In our grammar can anything be anything? No. What makes a use application applicable to one thing and not another? Only the ability of the thing to be that thing. If an beer can can be used as an ashtray it is an ashtray; the seeming physical criteria are irrelevant. That vector sustains the possibility of beer can and ashtray. The seeming of its being a beer can used as an ashtray is of course its stronger attachment to the beer can accretion (image).
I can feel questions. Is the vector something that remains outside of perception? In a sense this must be possible. Whatever ontological status being outside of observation has it must still contain the potential for the restraints we experience upon our being. Here is one of the ooo problems: discretion outside of Narp perception must be presupposed i.e. relation like nature of existence in human perception is presupposed to extend outside of it (this kind of problem is one of the reasons correlationism holds firm).
But I think the vector’s intentional usage is more as was stated in the first set of notes. It is almost like a hyle, a pre-conceptual awareness that we can know is still there by the fact that a thing that seems to be a thing can easily become something else. This aspect flipping power is conceptual. Most theory here will say that the conceptual aspect flip demonstrates the underlying being is not altered by it. In pneuminous theory this is not the case, accounting for magick entails that the perception of something as something, albeit in some minute way that may never be noticed, makes it closer to that accretion literally.
This is all related to the often mentioned reflected-out-again theory which is how things become reified accretions. To recap, something like a ready-to-hand level of usage-object becomes solidified into a relatively fixed shape association concealing its functionalist truth. This archetypal image as extracted from the usage realm is the accretion, curiously it is a posteriori but it looks a priori. This concept-image, when projected back out onto things is what is attaches back to other things to effect this transformative power, though only at the level of what we call paranormality is the effect noticed. Most of the time this is just a reinforcing process in which a vector allows the attachment of the hammer accretion as usage and looks like the archetype, this feedback make the hammer more hammer like: both usage and accretive image are in harmony. Insofar as the autonomous hammer-accretion is attached to the vector it is a hammer externally to perception -the hammer information persists in the vector.
This raises a fascinating option i.e. that we are releasing vectors back into non-perceptual reality that act contain human-pneuma and as such are different from uncontaminated noumena.