This moves on in particularly from Alignment ② definity and especially key discussions of the point of view therein.

Out there in the world there are many particulars with their own vectors, or at least, move with what we have given them, but more likely not.
There are so many things going on. Mostly nothing to do with us.
Except potentially. Hmmmmmm— so we worry.
Even without the potential infinite plenitudes abounding outside our selfing microcosms, keeping track of all those alignments is resource and energy intensive, thus it can be easier on our animal minds to align those alignments with each other rather than keep track of each movement’s idiosyncratic path.
In information theory terms this can be viewed as a type of lossy compression, where we do not so much construct a model of reality with some accuracy/error margin so much as compress the information received back into the world, as ourselves, and upon which we then elaborate (further invaginate or gastrulate).
Each bit out there, each piece of dust in our eyes, is seen as a potential something of us or like us, a threat or opportunity. And in using what is nearest at hand, our partiality, our distinctness for our own notice, we use our own vector in/from its point of view (elsewhere some call this a perspective but this can loose its origins in the point and then be forgotten) and begin to align the bits out there in reference to our own bit here.
We can call this aligning of alignments a bias, or a short-cut, a preference or an inclination. Evolution selects it, we story it: I walk here, this is mine, I have always been here.
It comes with the territory.
We can then further describe this move to align alignments as a type of ‘wilful-magnetisation’, with an originary perspective seen as a magnetic POV capable of making those others fall into line. Such that the polarity of the partial is the polarity of all.
Such that the universe becomes one big magnet.
Except for all the other peeps doing the same with their senses and/or sensibilities.

A crystal growth metaphor could also be used, but magnetism is a prior force to the agglomeration of matter's multiplicity in the stelliferous age.
Emperors and authoritarians love the one big magnet idea, limited anxious fools that they are, but lining things up is available to all of us and is in no way an element of divinity. Though theists will align it just-so, some in the name of power as mentioned, some in the name of themselves, because power, and some in the name of the sacred. Such alignments are regarded as so obvious that any questioning of the judgement so arranged are regarded as injurious to the world itself. Alignment thus becomes “alignment with worlding characteristics”, and while true for those worlding that way, so dogmatically, alignment may not be the only way to align, at least not so dogmatically, and so the world is also produced with that less aligning alignment as well.
The world continues on regardless. So it is wise to remember that the world is not your preference nor an accommodation of it.
Crossposted at whyweshould.loofs-samorzewski.com. Where the other parts on Alignment in the [taphonomy of worlding] can be found here.