So it boils down to this: is an extra phenomenological force needed as manifestation or is the rendering of pneuma sufficient? The notion of energia which fuels the pneuma is certainly a manifestation, but possibly its aspect perception is sufficient. It would seem that the notion here is that when I see something as something it acquires these properties -all be it slightly. Thus when I see an inanimate doll as animate it acquires a sense of consciousness -an identical process to the invocation of a spirit except there is an umbratic counterpart. In this sense no energy theory is needed for it was the interpretation which did the altering. The notion of energy would be in this sense subsumed under the belief of the interpretation. The energy theorist might say that it is precisely this effort of interpretation which gives energy to the being, but it seems more that the interpretant expended energy themselves rather than imbued energy into the pneumatic entity.