I'm not sure the Romantic process-theorists fit so easily into Vervaeke's schema. But in so far as they seem to posit supernatural, abstract structures, I assume it would be due either to the physicist's use of math, which invites a platonic reading, or to an illicit analogy with human artists, as I say in the article. The latter image is of a wild, human artist who achieves mastery over the subject matter, and nature is supposed to work the same way, except that the Romanticist identifies some level of nature itself as the artist. It's the old form vs matter divide, which is often given a sexist interpretation: the male artist shapes the feminine materials.

In my articles on math in science, I take a deflationary, pragmatic view rather than a platonic one. Math abstracts from particulars to give us the concept of pure structure. But all our languages simplify, so we should be humble rather than so literal about their implications.

However, in my articles on psychedelics and on my encounters with cannabis, I point out that it certainly seems like there's a world soul and like you can talk directly to it when you're high. It's just that when you come down, you realize the simpler explanation is that the drugs --including the drugs at Eleusis, which Plato probably took--reduce your inhibitions, making it seem as though when you're talking to yourself, you're talking to God. The drugs re-enchant everything, making us view the world as we did when we were children, by shutting off the brain's higher faculties, and their cynicism and capacity for rational doubts.