INTRODUCTION

The alterhuman community doesn't talk about conceptual experiences enough. This essay aims to pave the way for a broader discussion of this way of being, so that others can begin to gather the language to make sense of things like this, instead of struggling to put it into words. Conceptual alterhumanity can take many forms, and I write from my own perspective only. It is impossible for one dragon to cover every possible aspect, and I may leave out things which the reader may wish to see covered. I invite the reader to cover it themselves.

For a long time, myself and the two people in my subsystem (Solander) have struggled to understand the way we experience draconity. Make no mistake, I am--we are--a dragon. But the mark that our draconity left on us seemed to be different than how both therian and otherkin dragons have approached their identity. Since there is little to no draconic community left (a fact we mourn to this day), this was a worry we could not allay by talking to others.

Rather than being based in physicality--having phantom shifts, draconic instincts, and the like--our draconity seemed to be the product of culture, almost of the ideas of what dragons are, rather than any specific dragon in particular. Our draconity felt malleable, based on abstract ideas and stories in a very direct way that seemed unusual for dragonkin.

And then there was storytelling.

In the same way that my species is dragon, my species is also storyteller. This has consistently felt like an experience that goes over the edges of the map (which, luckily, is draconic territory). We are a Storyteller to the bone, it is intrinsic and fundamental to our sense of self. To take it out would even be to remove our draconity.

It was hard to fit my ideas of draconity into existing alterhuman frameworks. It was impossible to make sense of myself. I felt like a failure at being a dragon. But I was looking at everything wrong. When I reanalyzed my draconity under a conceptual framework, everything fell into place.

DEFINING CONCEPTUALITY

What is conceptuality in this context? For the purposes of this essay, I am referring to identification with the abstract understanding of a real object, phenomenon, property, or other thing that exists in the world. I'm also referring to symbols, metaphors, social roles, and archetypes.

The term conceptfolk was inspired by the term fictionfolk, and it is intended to serve the same purpose–an umbrella term that makes it possible for all manner of people to find community with each other based on a shared quality of their alterhumanity. In the same way that fictionfolk is inclusive of anyone with fictionality, conceptfolk is inclusive of anyone with conceptuality–the state or quality of being conceptual in some way.

In order to get a better idea of what conceptuality can entail, let us examine some experiences that I believe fall under the term.

I based this list off of an incomplete list of alterhuman frameworks that's currently being collected by our friends in the Dragonheart Collective.

Cocneptfolk includes, but is not limited to:

• Being the concept of something, being the embodiment of a concept, identifying as a concept.
• Embodying a role, profession, or archetype, or understanding yourself through the lense of an archetype, narrative, or trope.
• Intimately associating yourself with a concept (e.g. an aesthetic, subculture, or symbol).
• Relating to, identifying with, caring deeply about, being affected strongly by a concept.
• Basing your sense of self around a concept, so that, while you are not that concept itself, you are inextricable from it.
• Feeling like a part of, a shard of a concept.
• Feeling at home with a concept.
• Feeling like a concept or akin to one.

I've purposefully kept this list free of terms so as to be as clear as possible, and also because I would like for people to choose for themselves whether or not they want to be associated with this term and community. I don't view conceptuality as its own phenomenon per se, but rather an approach anyone might have to their identity, an element or quality of alterhumanity that can be present no matter what the identity is.

Conceptuality is based on an abstract or symbolic understanding of something that exists in the world. It involves identification with, as, or like a continuum of ideas as opposed to a discrete and defined entity. And it explores symbolic, metaphorical, and abstract forms of alterhumanity, not in opposition to more literal forms, but in partnership with, or adjacent to them.

I see a clear need for a term like this in our community for a few reasons. Firstly, while conceptuality is very intertwined with other forms of alterhumanity, my personal experience of, and the way I have seen other conceptfolk approach their identity is often very different from the frameworks provided by other communities under the alterhuman umbrella. Secondly, there are no widely used words or terms that I am currently aware of which take these nuances into account and also provide a larger umbrella term for alterhumans with related but still different experiences to cluster under. All of this results in a lexical gap, where the ordinary language of alterhumanity falls short.

TERMINOLOGY

The main point of this essay is less to talk about conceptfolk as a term, and more to go over some terminology and frameworks I want to propose to make it easier to discuss conceptual alterhumanity. I have three proposals, which I am really eager to see people expand on, disagree with, dissect, and apply to their own lives.

First, I want to talk about the with/as dichotomy, and propose a way to at least make it a trinary, if not open the way for even more ways of talking about alterhumanity in general.

Second, I want to talk about embodiment. I will be pulling from conversations we've had in the Archetroper's Guild discord server for this.

Third, I will discuss keystones, which I've come to understand as a core part of my experience of conceptual alterhumanity.

METAPHORICAL, SENTIMENTAL, AND LITERAL ALTERHUMANITY

We've probably all heard otherkinity, therianthropy, and fictionkinity defined as identifying as something, while hearttypes are defined as identifying with something. But have you ever identified like something? The with-as dichotomy is often reached for when explaining alterhumanity. Some people identify with these things, other people identify as these things. I want to complicate this dichotomy.

Literal alterhumanity focuses on the object of identification as itself. Often, this is accomplished by being the thing in question, but I would argue that, while that sense predominates this category of alterhumanity, it is not the exclusive domain of identifying-as. In literal alterhumanity, each 'type is focused on one singular entity, and generally focuses on the lived experience of being that thing, whatever it is. This type of alterhumanity is not specifically focused on things that exist in the world, but rather focused on one's type in a practical, literal, occasionally material sense.

Sentimental alterhumanity is about the connection someone feels to their type. With a type that's primarily focused on the experience of that connection, the emphasis may be on the importance of the type to someone's sense of self, previous experiences with the type, and the ways in which the type impacts or influences the person in question. However, a sentimental connection may also compel someone into identifying-as that type, or it may become literal through the practice of embodying it.

Metaphorical alterhumanity is focused on the narrative, symbolic or other resonance of a type for the person who has it. The focus here is on the ways in which the person is like their type, whether in behaviour, symbolism, or narrative. This can be a more abstracted form of alterhumanity, but it is no less impactful and directly relevant than the other two.

These distinctions make sense of how people approach their alterhumanity, they are not origins part two (even worse), and they are not a reason to get into slap fights over validity. The whole point of this section is to give people tools to talk about their approach to, and experience of, alterhumanity in a more comprehensive and easier to understand manner. These are also not intended to be used as microlabels. Any one, of any stream of alterhumanity, may fall under any of these categories depending on their own experiences and feelings toward their types. These categories are also not intended to be exclusive to conceptfolk, but are likely useful tools for any alterhuman.

Where do conceptfolk fall into this? Seeing as these are tools to analyze your alterhumanity, conceptfolk can fall anywhere among the three categories. I personally fall along a spectrum of metaphorical to literal, wherein my connection to draconity is focused on the ways in which I am like dragons, but becomes literal in my lived experience because I am one. My behaviour and my thoughts are dragon behaviour because I am like a dragon.

EMBODIMENT

This is a concept I first heard discussed within the Archetroper's Guild discord server. For those who may not know, archetropy is an identity based on an archetype, job, or role that is typically not extant within present society, common examples include paladin, jester, storyteller, shrine maiden, dragon, dog, or beast of burden. The archetroper is deeply influenced by their archetrope in all areas of life, including in relationships, jobs, hobbies, and other alterhuman identities as well. The archetrope may be focused on the performance of the role in question, or on the narrative likeness of the archetroper to their archetrope.

The discussion around embodiment (or syncing) arose from the question of if archetropers get shifts. Shifts are based on a presence of phantom limbs, a change in envisage, or mental state.

But not everyone with a concepttype may experience shifts like this, especially if their type is intangible or they do not identify as them. To that end, I propose a sync or moment of embodiment for conceptfolk as being a moment in which they may feel uniquely connected to their concepttype. The metaphor I use personally is that it feels as if I have become part of a larger idea and act as its channel in the world. This is a very common experience for me, and it can manifest in different ways. Beyond in the moment experiments, I would define embodiment as also referring to the life long process of aligning oneself with their concept in a myriad of different ways. Just as an archetroper's archetrope may influence all areas of their life, from job to hobbies, from name even down to kintype, the keystone of someone who is conceptfolk may do the same, or steps may be taken to make it so. This likely holds true for conceptfolk of all types, not just conceptkind.

The idea of embodiment is parallel to the idea of shifts, as it encompasses more than having phantom limbs, and the emphasis is on both short and long term alignment, it is also blind to distinctions between voluntary and involuntary embodiment, and it is focused around lifestyle and sensation both. But it isn't in direct opposition either. I want it to be another tool in your vocabulary to describe what you are going through! Relatedly, I think embodiment may be a useful term for non-conceptual alterhumans as well, especially to describe long term alignment.

KEYSTONES

A keystone is the central organizing principle of someone's conceptuality, the thing your conceptuality is about in some way. For conceptkind, this keystone may be the concept they are kin with; for archetropers, their archetrope; and for those who are concepthearted, it may be their hearttype. Your keystone may be as abstract or literal, as broad or specific as needed; whatever makes sense for the person to whom it is important. Conceptfolk might also have more than one keystone. Your conceptuality may influence other aspects of your alterhumanity, and your identity in general, or it may not. For some, every aspect of their identity may be influenced by, or just be conceptual in some way, and for others it may form only one part of a greater picture. That entire spectrum of experience is welcome under the conceptfolk label.

in terms of use, keystone is similar to fictomere, the organizing principle of someone's fictionality, the thing your fictionality is about. It is not intended to be a standalone term, but instead describes the domain of your conceptuality, the lense through which you understand it, the theme of it, and the role you might play as a result of it. I describe this common experience with a singular term here to make it easier to talk about in shared company, as I believe it to be a unifying feature of conceptuality.

My keystone is illumination. My life orbits around the principle of the revelation of things that are hidden. This principle is the reason why I am a storyteller, and the driving force of my draconity. It also has something to do with my possible phytanthropy. When I am embodied, it is because I am carrying out the task my keystone gives me. This is an example that's specific to me, though I've talked to others with analogous experiences with their own keystones.

CONCEPTUAL STARVATION

Let me start by saying that I am unsure if this is a thing for other conceptfolk, at the very least in the same way. It is not a mandatory feature of conceptuality. Nevertheless, it is a phenomenon that affects me deeply, and which has come up in conversation with others who have expressed interest in seeing the concept developed further.

Currently, I'm calling this phenomenon conceptual hunger, or conceptual starvation. For me, this phenomenon sets in when I haven't interacted or embodied my keystone in a while. It is marked by lethargy, frustration, and a simultaneous restlessness which can deepen the more you are deprived. It is the opposite of embodiment. It is a hunger for meaning, for purpose.

I find that my conceptual starvation gets worse the longer I go without interaction, and it is not really ameliorated by short term engagement, but rather requires consistent, long term embodiment. In short, I am not myself when I'm suffering with conceptual starvation, and I must structure my days around satisfying these urges. To that end, I write, a lot; I try to learn new things and ask questions; I engage in my community to help others understand the world; I sculpt with clay; I, apparently, coin new terms and write 2000+ word essays about it to help others understand themselves. And the more I do it, the more embodied I feel.

I think my hunger is shaped by having a role (storyteller) that I am meant to fulfill. I want to know if others experience this hunger, particularly if you have a conceptual hearttype or other such experiences. What does it look like for you?

CONCLUSION

If you have reached this point, I want to thank you for taking the time to read my words. This is a subject very close to my heart, and, I think, an important one for the community at large. My hope is that I've laid out my case clearly enough for others to build on my ideas and make them their own.

In this essay, I have covered my ideas on conceptuality and proposed a few terms which may be helpful for others as a tool to frame their thinking on the subject. I argue that conceptuality is an approach or quality that anyone may find in their alterhumanity, while the term itself is for those want to find community with others that share this quality as a significant aspect or component of their identity. I outline my idea of the character of conceptuality, which is its foundation in the symbolic, metaphorical, and abstract forms of alterhumanity, its identification with a continuum of ideas rather than one singular entity, and its basis in the conceptualization of things that exist in the world. I also outline who might find a home under this term. I then set out my ideas for three different types of alterhumanity, the literal, sentimental, and metaphorical; I define embodiment and keystone, and discuss my own experience of conceptual starvation.

Conceptfolk is a term, but it cannot become a community without your help. Below are some questions for you to ponder if you found anything in this essay spoke to you. Consider joining the conceptfolk Dreamwidth and posting your answers to them there.

• Think about your alterhumanity from a metaphorical angle. In what ways are you like your type? Is this way of thinking about it useful to you?
• Do you feel you have a conceptual element to your alterhumanity? Why, or why not? 
• What is your keystone? How has it impacted your life? 
• In what ways is a label like conceptfolk useful for you? 
• What elements make up your conceptuality? How did you first come to understand it? 
• Who do you think you would be if your keystone was not what it is?
• What is your experience of conceptual starvation like? What alleviates it?
• Is your approach to your alterhumanity literal, sentimental, or metaphorical? Or multiple of these? What does that look like for you?
• How would you define conceptuality in your own words?
• How does conceptuality feel compared to non-conceptual identities?
• If you have multiple keystones, are they interrelated or distinct?
• Is your conceptuality distinct from your other alterhuman identities? If not, how do they influence each other?
• How do you embody your concepttype, if at all?
• How do you embody your concepttype in day to day life, in small ways?
• How does your conceptuality interact, impact, and influence your identity in general, not just your alterhumanity?