Protism

Definition

Protism is a doctrine credited to Protas that holds particulars in this world can be understood as shadows or projections of more perfect originals in a higher realm. In current discussion it is framed as a simple, two‑domain model: the Hylaean Theoric World and this causal domain, with a one‑way arrow indicating a flow of information from the former into the latter. Some proponents note that thinking is a physical process; on that view, the “arrow” would have measurable correlates in brain activity.

Context and Usage

• Everyday lens: Avout invoke Protism to explain how many changing particulars can reflect one unchanging, more perfect form.
• “Two‑box” baseline: Diagrams and calca commonly depict Protism as two labeled boxes (the HTW and this cosmos) with a single arrow from the HTW to here. This is sometimes called “Simple Protism.”
• Extension to “Complex Protism”: At Saunt Baritoe’s, Suur Uthentine and Fraa Erasmas developed a generalization that models multiple cosmi as nodes in a directed acyclic graph. Information is described as percolating one way through the network, with “up‑Wick” cosmi feeding ours and “down‑Wick” cosmi receiving from ours. Elements of this line of thought are associated—by readers and colleagues—with the tradition around Fraa Paphlagon.

Related Terms

• Protas: Source of the classic “forms and shadows” upsight.
• Hylaean Theoric World: The higher realm of ideal theorical objects invoked in Protist framing.
• Fraa Erasmas: Named as co‑developer (with Suur Uthentine) of Complex Protism at Saunt Baritoe’s.
• Fraa Paphlagon: A Hundreder often mentioned in the same metatheoretic conversation; linked here as a tradition marker.
• Complex Protism: Generalized, multi‑node version of the Protist diagram; arrows do not form cycles.

Notes

• Protism is a doctrine, not an organization. It is used as a way of speaking about how proofs and perceptions relate to ideal objects; specific empirical claims (for example, about measurable brain differences) are presented in‑world as interpretations rather than established results.
• Usage varies: some speakers treat the Hylaean language as figurative, others as asserting a more literal, polycosmic structure. The narrative preserves this ambiguity.