I’m not going to build a whole theory around these new points, but I want to comment on a couple in light of a few thoughts from my past theorizing.
First, to understand “shadow anima” we likely need to bring in Planar Theory, which treats the shadow realm.
Very briefly, I’ve approached planes, shadow realms, the abyss, and the void as the main topics of Planar Theory in the following way. Planes are domains of facts. Shadow realms are domains of counterfacts - e.g. what could have been. (I treat spirit realms as parts of shadow realms.) The abyss is the realm of parafacts - i.e. non-facts unrelated to spatiotemporally individuated facts. (The latter are typically found in planes.) The void is the realm of forms/structures abstracted from all sensory content.
So the “shadow” of shadow anima concerns counterfacticity.
What is anima?
I’ve proposed multiple paradigms for understanding anima. In the earlier ages of Gielinor, anima was understood as the responsiveness of visible things to invisible things (spirits, values, etc.) In the later ages, anima has been understood as a quantifiable force, energy, or power. What’s important to remember, and important to preserve the unity of the concept, is that this power is
spiritual
power - it moves the heart. It is “environmental,” “emotional.” It is never
merely
“energy,” to be “used” or “refined.” I am glad that Charos has confirmed this point.
Antimatter as a model for shadow anima is undoubtedly useful. But a deeper explanation of shadow anima could explore the spiritual/psychological effects of giving counterfacticity greater significance than it typically receives.
29-Jul-2020 17:25:44
- Last edited on
29-Jul-2020 17:28:06
by
AttilaSquare