The term is an anthropomorphised pseudoexplanation for what it actually refers to. It's akin to calling genetic mutation "the forces of evolution", or price negotiation "the invisible hand of the market".

We do that sort of thing when we don't know what the thing we're trying to describe is and have nothing better - a contemporary example of an appropriate use of this would be "dark matter". But we do know what this is. It's "instruction steps". Not a series of thoughts!

Can we please aim higher than Victorian-era allegory and metaphors. If we don't, we'll keep getting people saying stuff like "GPT-6 is better at hiding its thoughts".