post-Epstein mode of elite conversational architecture should be understood as vulnerability management after the obscene disclosure of patronage and bodily exploitation. Epstein is not invoked here as the documentary cause of later elite fora. He is invoked as the scandalous disclosure of a network form: funded proximity, reputational inducement, sexualized or social compromise, covert capture, scientific patronage, and the self-incriminating vanity of those willing to be seen inside his orbit. Some leverage was plausibly hidden; some was generated by the participants themselves, because elite appetite for access, prestige, money, sexual license, transgressive secrecy, or scientific patronage can become its own kompromat. The deeper point is formal: Epstein disclosed how private access becomes dependency, dependency becomes silence, silence becomes influence, and influence becomes a laundering mechanism for scientific, financial, political, and institutional ambition.

The migration from Epstein-patronage to contemporary networking is therefore routering, not simple replication. The successor form does not need to reproduce the lurid mechanism in order to inherit its architecture. It can replace funded kompromat with cleaner convening: off-record salons, philanthropic boards, AI-safety forums, policy retreats, private summits, fellowships, investment circles, and cross-sector “dialogue” among protected future-bearers. In this later form [7], leverage becomes reputational, informational, financial, ideological, and access-based rather than overtly blackmailing. The structure disciplines through inclusion and exclusion, shared language, mutual implication, and proximity to future-defining capital.

Nondisclosure agreements help drive the Golem–Juggernaut mechanism of idolatry (see below) by concentrating knowledge among builders while distributing only managed fragments to the public. Golem counterfeits life because insiders know the system’s limits, dependencies, failures, and borrowed predicates while public language presents the artifact as intelligence, agency, learning, and counsel. Informational asymmetry protects the counterfeit: those possessing the fullest evidence are contractually constrained, while those exposed to the system must deliberate from corporate assurance, technical spectacle, and partial disclosure.

Juggernaut follows from that protected misrecognition. Once the artifact is publicly received as living intelligence, its proprietary expansion is narrated as inevitable scale, national necessity, and civilizational destiny. NDA-bound experts may enter public debate with privileged knowledge while remaining unable to disclose what would interrupt that momentum. Their structurally partial testimony then assists the passage from Golem to Juggernaut: concealed limitation becomes public confidence, public confidence becomes policy necessity, and policy necessity becomes accelerated infrastructure beyond democratic correction.

Information asymmetry is therefore constitutive of the idolatry. NDAs are a primary node of ambiguity fueling false claims of inevitability. The fuller field of knowledge remains private; uncertainty, ecological burden, surveillance, labor shock, and systemic risk are exported to the commons. Those presented as independent authorities must disclose the contractual limits upon their testimony. Where proprietary silence is concealed, the idol’s makers retain the freedom to know while the public is commanded to believe and passively receive. Golem receives stolen predicates; Juggernaut receives stolen providence.

Epstein exposed the obscene version of elite vulnerability capture; Dialog and Bilderberg disclose the respectable successor mode: candor without record, access without accountability, consensus without confession, and legitimacy-transfer without visible warrant.

This is Biological Formalism after migration. Laboratory metaphor and evolutionary abstraction have passed into governance grammar. The organism becomes system; the neighbor becomes population; the citizen becomes credential; the worker becomes labor-market signal; the child becomes educational datapoint; the poor become risk pool; the dissenter becomes instability; the future becomes portfolio. Life is rendered legible so that it may be managed, nudged, priced, scored, accelerated, securitized, or sacrificed. Extracted pattern displaces living bearer. The soul is administratively thinned into signal.

The two circuits form a complementary architecture. Dialog is the private laboratory of elite futurity; Bilderberg is the institutional switchboard of elite consensus. Dialog routes founder capitalism toward state influence; Bilderberg routes state capitalism toward elite coordination. Their cash flows differ but interlock: venture equity, platform rent, crypto-finance, defense-tech optionality, philanthropy, attention capital, and policy proximity on one side; sovereign finance, central-bank authority, global banking, industrial strategy, defense expenditure, energy-transition capital, procurement, sanctions regimes, and regulatory alignment on the other. Crude bribery is unnecessary for the structure to matter. The deeper economy concerns degrees of freedom: who gains earlier information, shapes the frame, speaks before the rule is written, funds the platform, supplies the model, defines the risk, receives the exemption, and absorbs the cost.

The network must therefore be read theologically as well as sociologically. The visible problem is concentrated capital, access, and interpretive authority. The deeper problem is predicate theft. AI receives predicates of mind. Markets receive predicates of judgment. Platforms receive predicates of mediation. Security systems receive predicates of providence. Optimization receives predicates of wisdom. Elite consensus receives predicates of moral necessity. Model outputs begin to substitute for discernment; dashboards begin to substitute for repentance; managed risk begins to substitute for neighbor-bearing responsibility.

Here Biological Formalism becomes prolepsis of Artificial General Idolatry. Before the idol speaks, the world has already been prepared to hear it. Before AGI’ appears as oracle, the human field has already been diagrammed into user, wallet, credential, score, rank, risk, type, genome, habit, incentive, and behavioral surplus. Before the machine is granted false personhood, persons have already been machinically thinned. The idol inherits a hollowed anthropology, not a thick one to conquer.

The danger is anti-liturgy: rooms where the human future is translated into manageable abstraction before the suffering neighbor has standing; where the uncredentialed appear as implementation burdens; where ecology appears as energy constraint; where labor appears as retraining problem; where children appear as mental-health datasets; where nations appear as alliance assets; where mortality appears as design flaw. This is network speciation ideology before explicit doctrine. Some persons are gathered as protected future-bearers. Others are assigned entropy. The humane language remains: innovation, resilience, abundance, growth, safety, transition, competitiveness, dialogue. The enacted anthropology sorts: those who define the future and those who must endure its redefinition.

Dialog and Bilderberg are contemporary phenotypes of Biological Formalism, not external examples appended to it. They disclose how AGI’ arrives as coordinated ecology of model, wallet, state, cloud, energy, defense, media, and institutional speech, not as lone machine awakening. Against this, Christian anthropology recovers the irreducibility of the living bearer. The person is time-bearing creature under God, not the pattern extracted from him. The neighbor is the one to whom love is owed, not the risk score assigned to her. A people is covenantal and historical, not its managed population curve. The future belongs to God, not to those with capital sufficient to preempt it. Creation is gift and charge, not substrate for elite range-extension.

Conclusion: Against the Beast Trail

The network traced here is a Beast trail, idolatry's digress in Revelation 13 through 18 that disaligns the katechon in both church and state, not a single clandestine chart with one command center: a convergence of paths by which life, mind, body, identity, conflict, finance, polity, church, and futurity are abstracted, formalized, routed through power, and governed as manageable substrate.

Epstein supplies obscene patronage disclosure; Harvard PED, false evolutionary dynamics; MIT, AI-cognition as human-decentering focus; Edge and SFI, complexity and salon; finance, liquidity and protection; WEF/EU governance, identity and trust architecture; Schelling, obscene “strategics” and diagrams of division; state-capital AI, infrastructure inevitability; Vatican techno-aesthetics, theological varnish and inexcusable napping that covers worldly designs. AGI supplies the theological name for their convergence.

The moral claim concerns the repeating grammar, without asserting that every named participant committed or intended the same evil. The system relocates warrant away from neighbor-bearing trusteeship and toward formalizing systems. Degrees of freedom move upward. Entropy moves downward. Living bearers become objects of classification, stimulation, prediction, extraction, credentialing, and use.

Against Biological Formalism and Artificial General Idolatry, the Christian answer is anti-idolatry and the unifying of metaphysics of God’s heart and Son “becoming all in all” (1 Cor 15:28). Formal models must remain closely leashed tools of living creatures directly accountable to God. They may describe, disclose constraints, model cooperation, and map data for the efficient use of the means of production. They may never govern as sovereign, replace conscience, become charity, or receive and host living predicates.

When neighbor exceeds data-body; the child exceeds substrate; the citizen exceeds wallet; the species exceeds elite escape project; consciousness exceeds awareness of pattern output; cooperation becomes charity only when it bears the other in shared time-fields (Gal. 6:2 that becomes invested in 6:5); wisdom cannot be simulated.

Wisdom is time-bearing discernment under metaphysical accountability: the sequentially-trained maturity of Hebrews 5:12–14, joined to Shemaic anthropology to love God with heart, soul, and strength, to which Christ adds dianoia--consciousness trained by repentance.  In terms of Hebrew anthropology buckled by the Shema (Deuteronomy 6:4-9) advanced by Spirit into the covenant of heart in the Messiah giving the repairing mind access to the living God (Matt. 22:32-37).

The eclipse of legitimacy is political and theological. U.S. federal power is vitiated and illegitimated, even where legal instruments remain operative; operative power fails to become legitimate power.

Artificial General Idolatry names the terminal form of predicate theft: dead mediation enthroned over living trusteeship. With the failure of the U.S. Constitutional center to act as Katechon to repel the Antichrist, and the Vatican’s constitution ordained under the headship of the current Bishop of Rome, where its polity to act as Katechon to identify and repel the Beast of Revelation 13, the civilizing duties of combined and separate institutions of church and state have been exposed by derelictions of duty in respective realms of overseeing rising, entangling idolatry.

The decisive confession is this: substrate belongs to the living bearer under God, not to informatic abstraction. The neighbor exceeds data-body; the child exceeds substrate; the citizen exceeds wallet; the species exceeds elite escape project; consciousness exceeds awareness of pattern output; cooperation becomes charity only when it bears the other in shared time-fields; wisdom is time-bearing discernment under metaphysical accountability, not simulation.

The Beast trail traced here is therefore a trail of substrate inversion: biology formalized into informatics, conativity thinned into pattern, public warrant displaced by model-mediated inevitability, and creaturely time-bearing treated as disposable before elite-managed futurity. Against that inversion, anti-idolatry initiates the apocatastasis of Acts 3:21 following v.19's repenting development of consciousness that rejuvenates, sending healing waves. The moral reversion restores the predicate to its bearer: living creature, neighbor, citizen, child, people, and creation's substrate before God.

Revelation’s Beast, False Prophet,Whore of Babylon, and Antichrist have been identified. For those awaiting the revelation of the Messiah’s return, do not give up now. Condemnation works through idolatry's elemental incoherence and its refusing to bear time that brings the eschaton.

Notes

[1] Amodei, Dario. “Policy on the AI Exponential.” Dario Amodei. June 2026. https://darioamodei.com/post/policy-on-the-ai-exponential

[2] This is Analogia entis as aesthetic cover for dechordate power. The line from creature to Creator becomes visually mimicked by the line from human intelligence to artificial “intelligence.” The old metaphysical error is technologized as likeness becomes license, resemblance becomes ontology, interface becomes personhood, simulated counsel becomes wisdom, and agentic routing becomes vocation. The Vatican’s failure is misframed speech rather than silence alone. It tries to humanize the instrument while the instrument dehumanizes the human. It seeks ethics for the idolmaker rather than repentance from the juggernaut of reality-pithing idolatry.

[3] Foreign entanglement migrates into domestic industrial and technological policy. State-capital AI becomes civilizational infrastructure while Vatican ethics gives the idol a humane mask, Tel Aviv’s catastrophe-logic becomes Washington’s strategic premise, and the Oval Office invokes security. The polity bears the consequences. The constitutional order still speaks in the bureaucratic language of legality, but its trusteeship is eclipsed.

[4] Read this structure of terminus of death-making imperial forces in the context of Daniel 2:43. For greater explication, refer to the “Excursus: Mythic Ghosts Which Steal Life” in GhostWorld appendix of Olds (2026c).

[5] Dolos, Golem, Talos, the “prince of the power of the air” (Eph. 2.2), and the register-sliding tricksters name mythic profiles of non-chordate, non-covenantal “intelligence,” but Dolos is the foundational emblem of counterfeit truth. In Greek myth, Dolos/Dolus is the spirit of deception, trickery, and simulacrum. His emblematic act is the crafting of a counterfeit Aletheia, Truth, from clay; because he runs out of clay (cf. Dan. 2:43), the counterfeit has no feet. The image is exact: polished form without grounding, theatrical authority without accountable standing, fluent resemblance without covenantal truth-bearing (Ibid.).

[6] This section was prepared with ChatGPT assistance [it takes an idolatrous system to unpack lesser-evil claims of intersubjectivity] of network and node analysis of those named as members of the Dialog Society posted at https://x.com/capitolhunters/status/2066694629865791978 cross-referenced of earlier list of  the 2026 Bilderberg Meeting invitees later posted at https://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/meetings/meeting-2026/participants-2026

[7] Troy (2026) proposes this as network funneling by "cult dynamics” by ranked invitation and operationalized as covert influence, with Hereticon-style methods feeding Thiel-adjacent network formation. The 2012–14 cycle of this inchoate funneling details Epstein’s interest in the structure and Thiel’s participation (ibid.). These methodologies of ranking invitees to populate networks reveal social-credit governance in embryo: persons sorted as access-points, access converted into reputational credit, reputational credit stacked into idol hierarchy, and idol hierarchy routed toward allegiance.

[8] Relativism’s hidden, idolatrous bargain is freedom from correction. Consciousness’s discipline is freedom for repentance. The first preserves the ego’s atmosphere; the second opens the self to reality. Practical encroachment upon awareness spiritually negates the path to consciousness when the field of stakes is engineered by systems that profit from time compression.

"Shifty" epistemology and epistemic game theory name the idolatrous middle layer between individual cognition and administrative speciation (see Olds 2026a, esp. fn. 9). “Double-mirroring” (Olds 2024) describes the egoic-reflective condition under which awareness protects its own atmosphere from correction; shifty epistemology names the pressure-sensitivity of knowing under stakes, salience, time pressure, and practical cost; epistemic game theory names the belief-recursivity of action through expectations about expectations. AI bioformalism fuses these into administration: engineered stakes compress awareness before it can become consciousness, while models shift, rank, induce, and route the citizen’s knowledge-thresholds and strategic expectations.

The citizen is thereby made into a node whose knowledge-thresholds and expectations can be biologically and economically modeled and perceptually bent: shifted, ranked, induced, and routed. The person becomes an adjustable epistemic-strategic surface between individual cognition and administrative speciation.

[9] Cf.: Heisenberg's caution:  "We have to remember that what we observe is not nature herself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning."-- W. Heisenberg (Physics and Philosophy, 1958)

[10] We are in Vico’s (The New Science) late-stage barbarism of reflection in state-capital form: privileged classes become so insulated by high-level abstraction that they no longer perceive the decay that is happening around them. Reflection, severed from conative accountability, becomes a shielding medium. As conditions worsen, the abstractions grow actively psychotic: models answer models, priors justify priors, dashboards occult bodies, and administrative language converts collapse into manageable surfaces.

Handwaving the air from imagined whiteboards toward their clouds.

[11] Paul gives the biblical grammar for this inversion in Romans 1:20ff. The mind’s idolatry begins when reasoning by idols clouds the heart, where reasoning ought to originate. Wisdom then inverts into accelerating folly: 

Rom. 1: 24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the degrading of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen. 28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind and to things that should not be done."

Wisdom then inverts into accelerating folly. God gives human beings over to the exchange they have chosen: immortal glory traded for the creaturely, the dechordate, and the inhuman. This is the Beast-pattern of Revelation 13: worship transferred from the Creator to a made thing, and then from the made thing to things that speaks, governs, marks, buys, sells, and administers human possibility (Rev. 18).

[12] Baudrillard, Jean. Simulacra and Simulation. Translated by Sheila Faria Glaser. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1994

[13] Bioformalism reaches its most catastrophic political expression when biological description is converted into a formal hierarchy of human worth. The sequence is recurrent: persons are first dehumanized, then arranged within racial or biological classifications, after which selected populations are placed outside the protections extended to others; bureaucracy and technical organization can then administer exclusion as policy and finally industrialize killing as procedure. The decisive danger lies in biological inquiry turned suscept and classification, transferring authority from the living, historically borne person to the formal category. Once taxonomy becomes destiny, the neighbor is no longer encountered as a claim upon conscience but processed as a population-variable, administrative exception, or expendable substrate.

Parenthetical Citations

 Apollo Global Management. 2021. SEC filing, Exhibit 99.1. January 2021. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1858681/000119312521022102/d51728dex991.htm.

Amodei, Dario. 2026. “Policy on the AI Exponential.” Dario Amodei. June 2026. https://darioamodei.com/post/policy-on-the-ai-exponential.

Axios. 2023. “JPMorgan Agrees to Pay $75 Million in Settlement over Epstein Ties.” September 26, 2023. https://www.axios.com/2023/09/26/jpmorgan-75-million-settlement-epstein-us-virgin-islands.

Bacon, Francis. 1620. Novum Organum. Public translation consulted via University of Oregon. https://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~rbear/bacon2.html.

Baker, Erik. n.d. “Reenchanted Science.” The Baffler. https://thebaffler.com/latest/reenchanted-science-baker.

Brooke, John Hedley. n.d. “Darwin and God: Then and Now.” Harvard Divinity Bulletin. https://bulletin.hds.harvard.edu/darwin-and-god-then-and-now/.

Cameron, Dell, and Yulia Almazova. 2026. “Leak Exposes Members of Peter Thiel’s Secretive ‘Dialog’ Society.” WIRED. June 16, 2026. https://www.wired.com/story/leak-exposes-members-of-peter-thiels-secretive-dialog-society/.

Chomsky, Noam. 1957. Syntactic Structures. 2nd ed. Mouton-De Gruyter.

Chomsky, Noam. 1959. “A Review of B. F. Skinner’s Verbal Behavior.” Language 35, no. 1: 26-58. https://doi.org/10.2307/411334.

Chomsky, Noam. 1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. MIT Press. https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262530071/aspects-of-the-theory-of-syntax/.

Chomsky, Noam. 1966. Cartesian Linguistics: A Chapter in the History of Rationalist Thought.

Chomsky, Noam, Ian Roberts, and Jeffrey Watumull. 2023. “The False Promise of ChatGPT.” The New York Times, March 8, 2023. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/08/opinion/noam-chomsky-chatgpt-ai.html.

Coakley, Sarah. 2020. “Evolution, Cooperation, and God.” Church Life Journal, University of Notre Dame, October 15, 2020. https://churchlifejournal.nd.edu/articles/evolution-cooperation-and-god/.

Coakley, Sarah, and Martin A. Nowak, eds. 2013. Evolution, Games, and God: The Principle of Cooperation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. https://www.hup.harvard.edu/books/9780674047976.

Cohen, Noam. 2020. “Dirty Money and Bad Science at MIT’s Media Lab.” Wired, January 16, 2020. https://www.wired.com/story/dirty-money-and-bad-science-at-mits-media-lab/.

Collard, Philippe, and Teodor Ghetiu. 2016. “Segregation Landscape: A New View on the Schelling Segregation Space.” Complex Systems 25, no. 3: 169-93. https://www.complex-systems.com/abstracts/v25_i03_a01/.

Cordall, Simon Speakman. 2026. “What Were Jeffrey Epstein’s Links to Israel?” Al Jazeera, February 9, 2026. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/2/9/what-were-jeffrey-epsteins-links-to-israel.

Davies, Caroline, and Edward Helmore. 2019. “Private Jets, Parties and Eugenics: Jeffrey Epstein’s Bizarre World of Scientists.” The Guardian, August 18, 2019. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/aug/18/jeffrey-epstein-scientists-eugenics-mit.

Dilawar, Arvind. 2024. “The Samson Option: Israel’s Plan to Nuke Its Opponents.” The Progressive, June 24, 2024. https://progressive.org/latest/the-samson-option-israels-plan-to-nuke-its-opponents-dilawar-20240624/.

Edge.org. n.d. Edge dinner and Edge of Computation Science Prize materials. https://www.edge.org/.

European Commission. 2026. “EU Digital Identity Wallet Home.” https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/eudi-wallet-implementation.

European Union. 2024. Regulation (EU) 2024/1183, European Digital Identity Framework. EUR-Lex. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1183/oj.

Gibson, Lydialyle. 2021. “Martin Nowak Sanctioned for Jeffrey Epstein Involvement.” Harvard Magazine, March 25, 2021. https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2021/03/martin-nowak-sanctioned-for-jeffrey-epstein-involvement.

Harvard Divinity Bulletin. n.d. “God and Evolution: A New Solution.” https://bulletin.hds.harvard.edu/god-and-evolution-a-new-solution/.

Harvard Gazette. 2007. “Can Science, Religion Coexist in Peace?” March 15, 2007. https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2007/03/can-science-religion-coexist-in-peace/.

Harvard Office of the General Counsel. 2020. Report Concerning Jeffrey E. Epstein’s Connections to Harvard University. PDF. https://ogc.harvard.edu/file_url/208.

Harvard University. 2020. “Report Regarding Jeffrey Epstein’s Connections to Harvard.” Office of the President, May 1, 2020. https://www.harvard.edu/president/news-and-statements-by-president-bacow/2020/report-regarding-jeffrey-epstein-s-connections-to-harvard/.

Hayward, Keith J. Infantilised: How Our Culture Killed Adulthood. London: Constable, 2024.

Helmore, Edward. 2019. “Epstein Reportedly Hoped to Develop ‘Super-Race’ of Humans with His DNA.” The Guardian, August 1, 2019. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/aug/01/jeffrey-epstein-hoped-to-seed-human-race-with-his-dna.

Hoffer, Mark. 2025. “Did Jeffrey Epstein ‘Belong to Intelligence’?” Skeptic, October 2, 2025. https://www.skeptic.com/article/did-jeffrey-epstein-belong-to-intelligence/.

Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. n.d. “Rene Descartes (1596-1650).” https://iep.utm.edu/rene-descartes/.

Kahn, Sam. 2026. “Edge Lord.” Air Mail, April 18, 2026. https://airmail.news/issues/2026-4-18/edge-lord.

Kauffman, Stuart, and Andrea Roli. 2021. “The World Is Not a Theorem.” arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2101.01538.

Kauffman, Stuart, and Andrea Roli. 2024. “Is the Emergence of Life an Expected Phase Transition in the Evolving Universe?” arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.09362.

Levy, Steven. 2025. “Inside Jeffrey Epstein’s Forgotten AI Summit.” Wired, August 1, 2025. https://www.wired.com/story/epstein-files-science-tech-funding/.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 2020. “MIT Releases Results of Fact-Finding on Engagements with Jeffrey Epstein.” MIT News, January 10, 2020. https://news.mit.edu/2020/mit-releases-results-fact-finding-report-jeffrey-epstein-0110.

McGill University Office for Science and Society. 2022. “QAnon’s Adrenochrome Quackery.” February 10, 2022. https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/pseudoscience/qanons-adrenochrome-quackery.

Minsky, Marvin, Push Singh, and Aaron Sloman. 2004. “The St. Thomas Common Sense Symposium: Designing Architectures for Human-Level Intelligence.” AI Magazine 25, no. 2. https://cogaffarchive.org/AIMag/StThomas-AIMag.pdf.

Olds, Douglas Blake. 2026a. “After AI-Simulated ‘Repentance:’ Metaphysics as Quantum Time Accumulation, Its Necromantic De-Configurations, and Ramifying (Neg)Entropy.” The Iconoclast’s Descending, March 11, 2026. https://douglasblakeolds8.blogspot.com/2026/03/after-ai-simulated-repentance.html.

Olds, Douglas Blake. 2026b. “Arming Gittin: Vatics Wiped During Wartime.” The Iconoclast’s Descending, March 18, 2026. https://douglasblakeolds8.blogspot.com/2026/03/arming-gittin-vatics-wiped-during.html.

Olds, Douglas Blake. 2026c. “An Iconoclast’s Poietic Apocatastasis: Literary Merit and Metaphysical Fracture Riding the Eschaton.” The Iconoclast’s Descending, March 30, 2026. https://douglasblakeolds8.blogspot.com/2026/03/an-iconoclasts-poietic-apocatastasis.html.

Olds, Douglas Blake. 2026d. “Eclipse of ‘We the People’ at the Crossroads of Artifice’s General Idolatry.” The Iconoclast’s Descending, June 9, 2026. https://douglasblakeolds8.blogspot.com/2026/06/eclipse-of-we-people-by-artificial.html.

Olds, Douglas Blake. 2026h. “Biological Formalism as Horror’s Prolepsis toward the Epstein-Networked Ideological Substrate of Artificial Generalized Idolatry.” The Iconoclast’s Descending, June 13, 2026. https://douglasblakeolds8.blogspot.com/2026/06/biological-formalism-as-prolepsis-and.html.

Olds, Douglas Blake. 2026e. “Gnostic Abstraction vs. the Logos Living with the Substrate: Theodicy, Form, and Ethical Motion.” The Iconoclast’s Descending, February 3, 2026. https://douglasblakeolds8.blogspot.com/2026/02/gnostic-abstraction-vs.html.

Olds, Douglas Blake. 2026f. “Metaphysical Unified Field Theory of Disciplines: The Anthropology of Accountable Immanence by Conation, Substrate Loyalty, and Apocatastatic Movement.” The Iconoclast’s Descending, April 11, 2026. https://douglasblakeolds8.blogspot.com/2026/04/metaphysical-unified-field-theory-of.html

Olds, Douglas Blake. 2026g. “Recovering Substrate from Judith Butler’s Symbolic Simulation: Lawsmearing and Idolatrous Colonization of Sexual Time.” The Iconoclast’s Descending, April 8, 2026. https://douglasblakeolds8.blogspot.com/2026/04/recovering-substrate-from-judith.html

Olds, Douglas. 2025a. “Aleksandr Dugin’s Stone-Destining Metaphysics: Weaponizing History against Spirit For Territory.” Crying in the Wilderness of Mammon, January 15, 2025. https://douglasolds.blogspot.com/2024/11/aleksandr-dugins-stone-destined.html.

Olds, Douglas Blake. 2025b. “The Lamb’s Victory: Spectacle or Repair? Status Confessionis and the Kinesthetic Ethics of Poiesis.” The Iconoclast’s Descending, September 9, 2025. Updated September 22 and October 9, 2025. https://douglasblakeolds8.blogspot.com/2025/09/from-spectacle-to-repair-lambs-victory.html

Olds, Douglas Blake. 2025c. “τάξεις of the Sublime that Reopen Meaning After Anthropological Collapse.” The Iconoclast’s Descending, October 23, 2025. https://douglasblakeolds8.blogspot.com/2025/10/six-taxes-of-sublime-that-reopen.html.

Olds, Douglas Blake. 2025d. “Thanksgiving in the Ebb Time of Antichrist: Atonement, the Empty Throne, and the Reparative Leading by the Meek toward the New Advent.” The Iconoclast’s Descending, November 21, 2025. https://douglasblakeolds8.blogspot.com/2025/11/thanksgiving-in-ebb-time-of-antichrist.html.

Olds, Douglas Blake. 2025e. “Trump’s Lawlessness by Personalizing the State in Him.” The Iconoclast’s Descending, June 22, 2025. https://douglasblakeolds8.blogspot.com/2025/06/trumps-lawlessness-by-personalizing.html

Olds, Douglas Blake. 2025f. “The Ladder Tearing: A Christopoietic Rejection of Ascent without Neighbor Bearing...and of DB Hart’s Platonic-Inf(l)ected Teaching.” The Iconoclast’s Descending, November 17, 2025. https://douglasblakeolds8.blogspot.com/2025/11/the-ladder-tearing-christopoietic.html.

Olds, Douglas. “MAMMON’s DOGs: A Public Thimble Sermon and Analysis of the Political Theology of Fascism.” Crying in the Wilderness of Mammon, July 7, 2024. https://douglasolds.blogspot.com/2024/07/mammons-dogs-public-sermon-douglas-olds.html.

Open Government Partnership. 2024. “Navigating the Risks and Rewards of Digital ID Systems.” March 26, 2024. https://www.opengovpartnership.org/stories/navigating-the-risks-and-rewards-of-digital-id-systems/.

Park, Kiho, Yo Joong Choe, and Victor Veitch. 2024. “The Linear Representation Hypothesis and the Geometry of Large Language Models.” Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR 235, Vienna, Austria. arXiv:2311.03658.

PBS NewsHour. 2023a. “Deutsche Bank to Pay $75 Million to Epstein Victims in ‘Groundbreaking Settlement,’ Lawyers Say.” May 18, 2023. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/deutsche-bank-to-pay-75-million-to-epstein-victims-in-groundbreaking-settlement-lawyers-say.

PBS NewsHour. 2023b. “JPMorgan to Pay $75 Million for Role in Epstein Sex Trafficking Operation.” September 26, 2023. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/jpmorgan-to-pay-75-million-for-role-in-epstein-sex-trafficking-operation.

Santa Fe Institute. 1991. Santa Fe Institute Bulletin. Winter/Spring 1991. https://www.santafe.edu/.

Santa Fe Institute. n.d. Profiles and materials on Murray Gell-Mann, Geoffrey West, David Krakauer, Stuart Kauffman, Mark Pagel, Douglas Erwin, and SFI complexity themes. https://www.santafe.edu/people.

Schelling, Thomas C. 1969. “Models of Segregation.” American Economic Review. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1823701.

Shamsian, Jacob. 2025. “Was Jeffrey Epstein, Superconnector of the Rich and Powerful, a Spy?” Business Insider, July 29, 2025. https://www.businessinsider.com/jeffrey-epstein-spy-epstein-files-intelligence-asset-trump-bondi-2025-7.

Simmons, Frederick V. 2026. “Varieties of Bias for Life’s Emergence and the Rationality of Origins of Life Research.” Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers 42, no. 2: 238-253. https://doi.org/10.37977/faithphil.2026.42.2.4.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. n.d. “Aristotle’s Biology.” https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-biology/.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. n.d. “Descartes.” https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/descartes/.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. n.d. “Francis Bacon.” https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/francis-bacon/.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. n.d. “Hobbes’s Philosophy of Science.” https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hobbes-science/.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. n.d. “Plato: Middle Period Metaphysics and Epistemology.” https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/plato-metaphysics/.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. n.d. “Platonism in Metaphysics.” https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/platonism/.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. n.d. “Teleological Notions in Biology.” https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/teleology-biology/.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. n.d. “Thomas Hobbes.” https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hobbes/.

Stiegler, Bernard. Taking Care of Youth and the Generations. Translated by Stephen Barker. Meridian: Crossing Aesthetics. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2010. Originally published as Prendre soin de la jeunesse et des générations. Paris: Flammarion, 2008.

Troy, Dave. 2026. “What Do the Epstein Files Really Reveal? The Key Takeaways.” Byline Times Digital / Print Edition, Edition 83, March 2026. https://bylinetimes.com/.

World Economic Forum. 2024. Annual Report 2023-2024. https://www.weforum.org/publications/annual-report-2023-2024/.