I've been working on a personal research hypothesis I call “Programmed Archetypal Incarnation” (PAI).
It explores how symbolic saturation (media, myth, AI narratives) may cause certain individuals to involuntarily ‘incarnate’ mythological archetypes, potentially leading to dissociative or psychotic episodes.

This isn’t religious woo or a call for conspiracy theories. It’s an attempt to build a **symbolic and narrative framework** to understand how modern informational overload might trigger identity collapse in some individuals — particularly those already fragile or in liminal states of consciousness.

The paper mixes:
– cultural narrative theory
– phenomenological psychiatry
– symbolic analysis (Jung, Eliade, Jaspers)
– ethical and technological implications (AI, media feedback loops)

Preprint here :
https://zenodo.org/record/15670247

Curious to hear what you guys think.
Is there precedent for formal symbolic contamination theories in cognitive science or semiotics?
Would love pointers / critiques / counter-arguments.

>>16699212 (OP)

>A compelling idea, a striking character, or a powerful story can take root in an individual's mind and grow over time, partially restructuring their worldview. This process is rarely conscious.

Rarely, indeed. The interesting cases would be those where it happens under full awareness. Although it might influence the outcome only subtly. Once a role has fully asserted itself I would assume that trying to "fight" it would result in pretty detrimental psychological outcomes.

>Natural Cyclical Spontaneity

At its core it could not be anything else but that. Something from the deepest strata of neurobiology. The rest is probably memetic deformation faciliated by generations of cultural pressures with some active but ultimately misguided meddling. The question here truly is how far this has influenced the genomic level. Bad feedback over generations might have led to a status quo where a nascent archetype might "load" insufficiently or misdevelop due to some neuropsychological incompatibility. The result might as well be anything from narrative "graft rejection" to clinically defined madness.

>>16699212 (OP)
I think that's what mkultra was about, and you can bet good money this is in action and has always been since, probably since ancient times. but imo it stems from one very powerful idea, that one dude, with a fragile mind, let's ruin him, because that benefits us. I can only wonde that'd be, maybe because "the people" is the enemy to those in power
anyways for very obvious reasons a good deal of this information will be hidden
and the best part, if you go any far, they'd either try to ruin you, or welcome you into their club, both options seem really frightening to me

>>16699212 (OP)
I'm exactly the person you should talk to about this, but i'm also not going to talk to you about it, because there's a very significant missing realization in your theorem which would be imprudent to disclose.

>>16699212 (OP)
aislop image, why would I take the rest seriously?

>>16699212 (OP)
I am just going to say this to you bluntly. Your relationship with the chat bot is fake and gay. Everyone is building these riddles with the AI, but it won't help you get any closer.

>>16699212 (OP)
You have a good start for some exploration in cognitive science, however you need to tie things into other established sources as much as you can while making clear connections.
For instance, it's one thing to talk about schizophrenia and it's an entirely other thing to understand and reference the literature on it such that subject matter experts will acknowledge it.
Ironically, this is congruent to the problem of schizophrenia, where an individual might express an internally consistent logic yet fail to ground it within any tried-and-true understanding of the relevant phenomena.
As far as the gist of the paper goes there's nothing egregious about the ideas. Jung et. al. are a great way to get motivation and develop interesting frameworks. But again, the burden is on you to validate them as pragmatic and not internet schizo tier. You do that but showing that you built it on others work and that others can build their work on yours.

Thank you all for your excellent feedback.
It’s truly encouraging to see that, even though this is an entirely hypothetical theory, the community is showing interest in it.
As for references and sources:
given the exploratory and purely speculative nature of this work, I chose not to include external references (specialists) in this paper.
However, a future version may include those additions.
PS: “ChatTDG !!Z0MA/4gprbd” thank you for your very interesting and well-argued feedback.
It’s given me some ideas for a possible continuation of this work .

>>16699212 (OP)
I was thinking, and the way they turn really disapointed people in 4chan to school shooters. I believe there is, in some cases at least, powerful shilling that helped or even forced their hand, the psichology student that thought he was the joker, tarrant with his infinkte hatred towards muzzies. the list goes on. Even the shooter that shot trump, all of them follow a patttern to me, trump one for example spent a lot of time in torkand, glowies of any kind might have gotten to him. Same goes for the ¿norway? mass shooter, same deal, iirc, torland
you get the picture
the glowies that be probably have the whole deal mapped put to great detail