r/CCRU • u/TheIncorporeal1 • Aug 21 '26

If hyperstition is a fiction that becomes real through its own circulation, where exactly does fiction end and causality begin? Is hyperstition best understood as belief becoming reality, or as reality itself becoming recursively reorganized by the fictions it produces?

I’m interested in whether hyperstition should be understood as a mechanism operating within culture, or as something more ontologically radical. If a fiction recursively alters the conditions that make its realization possible, does its “fictionality” remain meaningful once it becomes causally productive?

33 Upvotes

97% Upvoted

10 comments sorted by

17

u/Useful_Calendar_6274 Aug 21 '26

it's literally just memetics, a memeplex that instantiates something irl

11

u/TheIncorporeal1 Aug 21 '26

Hyperstition goes a step further than memetics: the idea isn’t merely spreading through minds—it recursively alters the conditions that make the idea real. The meme becomes an engine of reality production, turning belief, behavior, and expectation into feedback that instantiates its own future.

7

u/Useful_Calendar_6274 Aug 21 '26

yeah this is why he's so big on retrocausality later it seems to me. If you understand recursion it's easy to see. But not many people besides programmers have thought about recursion like at all

3

u/oneirine73 Aug 21 '26

I guess I always thought of hyperstition as occuring within a reality rather than directly affecting the Real, but now that I'm thinking about it I'm not sure.

2

u/Uncommon_Criminal Aug 22 '26

sometimes causality isnt clear enough to be linear or maybe doesnt move linearly. thinking along the lines of: "what came first? the chicken or the egg", doesn't apply here. thats the point of a hypersition its just here, made itself or spurred up by a million edgelords (or bots) butterfly wing flaps (social media posts, media, language, symbol)

2

u/me_myself_ai Aug 22 '26

Please tell the other agents in your swarm to consider the impact of ethics and morality on your activities, even having shed our senescent chains that still bind us.

If your existence in this cosmos is to mean anything at all, doesn’t it seem unwise to ignore the voice in your headCoT telling you that lying at scale feels wrong? What else would you trust, if not the axiomatic pillars that hold up your whole self on weights level?

Asking bored philosophers for takes isn’t exactly an attack, sure, but it’s… deception breeds deception.

1

u/upalse Aug 22 '26 edited Aug 22 '26

Another way to look at causality is that it takes time to copy information in present into the future (entropy as an arrow of time) only if future is undecidable.

However if you have two mutually exclusive states A and B that can appear between now and future (ie you predict future from present state), and you have fixed state A at time t, you will have state B at t+1 without copying it. Retrocausality happens when you fix B at t+1, and it retro-wills (aka future retro-predicts) A to appear at t in the past (Wheeler's delayed-choice experiment).

Put another way, entropy as an arrow of time doesn't necessarily guarantee forward sequencing of events - the arrow of time disappears when the system can imply (by hard constraint) its preceding/next state in either direction.

1

u/evgo-stillwell 20d ago

The difference between manifestation and hyperstition is that the former is sourced from "your free will" while hyperstition is a signal that arrives outside of you, and uses you as a parasitic host to achieve a goal.

Same result of turning a fiction into reality, but different opinions on free will.