My colleague here Emanuel Magno has often described the evolution of the CEO into phases; I did not see the development in these terms at first, though I increasingly see what he means. Phase 1 was characterised a kind of phenomenology by the initial development of the pneuminous accretive theory -as sketched in the Tractatus Pneumatologico Philosophicus. Phase 2 can probably loosely be characterised as a combination of returning to the agnostic disjunction that was used to justify the investigation of accretive theory in the first place. This resulted in a recognition of a Laruellesque equality between all ontologies and their competition for dominance of the territory. Phase 3 was the zonal investigations. This was a very specific kind of enquiry that was only tangentially related to the others. In this sense it was both wider (non-pneuminous specific) and narrower (about a specific topic).

The phases are never pre-planned they just emerge one from the other. Phase 4 has been hinted at from two angles. Firstly there have been notes on a pre-ontology. The pre-ontological sketches have tried to hint at the possible disclosure of reality that seamlessly weds what we would call anomaly and regular reality; to try to speak of how it would be for these to appear as just how things are without one being seen as a rupture of the other. The second of these is the interest in the writings of Carlos Castaneda as fuelled by a recent reading of 1000 Plateaus. Bracketing off concerns of invention, they provide a description of radical possibilities available if the world is accessed in a certain way.

Building on this pre-ontological synthesis and modern tales of ‘Power’ (hyperstitional or otherwise), we believe that phase 4 should be characterised by a move beyond the phenomenological nature of accretive theory as it has been couched so far -a transcendental appearance- to a full blown speculative ontology that seeks to treat all forms of anomaly as not psychological but actual.

A key feature of the accretive phenomenology was the incoherentism it emphasised with respect to how such alterations as synchronicity occurred -the incoherence being part of the appearance. This incoherence was in turn linked to the incoherence that borders our usage of concepts and the way they bleed at the edge. The latter part of this statement will no doubt still be employed -in conjunction with Emanuel’s development ‘decoherentism’, whereas the former will be abandoned in favour of a more definite metaphysic that makes a decision about what is actually happening.

Such an endeavour does not seek to be flakey or new-age pandering. Indeed it hopes to be a rigorous speculation that sketches what reality actually looks like if we understood that the anomalies are actual incursions and not just subjective fantasies.

In keeping with one of the exit points that have spawned this phase, the ontology will probably have the flavour of being a disambiguating plug-in to Capitalism and Schizophrenia. That is, where the paranormal references in CS can seen as analogy or acceptance here we side unambiguously with acceptance. This will be complemented by a more fleshed out less phenomenological version of accretive theory in which pneuma -as substance- can be viewed through a quasi-materialist lens in terms of its strata (accretive layers) and content/expression.

The basic overarching structure of reality will be capable of alterations in relation of subjects minimally two ways. One will entail the seamless move from one reality to another as a perfectly ordinary everyday process whilst another will allow for alterations within a given reality. Intentional accretive entities (egregores) and pre-existent to human intention non-physical beings will both be presupposed to obtain. Physical and non-physical interactions with a variety of entities will also be taken as axiomatic. Locations of such entities must also be presupposed on similar pair of axes as alterations. That is, entities may be residing in this plane of existence in a more or less permanent manner -overlap itself will be a useful concept for explanation- whilst also existing on adjacent dimensional planes.

It is interesting to note that this very classification of beings was used for the zonal investigation project. This in turn shows the connecting thread that drives the general work of the CEO. More detail on all of this soon.

The Reality of Knowing Nothing at All -Part 3
Jim Meirose

No one knew the why, but my dear, there’s an ‘efinate process; yes, a process, a good process, quite fine; to returnback for—plant these rose—f’ recoinsideration ‘f any possibly mistake ‘f lack of presence of any character ‘f number forming any of the words—rose seeds—which, strung together, form the name of the thing less than present, and one unusual day the Paul came to work on time, all calmly putting palms down ‘n soothing gestures with, No, I am fine—I had a neck problem. Got hurt in the pool. I had to get surgery. I was gone for that reason, eh deftly swiping the next available excuse in the ‘x bin for fitting the ‘gory of universal no-show, the prior being, I went to the dentist for a cleaning—with the x’bility to be ramped up into, and I ended up with a broken—plant these rose seeds—jaw no I don’t know why they didn’t call you that’s just one ‘nother facette oof there indocompetenance, maybe they don’t know you exist—no I said no I don’t know why they didn’t try and find you out, dig you up, clean you raw, as existing I cannot answer for their dos, or do nots, and even so if had it been done, how the ‘eck ought they have figgered ‘ow to du-it. Then, as for me, after my wiring, I could not speak a syllable ‘cause this jaw’s wired immobile okay, okay, I know this’s off topico’ sinn et’s know not big shot Paul’s excuse, how dumb do I look I did hear you know that yes his was I had a bad spine, and yes his was also; I had to stop lay down and lookie heah’ listen, gaaa. Gaaaa! Stop, let him fix things using tools some long and sharp some short and blunt—these rose—some in be the ‘tween so. Stop, lookie here I do seem to you to be a different person now, say that you all wrong all that hey, ah? Is that—seeds—it? Well, bah. Ahh, you don’t know me. So you say? No, shut, listen. You may look at me. No, shut, listen. You may look at me. No, shut, listen. But you don’t see me. You don’t know eh o’ look at me. But me, you look at me, you don’t? Yes you do—but you can’t see me, don’t know me, now ‘r never. Hear me! I am Paul Repititian, I am here to work out my way! I am yes, the big Papa and Paul and all that, just like that. Let me work. And. He being ten. To. Plant seeds. Being ten feet. Of. Ten feet tall and half as less sametimes. Tall and tall and half-broad as tall, nobody questioned Paul any times over then,’bout any possible hoax, more afta’ that. Paul, the big Papa, and both of all others go’ resurrected, went on to sainthood, the one already, the other, no, not yet, but—surely soon after. There are those that—and sorry, but the scroll rips gone down diagonally at that point. And so that is it. But knowin’ half—if that be the number— ‘s better than knowin’ nothing at all. The reality of knowing nothing at all, is not I’m afraid, my dearie o’ dear-o, all there is, so no it is not all—plant these rose seeds—there is no not no. Yes? Not in any way, either. No. Accept things please no or all’s gone by’s been flat wasted. There he goes; plant these rose seeds.

Jim Meirose

The Reality of Knowing Nothing at All 

Part 2 

So; we looked back to the first next behind snaking low up back o’ the Poole Mayorality’s behind, and there was a man pulling at his laminations, down in his pocketsacks, and the largest part of his name was Repititian, and. We said first, or last, and, if neither, or uh, not having no ‘dea what of our senses were speaking from the seemingly multiple holeframes of, ehh, it’s said he said, Well there’ neve’ goan’ ‘t be another soooo’ it Mustafa bean the last. Taken aback, we scattered into our second, and third—these—regrouping ‘fore finalizatioining the question at—plant these rose—him, then what of the first—how ‘bout—see there it flies, ah—hook it, in one gill or t’other which’s no matter longs as gillie by goshie, ye’ gets it, Paul! Then the real Paul held it up, waving it ‘roundall slappy ’n flaglike, but, a fast skinny whipman—of which in those days hosts came up from the swampland all wildly an’ woolie, back then—snatched his name back into another, and we thought—I mean I am sorry officer, it happened so fast—but we’re sorry, Meestah Repititianne, we didn’t get you’ name fore it ‘ssolved-so, if Paul’s so looking back now, it seems so easy—plant—it’s taken for granulated  to b’ ‘ble t’ se, buh backity denda’ then, being young dumb and blind, we felt it right, and somehow in the following five minutes or less a newly minted jobrank called Chief Peninsulander popped out that guy back there, and Paul Repititiannette fell back deliberately into the cooling mold of the shiny bright job an’, they fused; all butte the last two letters ‘ne which lopped off Paul’s sho’ last of a oaken-name, leaving  the faux man he was with the final coolly solidified name-plate of Paul Repititian, Chief Peninsulander of Back City, or, betta’ yette, Back City Chief Peninsulander Paul Repititian—and the latest fully adjustable stainless steel style to boot—which was better way better ‘cause of course less is more, bigger’ snot better—these—and economy is a virtue, even a—plant these rose seeds—penny here, and a penny there, ‘cause infinity itself, it was built one penny afta’ it’s very own prior and repeat, Peter, repeat, eck! So that was how, the first three seconds of the start of Paul Repititian’s Chief Peninsulandership began. And all in one instant, compressed, coming critical, and becoming one chink in the wall of our ever festering tightly-firebricked reality. So. 


This, all as we are sure you are well lo’ th’ under of, took Ms. Poole by the behind, but she said, so be it—if it is May—rose—as well believe, that it is, and get in step, with it as, the big men above require it to be done as you know; else as you there are places you know there are for your kind to be places for your kind to taken you’ll be taken ‘u’ know you are to be ‘n know taken to, locked behind something, shut over, which is much, and locked down—which is locked down much more strongly than you’ll be later, to be the punishment center termed the gaol, or the punishment prison center, or the punishment center prison, oh—seeds—what the hereafter of it all, hot damn, and dog too, you got—these rose seeds—the drift, so; let’s move on. But, Vicki Poole became known as a squirmer ‘ver this Paul Repititian this squirmer of a Poole et Poolette he bashed out his head while backswimming in a pool, did you know? Not one year after like, that Papa, ‘member that Papa who ‘verybod’ was glad of who wok? Wok wok? When many all gone were driving up their fine hills, the beloved Pap went toward their bad warehousing shit jobs, all gone was the beloved Papa toward, and had their beloved Papa, in their radios—plant these—who’ bn’ tuned up for distraction. The Papa it said, was gone, all gone. All gone was their beloved Papa. Snot noses in similarity, stuffed ones sat sides by sides o’er him in the Back City business building, wh’ a separate episode will describe downstruction of—and the children may listen, ‘cause no loss of life’s described though yes, there were several hundred more than a few. Paul Repititian was not seeming sudden and not even sluggish on slowly his ‘rogress up the beloved Papa. No one knew the why, but— 

The Reality of Knowing Nothing at All -Jim Meirose        

Part 1 

Plant these rose seeds; hi, Pachasandrim here. Today’s tale concerns things way back in nineteen ninety-four, the year that a youngish Paul Repititian took the job of Chief Peninsulander. We’ll be homing in on the first three years of his tenure, those being marred by undeserved frightful suspicions and rumors, which we will detail down here. Memories from back that far are o’ course very, very hazy, and few, if any written record keeping was done ‘round here ‘bout that time. But, even as the years dragged by, pushing ninety-four back into the soupy haze of the past which dissolves everything inexorably, several oldsters, leaders in every practical meaning—plant—of that word, these being Earlie VonScarff, noted mother of the already late when born Han-Job, he of the Mighty Grip, and his large small dogface, Lucy. Through the years Earlie had always been by nature maddeningly hesitant and tentative, so much so that one wag termed him ‘er Mistress Hesitation De Tentativette, but; she did manage after several years of no actionable talk—that being very lucky for both of our Earlies, given the dread n’ dreadette’s running the mainland prison system a’ t’ ‘ime, heck, a rare bit of luck indeed. Moved to finally put pen to several score reams of costly hi-papyrette, the hand-made Frenchy inportationed type to boot, and so doing so carefully as to not pierce the foolishlies’ thin-cap, he wrote down as following—and, we hereby quote; these—this—that—Mister—plant—Paulie Repititian, as we knew him back o’ that way, out-mystified us all, in all both our ends, as did the twenty-four year old Vicky Poole, who had become mayor so one year prior, that we all ‘urned rou’ saying, We-hah, s’we got a mayor now? Huh. Never ‘curred to us, we needed a mayor, heh. But it seemed okay, ‘t did, uh ‘cause it’d never occurred in us th’t we didn’t need one also, so we figured now, how much trouble could it cause anyplace even if she wuss cas’ were some bad actor of a human, bent on seeding us under with some rot-tan evil bedpods filled with some sorts of scams—the practical—rose—cause, of our deaths from this strain of bad luck ‘oulda’ been limited, anyway, ‘cause in that time there were barely one hundred dozens of us out here—that leaving out all males also, actually—well, it has to be men-tionned here, this entire passage of VonScarrf’s manustrippe was rendered illegible round one littl’ past two thousand ah’n ten, from a laborious but misguided scientifically aided back-rollout of McScarff’s ripoff of an imported impossible to return fragility to these actuall ‘assages of Earlie’s faulty master sheet of rolloffed gutta perchament he wrote over the cross of—so, those populizationed people-numbers could be spurious in that specif’ ti’ ‘rem’, but it only being less that twenty-five fifteenths of a tenth of the total weight of the solidifying—seeds—mash screwup when—plant these—so, they got served up at us, even though Guy—you know Guy, you surely do, cause everything gnaws for Guy’s simple egg-roadsmack served throughout all Crockett, out that high far out westway ‘timately spilled out over the Salaraha, we premise the weight of it all, God willing—but, let me peel off the backskin from the bull of th’ head-tale, and tell you that no matter this, en no mattah that, Vicki was in having solidly spiked the ball down in overstriped all goaliepostal end-mayoral territory, but, we swore to not let no gnawthing snick up under ourselves never gain-gen, but—one year later—and it must have been—rose—so soon, because the first rounds of beatings had left us weak, and our eyesight hazy. So— 

Last summer I did my first end to end reading reading of Deleuze and Guattari’s ‘Thousand Plateaus’. Previously I had only read sections here and there and fragments of other works (of theirs) so this was an edifying experience. As I read I began to notice the Castaneda references. These grabbed my attention as I had previously read Castaneda’s books some 20 years ago. Prior to reading them I had always avoided them assuming them to be some kind of new-age claptrap, however when I did read them I found them compelling and beautifully written (or at least most of them). I played somewhat with the techniques and found they actually did things. This was something of a revelation as my prior interactions with meditation and western style magic seemed to get nowhere. However interest waned, other things happened and slowly I forgot about this time.

So reading Thousand Plateaus was an incredible experience for two reasons. Firstly it was fascinating to engage with this book properly and secondly it seemed interesting how many Castaneda references were in it. To review these, they are:

i) In ‘On Several Regimes of Signs’ he is mentioned in relation to combating solidified mechanisms of interpretation.

ii) In ‘How do you make yourself a Body Without Organs’ Castaneda’s experience is cited in relation to the construction of the BwO, this too relates to the breaking down of interpretation and construction of flows and becomings. In the same chapter we also have a mention of the tonal/nagual dualism set up in Tales of Power where the tonal is everything cast under an organising principle of intelligibility (quite like pneuma in the accretive system variously detailed throughout the site) whilst the nagual is simultaneously everything but from the position of flows themselves, an ineffable a-signification that (arguably) also potentially, obliterates the restraints of space and time (this would correlate to the umbratic in the pneuminous system).

iii) In ‘1933: Micropolitics and Segmentarity’ the works are mentioned again in relation to the obstacles that Don Juan says stand in the way of becoming a ‘man of knowledge’. Don Juan here is given the illustrious comparison of Nietzsche’s Zararthrustra. The obstacles are: fear, clarity, power and disgust (old age in Castaneda). Fear here seems to be fear of existence of flows/becomings etc. Clarity is comprehension of the same. Power is dangerous as once clarity is achieved and movement is possible between rigidity and flow and second kind of rigidity re-emerges as threat, the power to control the flows at this new level. The last danger concerns the lines of flight and the possibility that they will not connect to other lines but instead will end in abolition. One might hazard a guess that the chance that the line of flight ends in death increases with age.

iv) In ‘1730: Becoming-Intense, Becoming-Animal’ in ‘Memories of a Sorcerer III’ Castaneda is invoked again. Here he is used to illustrate the progression of a sequence of becomings; becoming-dog, becoming-water, becoming-air. It also mentions an incident of Carlos being pushed through a door and reappearing in a totally different place.

v) In the same chapter Castaneda is credited with having effected a ‘broad synthesis’ of earlier 20th century comprehension of mind altering drug effects. In this way he makes a key contribution to the ‘drug assemblage’.

This Deleuzo-Guattarian connection gives Castaneda a connecting line to philosophy. This is the starting point for Parasol 6. It doesn’t mean that we want only DnG/Castaneda papers but here is the bridge. A beautiful synchronistic connection is of course the English translation of the the French agencement: assemblage. This brings immediately to mind what Castaneda no doubt thought his most important concept in his later work: the assemblage point. The assemblage point supposedly determines the reality we experience by lighting up a certain set of human luminous fibres at a time. The point is normally fixed, sorcery, dreaming, power plants etc move it and hence alter our experience of the world. The two concepts may not be directly connected -but on the pneuminous plane they are.

We must also remember that there are many non-philosophical adherents to the ‘system’ still in existence. There is a reasonable sized subreddit that seems to have some of Castaneda’s old students in it. There is a heavy focus in the group on a practice called dark room gazing. This basically entails silencing the mind and staring into pitch blackness for a long time. Many practitioners report results, often involving purple smoke but many other phenomena. Interestingly the criterion for the reality of the experience seems to be to test whether or not any coloured lights/smoke can me touched and manipulated. Participants seem to frequently report being able to grab such lights/smoke.

The big question here is of course, does it actually do anything? One could potentially explain most of the subreddit participants activity by saying that they are inducing hypnogogic images of a powerful nature. This is all very well except it does leave us again in a rather agnostic disjunctive situation. That is, smoke/lights that appears in the dark may be adequately described as a hypnogogic effect however this is identical to the appearance of the same phenomenon that is actually some kind of energy as described in Castaneda. We might at this moment recall another previous Parasol topic who reported almost exactly the same phenomenon. Wilhelm Reich claimed orgone could be seen by staring into the dark and that it would appear as a blueish mist. Such a description of course is not far from the darkroom gazers purple smoke. The agnostic disjunctive point (like in the synchroncity argument) is that in order to privilege the hypnogogic explanation we must know that this version of reality is correct. Since both accounts are simply what it would look like for that to be the case we cannot be certain that the hypnogogic one is correct, so when (as many do) they simply thing dismissal is easy they beg the question by assuming a version of reality in order to dismiss the phenomenon. The big question of ‘does it do anything?’ then is partially rendered inert by the agnostic disjunctive observation insofar as being able to induce such experiences in a sense does count as doing something (it has the appearance of some experience commensurate with the descriptions in the books).

This is my impression of these kinds of practices too, the satisfaction of them is that they generate such experiences which then can be interpreted in light of the Castaneda system or reduced to hypnogogic hallucination. The Castaneda system makes one thing abundantly clear though. If one wishes to develop these kinds of things into full blown weirdness there is no place for the agnostic disjunction. One must be committed to accepting the weirdness and not dwelling on its ontological nature as only under this condition will it properly be able to develop. And this is reasonable really, one can imagine that if reality really were sensitive to mental/bodily activity then one must temper the mind to maximise the result.

In the books Castaneda is pushed beyond any level of agnostic disjunction by events so bewildering he has no choice -people flying, teleporting, producing energy doubles. These kinds of events are not reported as replicated in the subreddit and of course one can quickly think, ‘because they aren’t possible’ and probably they aren’t. However there are plenty of mentions of phenomena similar to astral projection/OBE’s which, through the Castaneda system are interpreted as ‘accessing the double’ and there are plenty of reports of such phenomena successfully interacting with the world (not necessarily from the CC camp). This suggests that there may indeed be a kind of progressive link between smoke like phenomena and the ‘double’. This furthermore (to me at least) suggests a kind of open end to the phenomena that we may not know the limit of.

With regards to scepticism, the system suggests there is a kind of protective mechanism built into extreme weirdness for it is repeatedly said (when Castaneda asks such questions) that when an ordinary person observed such a phenomena they would not be able to see it. We may take this to be a convenient or plausible explanation in a similar agnostic disjunctive manner.

Two more points spring to mind in this area. The first concerns that well known topic from various strands of neo-materialism, speculative realism, hauntology etc.: the outside. The exit to the outside is an idea that comes up a lot. The outside itself can be split into a strong and weak version. The weak one being the scientific outside which potentially allows for at least our comprehension and possible somehow greater interaction with fields beyond the human whereas the strong Kantian version prohibits our ability to ever make contact with the noumenal realm. Sorcery (the Castaneda system) seems to suggest a third option. Sorcery would seem to align itself basically with Kant except that transcendental categories and pure intuitions would only be pseudo-transcendental. That is, the transcendental status would be true for every human unless one took the trouble to dismantle the categories/intuitions using sorcery. Then it would be possible to experience something beyond them. This experience in Castaneda’s terms is indeed the experience of the noumenal realm. That is, it suggests that the exit from the human security system (to Coin Land’s phrase) is possible, it’s just it takes more than copious amounts of amphetamine to achieve this. Secondly I think no matter how stable and functional our current scientific paradigm looks, we have to put aside our prejudices about anomaly in general, listen to the phenomenological picture, override the tendency that comprehension of things is within easy reach and consider our understanding of reality may yet be extremely primitive by standards yet to come. The appearance of spatio-temporal solidity may yet turn out to be erroneous as a flat earth.

Another aspect of the whole Castaneda affair that we equally cannot ignore is exactly the claims of invention. We do not raise these in the tired sense of lambasting him for lying -as Deleuze and Guattari point out, it scarcely matters if he did. No one can tell how much of any of it is real. This in itself is an incredible achievement. Castaneda may have pulled off one of the greatest hyperstitional ever. The power of the writing, the strangeness of the events, the endearing natures of Don Juan and Don Genaro all go to making an incredibly attractive world that people want to be real. The work minimally exists as possibly real which means it essentially is hyperstition. It’s a whole canon of potentially largely invented work that exerted and continues to exert a powerful effect on reality.

What my wandering writing here is trying to get at is that there are many good angles from which to write/create upon this topic. There may be more but I offer here:
i) Deleuze and Guattari as a philosophical entry point -though I can see non-philosophy can work quite well here too.
ii) Considerations of the practical aspect of the practices and the ontological/epistemological implications
iii) Possible connections to other theories (e.g. Reich).
iv) The meta-fictional/hyperstitional aspect of the work.
v) Considerations of Castaneda’s work in relation to the outside.
vi) Ontological implications of treating such work seriously -even without practical engagement.

Submissions should be sent into

There is no deadline as yet, though 2021 itself roughly marks the boundary of submissions.