Alpha and Omega

Introducing ALPHA AND OMEGA

ALPHA AND OMEGA -

Beginning and End

Cyclic Philosophy

______________

CONTENTS

PART ONE

1. Who Precedes What or What precedes Whom?

2. Returning to One's 'Maker'

3. Mothers and Sons vis-à-vis Mothers and Daughters

4. The Dualities of both Soma and Psyche

5. Posthumous Fates of the Genders in relation to Class

6. The Gender Basis of Conflicting Freedoms

7. The Relationships between Work and Play

8. As in the Beginning, so Not Quite in the End

PART TWO

1. Devolution and Evolution in Perspective

2. The Subversion of Knowledge

3. Alternative Afterdeath and Afterlife Experiences

4. State Soma and Church Psyche

5. Contrasting Freedoms of Barbarism and Culture

6. Empiricism and Rationalism Reviewed

7. Failed Alternatives to the Liberal World

8. Returning to Self

PART THREE

1. Concrete and Abstract Revaluated

2. Fictional Knowledge and True Knowledge

3. Factual Primacy vis-à-vis Truthful Supremacy

4. Primacy and Supremacy in the Elements

5. Divisions in both the Self and the Not-Self

6. The Many and the One

7. The Tune and Dance of the Many

8. Returning (progressively) to the One

PART FOUR

1. Contrary types of Virtue and Vice

2. Psychic Virtue vis-à-vis Somatic Vice

3. Fictional and Illusory Hegemonies

4. Evil or Wisdom, the Gender Choice

5. Sin and Punishment

6. The Virtue of Self-promotion

7. The Prerogative of Man

8. The Prerogative of God

____________

PART ONE

WHO PRECEDES WHAT OR WHAT PRECEDES WHOM?

1. Soma and psyche, the nature and nurture, the not-self and self of life as it devolves on the female, or objective, side of things from most soma and least psyche, most particles and least wavicles, in the Cosmos to more (relative to most) soma and less (relative to least) psyche, more particles and less wavicles, in Nature, and evolves on the male, or subjective, side of things from more (relative to most) psyche and less (relative to least) soma, more wavicles and less particles, in Man to most psyche and least soma, most particles and least wavicles, in the Cyborg; which is to say, regresses from the Devil to Woman in fire and water, but progresses from Man to God in vegetation (earth) and air, as we plot an overall elemental chronology, both within and without historical time, from the noumenal objectivity of metachemistry in space-time devolution and the phenomenal objectivity of chemistry in volume-mass devolution to the phenomenal subjectivity of physics in mass-volume evolution and the noumenal subjectivity of metaphysics in time-space evolution, as from the somatic freedoms of will and spirit to the psychic freedoms of ego and soul.

2. Hence things could be said to proceed, whether regressively or progressively, in devolutionary descent or evolutionary ascent, from the metachemical context of appearances to the metaphysical context of essences par excellence via the chemical context of quantities and the physical context of qualities par excellence, as from power to content(ment) via glory and form, doing to being via giving and taking, will to soul via spirit and ego, though always with 'everything within everything' in different ratios and with different emphases according to the gender and/or class status of the element concerned, be it fiery, watery, vegetative, or airy.

3. In literary terms, this would be like plotting a regression from poetry to drama on the one hand, that of a female objectivity necessarily affiliated to or stemming from a vacuum, and plotting a progression from fiction to philosophy on the other hand, that of a male subjectivity necessarily centred in or appertaining to a plenum, the context in which, contrary to vacuums, psyche precedes soma rather than vice versa.

4. For when we ask ourselves, in somewhat Wildean fashion, whether matter precedes mind or mind precedes matter, we are obliged to answer, if wise and truly insightful, that the distinction which Wilde himself drew between matter over mind in relation to females and mind over matter (or, rather, morals, but unlike him we shan't be facetious!) in relation to males obliges us to concede a place to both tendencies, since a somatic predominance, as in the Cosmos and Nature, is only possible on the objective basis of particles preceding wavicles, whereas a psychic predominance, as in Man and (to anticipate the future) the Cyborg, is only possible on the subjective basis of wavicles preceding particles, so that the answer to the age-old question as to whether matter precedes mind or mind precedes matter can only be accurately answered on the basis of the precedence of mind by matter, of psyche by soma, in regard to the objective, or female, elements of fire and water, in contrast to the precedence of matter by mind, of soma by psyche, in regard to the subjective, or male, elements of vegetation and air.

5. Hence the ability to draw a gender distinction on the above objective/subjective, vacuum/plenum, particle/wavicle basis is the beginning of all wisdom and guarantor of philosophical truth, of a more comprehensively exacting and credible perspective, since it saves one from projecting, consciously or unconsciously, a single gender perspective on to the answer and, indeed, question in the first place, thereby enabling one to distinguish between those contexts, necessarily vacuously objective, in which soma precedes psyche, the not-self the self, and those contexts, by contrast, in which, due to subjective attributes deriving from a plenum, psyche precedes soma, the self the not-self, which gives us a clear-cut gender-based distinction between the femaleness, in metachemistry and chemistry, of those elements by which, on the basis of a particle hegemony, it can be categorically maintained that matter precedes mind, and the maleness, in physics and metaphysics, of those elements by which, on the basis of a wavicle hegemony, it can be maintained with equal categorical assurance that mind precedes matter, although the use of such facile terms as 'matter' and 'mind' is of less value, philosophically, than the more clinical distinction between soma and psyche, not-self and self, will and/or spirit and ego and/or soul, since mind is less purely psychic than a consequence of what happens when egocentric psyche is free, in male vein, to condition and modify the will of the relevant subjective order of soma towards consciousness, thereby establishing conscious will, which is the somatic counterpart to the modification of spirit by soul in such contexts, which I have hitherto - and I believe correctly - characterized as 'subspirit', or subconscious spirit.

6. For will, spirit, ego, and soul do not exist as equal components in every element, be it female objective or male subjective, but either will and spirit condition ego and soul, as in those female contexts where soma is free, in hegemonic particles, to maintain the psychic determinism of id and superego, instinctualized soul and spiritualized ego, or, by gender contrast, ego and soul condition will and spirit, as in those male contexts where psyche is free, in hegemonic wavicles, to maintain the somatic determinism of mind and subspirit, intellectualized (conscious) will and emotionalized spirit.

7. Therefore whilst will and spirit are very much factors of a somatic predominance, ego and soul are only genuinely possible in relation to a psychic predominance, the sort of predominance which follows from a plenum, in due subjective vein, and enables us to infer the precedence of soma by psyche, of not-self by self, the former of which is accordingly modified by the latter in relation to a male hegemony.

8. But when psyche is modified by soma, as in the objective contexts of a female hegemony, we have to infer the precedence of psyche by soma, of self by not-self, since particle hegemonies are only authentically possible in relation to a vacuum, and such a vacuum characterizes both the most particle and least wavicle absolutism of the Cosmos and the more (relative to most) particle and less (relative to least) wavicle relativity of Nature, conceiving of the former in a mainly metachemical light and the latter in a mainly chemical one, so that the elements of fire and water are respectively preponderant.

9. Therefore it can only be said that 'God created matter' in relation to the metaphysical self and its association with the metaphysical not-self, the 'matter', or soma, of the airy context in question, be it sensual or sensible, foolish or wise, of the ears or of the lungs. It cannot even be said of the physical self and its association with the physical not-self, the soma of a vegetative mean, be it phallic or cerebral, since that is not a context of God but, more phenomenally, of Man, even though the notion that 'Man created physical matter' is logically valid, and follows from the tendency of a free psyche centred in ego to fashion things in its formal image in respect to the development of civilization through knowledge, the masculine equivalent of the development, by the godly, of culture through truth.

10. But when we turn to the other side of the gender fence, the objective side of a vacuous predilection for a particle hegemony, it cannot be said that either God or Man created or preceded 'matter', meaning the not-self or soma, since neither God nor Man are relevant there, but either the Devil or Woman, of whom it has to be said that in neither case did they create matter but that, judged in relation to the self, matter created or preceded them, though, in contrast to the primacy of God and Man in relation to the self on the male side of life, it is not the self which is primarily identifiable with either the Devil or Woman, even though secondary manifestations of each most certainly apply, but the not-self, which is the soma from out of which psyche emerged, albeit on a subordinate basis, given the vacuously-conditioned objective bias of the female gender for not-self over self or, in Wilde's proverbial phrase, 'matter over mind', viz. soma over psyche.

11. Therefore if it could be said - and this contrary to how I used to think - that the Father takes precedence over the Son with both Man and God, physics and metaphysics, it would also have to be the case that, in parallel terms, the Mother takes precedence over the Daughter with both the Devil and Woman, metachemistry and chemistry, since the Daughter is the subordinate psychic factor in contexts where soma, and hence the Mother, must predominate in view of their objective nature and consequent tendency to put the not-self above the self.

12. Consequently the Daughter stems from the Mother, psyche from soma, in regard to both the metachemical fieriness of the Devil and the chemical wateriness of Woman, while the Son stems from the Father, soma from psyche, in regard to both the physical vegetativeness of Man and the metaphysical airiness of God, who, for us, is less a bona fide contemporary reality, higher-man exceptions to the general rule notwithstanding, than something or, rather, someone who will only come properly into his own in the more metaphysical future, when history moves beyond the dominion over the earth of Man and embraces the dominion beyond the earth of the Cyborg, who will bring godliness to a more authentic pitch than that at which it has ever existed in the past.

13. For God is not in the Beginning, with the Cosmos, but in the End, with the Cyborg, and until we officially embrace the coming age of the Cyborg through 'Kingdom Come', as defined by me in previous texts, we shall continue to live with either the hype of Man as God, as in the Christian tradition, the hype of Woman as God, as in the Marian and Heathen traditions, or the hype, worse again, of the Devil as God, as in all those Creator-worshipping paganistic traditions which, in their identification of God with a fiery 'First Mover', unwittingly accord divinity to that context in which the diabolism of most particle and least wavicle, most soma and least psyche, is scientifically uppermost - namely, the Cosmos.

14. We have a lot to do, especially those of us who are less than partial to any of the three false traditions noted above, before proper justice can be done to God and the concept thereof! We have to reject the hype, the falsehoods, the subversions of Godliness by Cosmos-slavering devils, Nature-worshipping women, and Man-affirming men, before any prospect of Cyborg-oriented gods can be expected to come to pass in heavenly contrast to both Hell and the World. Whereof 'Judgement' has its place as the electoral pathway to 'Kingdom Come'.

RETURNING TO ONE'S 'MAKER'

1. There is a sense in which 'As in the Beginning, so in the End' has some relevance to life, though not, I contend, in relation to the distinction between the alpha and omega of things, the Cosmos and the Cyborg, since we hold with the view that the former is more characteristic of the Devil and the latter of God, and that no greater distinction, amounting to a noumenal (absolute) antithesis in time and space between objectivity and subjectivity, could be imagined.

2. No, rather the worth of this biblical proverb is to be discerned in the distinction between psyche-out-of-soma on the one hand, and soma-out-of-psyche on the other, as between that which is female in its particle-hegemonic objectivity and that, by contrast, which is male in its wavicle-hegemonic subjectivity, so that both the Devil and Woman, the Cosmos and Nature, could be said to represent a tendency to return to soma in the end, whereas both Man and God, Civilization and the Cyborg, could be said to represent the contrary tendency to return to psyche in the end, since what began in soma must return to soma no less surely than what began in psyche must return to psyche.

3. There is even a biblical saying about 'ashes to ashes and dust to dust', and if I am not mistaken in my interpretation of this, it would seem to reflect acknowledgement of a gender distinction between female 'dust' and male 'ashes', between soma and psyche, primacy and supremacy, objectivity and subjectivity, whether in relation to devils and women in the case of females, or in relation to men and gods in the case of males, given the class distinctions which exist between those whose principal affiliation is to time and space, viz. devils and gods, and those, by contrast, whose principal affiliation is to volume and mass, viz. women and men.

4. Therefore whether one is primarily of the metachemical objectivity of space-time devolution, like upper-class females, or primarily of the chemical objectivity of volume-mass devolution, like lower-class females, dresses and skirts of respectively eyes-to-heart devils and tongue-to-womb women, one will return to soma in the end, as 'dust to dust', since females represent the triumph of matter over mind, of soma over psyche, whether scientifically, as it were, in relation to the most particles and least wavicles of metachemistry or politically ... in relation to the more (relative to most) particles and less (relative to least) wavicles of chemistry, with apparent and quantitative distinctions between upper-class doing and lower-class giving, the will and the spirit, with only a subordinate psyche characterized by the id and the superego, respectively, of the Daughter.

5. Conversely, whether one is primarily of the physical subjectivity of mass-volume evolution, like lower-class males, or primarily of the metaphysical subjectivity of time-space evolution, like upper-class males, trousers (or pants/jeans) and zippersuits of respectively phallus-to-brain men and ears-to-lungs gods, one will return to psyche in the end, as 'ashes to ashes', since males represent the triumph of mind over matter, of psyche over soma, whether economically, as it were, in relation to the more (relative to most) wavicles and less (relative to least) particles of physics or religiously ... in relation to the most wavicles and least particles of metaphysics, with qualitative and essential distinctions between lower-class taking and upper-class being, the ego and the soul, with only a subordinate soma characterized by the mind and the subspirit, respectively, of the Son.

6. Consequently it takes no great stretch of the imagination to see that what returns, having begun in soma, to soma in the end is unlikely to have much by way of afterlife experience, whereas what returns, having begun in psyche, to psyche in the end is almost sure to experience an afterlife, since such experience is only possible in relation to psyche, to the self, and never more so than in regard to that self which was partial, in upper-class male vein, to metaphysics in life and therefore primarily concerned with the well-being of the soul. For it is in the context of most wavicles and least particles, most psyche and least soma, that the soul comes most alive and lives the life eternal through metaphysics.

7. In almost absolute contrast to that context of most particles and least wavicles, most soma and least psyche, in which the will is predominant and one has a sort of eternal death through metachemistry, through the darkness of soma which, no matter how superficially bright the psychic surface may appear in its id-like radiance, is chiefly characteristic of the context in question.

8. Therefore while gods can expect to go into the light of a metaphysical eternity in the Afterlife, devils can expect nothing more than the darkness of a metachemical eternity, since what began in soma must return via a brief flare-up of instinctualized soul, viz. the id, to soma and fade-out into nothingness, whereas what began in psyche must return via the giving-up of emotionalized spirit, viz. the subspirit, to psyche and rise up into somethingness, the somethingness that owes its being to a soulful plenum as opposed, like the somatic nothingness of eternal death, to a wilful vacuum.

9. But what applies to devils and gods, genuinely upper-class females and males of a space/time highness, also applies, if to a lesser extent, to women and men, genuinely lower-class females and males of a volume/mass lowness, whose soma-over-psyche in the feminine case and psyche-over-soma in the masculine case means that, in the comparative relativity of their phenomenal integrities, soma returns to soma as, in some sense, 'maternal dust to dust' less quickly and completely with women while, conversely, psyche returns to psyche as 'paternal ashes to ashes' less quickly and completely with men, as each gender rots away in relatively intermediate afterlife states which we may characterize as purgatorial in the one case and earthly in the other, since neither women nor men are so somatic or psychic as to warrant either the hellish extreme of virtually total darkness or the heavenly extreme of virtually total light, psychic extinction or somatic irrelevance, but must needs fade-out via the extinction of superego or flare-up via the extinction of mind more modestly in the contexts of a temporal death.

10. Of course, the afterlives or afterdeaths of the respective genders and classes are really somewhat limited in duration, since extensive decomposition of the corpse does not accord with infinite duration of either somatic negativity or psychic positivity, whether on an absolute or a relative basis. I believe I have dealt adequately with this subject in previous texts, and the reader familiar with my work should recall that the prospects for a Christian-type burial these days are not what they used to be, and are hardly likely to improve in the course of time.

11. Neither, of course, is Christianity as relevant as was formerly the case, and many people would choose not to be buried but, rather, incinerated at their local crematorium. In view of the female-dominated nature of the age, of the sensual hegemonies that owe more to objectivity than to subjectivity, including the prevalence of cathode-ray-tube popular culture, this need not surprise us, even though it may be cause for alarm as far as males are concerned, since if, as I believe, they are more likely to experience an afterlife than females, given their psychic predominance, then they must surely be the ones who would have most to lose by opting for cremation instead of burial.

12. And yet, one cannot reverse time and undo existing technologies (though modify and overhaul them one assuredly can), nor expect most people to return to criteria more relevant to a suburban and even town-like culture than to what is chiefly characteristic, in our cosmopolitan metropolises, of the age, as though Christianity was still more applicable than the patently heathenistic and even paganistic parallels which underlie so much contemporary secular culture. The solution to this dilemma has, I believe, already been posed, and it will require that the cities - and therefore the majority of people - take full responsibility for their religious future and opt, democratically and urbanely, for an alternative to crematorial perdition in which, by degrees, the cyborgization of life, commensurate with a more evolved age, will provide the means by which life may continue virtually indefinitely and reach peaks of eternity that not even posthumous eternal life could provide or rival, thereby swinging things back in the male's favour and allowing him to dictate the terms not merely of psychic survival but of the enhancement of psyche in relation to a variety of synthetic and yogic practises.

FATHERS AND SONS VIS-À-VIS MOTHERS AND DAUGHTERS

1. Genuine philosophy can be a wonderful thing, a marvellously liberating and mentally enriching procedure. But it can also be a real problem when one is obliged, through enhanced logic, to review and even revise a long-held position, no matter how justified it may have seemed in the past. My own recent rethink in relation to the respective positions of the Father and the Son is a case in point, for I have long been arguing in favour of the identification of the Son with the self and of the Father with the not-self, thereby according pride of place, so to speak, to the former.

2. How wrong and misguided I was! For as psyche precedes soma with males, so it must follow that the Father precedes the Son, that the Father is what comes first and the Son afterwards, since fathers and sons are like that, and this whether in physics, where we can distinguish between manly modes of each, or in metaphysics, where the distinction between them is rather more godly.

3. Granted, further, a distinction between foolish and wise, sensual and sensible manifestations of both the manly and godly modes of the Father and the Son, we should also allow for their earthly and heavenly counterparts in unholiness and holiness, sensuality and sensibility, with respect to both the spirit and the soul, as before.

4. Hence, in sensible metaphysics, which is the salvation of the godly from the folly of its sensual counterpart, we must allow, contrary to how I used to think, for a distinction between God-the-Wise-Father and Heaven-the-Holy-Soul in relation to the self, to psyche, on the one hand, and God-the-Wise-Son and Heaven-the-Holy-Spirit in relation to the not-self, to soma, on the other hand, so that it is the Father and not the Son of the context in question which should be identified with the ego, with ego-through-spirit-via-will equalling soulful recoil, as one consciously plunges, as God-the-Wise-Father, into the will of the lungs to breathe (as God-the-Wise-Son) and is borne aloft on the out-breath (of Heaven-the-Holy-Spirit) only to recoil, in self-preservation, to self more profoundly, as Heaven-the-Holy-Soul, wherein one's redemption, or resurrection from ego to soul, is complete, and one achieves a state of joy, the reward of truth.

5. But both God-the-Wise-Father and Heaven-the-Holy-Soul are graceful in their different ways, the former in relation to the more (relative to most) wavicles and less (relative to least) particles, more psyche and less soma, of the relevant ego, the latter in relation to the most wavicles and least particles, most psyche and least soma, of the relevant soul, since the metaphysical self is, in contrast to the metaphysical not-self, alone graceful in its psychic predominance, and to the self in question is granted the sacredness of truth and joy, which contrasts with the falsity and woe of the not-self wherein profanity has its sinful throne in a somatic predominance, in the most particles and least wavicles, most soma and least psyche, of God-the-Wise-Son, and in the more (relative to most) particles and less (relative to least) wavicles, more soma and less psyche, of Heaven-the-Holy-Spirit, both of which, existing in relation to a particle hegemony, are always negative, even in the inner metaphysical context in question where, of course, they have reference to the lungs and the breath.

6. Therefore even in the saved context of Godliness and Heavenliness, wherein absolute wisdom and holiness have their respective places, we have to distinguish between the gracefulness of God-the-Wise-Father and Heaven-the-Holy-Soul, and the sinfulness of God-the-Wise-Son and Heaven-the-Holy-Spirit, psyche and soma, sanctity and profanity, primary and secondary orders of God and Heaven, since only in contexts of a wavicle hegemony is there anything positive, whether in relation to ego or to soul, the qualitative and essential manifestations of a quadruplicity dependent upon the utilization of wilful appearances and spiritual quantities.

7. Hence, in inner metaphysical psyche, the sensible truth of God-the-Wise-Father and the sensible joy of Heaven-the-Holy-Soul, as opposed, in the inner metaphysical soma of lungs and breath, to the sensible falsity of God-the-Wise-Son and the sensible woe of Heaven-the-Holy-Spirit, all of which contrast, in absolute salvation, with the sensual truth, in outer metaphysical psyche, of God-the-Unwise-Father and the sensual joy of Heaven-the-Unholy-Soul vis-à-vis the sensual falsity, in outer metaphysical soma, of God-the-Unwise-Son and the sensual woe of Heaven-the-Unholy-Spirit, viz. ears and airwaves.

8. But hence, too, in inner physical psyche, the sensible knowledge of Man-the-Wise-Father and the sensible pleasure of Earth-the-Holy-Soul, as opposed, in the inner physical soma of brain and thought, to the sensible ignorance of Man-the-Wise-Son and the sensible pain of Earth-the-Holy-Spirit, all of which contrast, in relative salvation, with the sensual knowledge, in outer physical psyche, of Man-the-Unwise-Father and the sensual pleasure of Earth-the-Unholy-Soul vis-à-vis the sensual ignorance, in outer physical soma, of Man-the-Unwise-Son and the sensual pain of Earth-the-Unholy-Spirit, viz. phallus and sperm.

9. But then, too, on the opposite side of the gender fence, in contexts where soma takes precedence over psyche, with the inner chemical soma of womb and amniotic fluid the sensible weakness of Woman-the-Good-Mother and the sensible humility of Purgatory-the-Unclear-Spirit, as opposed, in inner chemical psyche, to the sensible strength of Woman-the-Good-Daughter and the sensible pride of Purgatory-the-Unclear-Soul, all of which contrast, in relative damnation, with the sensual weakness, in the tongue and saliva of outer chemical soma, of Woman-the-Evil-Mother and the sensual humility of Purgatory-the-Clear-Spirit vis-à-vis the sensual strength, in outer chemical psyche, of Woman-the-Evil-Daughter and the sensual pride of Purgatory-the-Clear-Soul.

10. And last and, from a divine standpoint, avowedly least, in the inner metachemical soma of heart and blood, the sensible ugliness of Devil-the-Good-Mother and the sensible hatred of Hell-the-Unclear-Spirit, as opposed, in inner metachemical psyche, to the sensible beauty of Devil-the-Good-Daughter and the sensible love of Hell-the-Unclear-Soul, all of which contrast, in absolute damnation, with the sensual ugliness, in the eyes and optical light of outer metachemical soma, of Devil-the-Evil-Mother and the sensual hatred of Hell-the-Clear-Spirit vis-à-vis the sensual beauty, in outer metachemical psyche, of Devil-the-Evil-Daughter and the sensual love of Hell-the-Clear-Soul.

THE DUALITIES OF BOTH SOMA AND PSYCHE

1. We have argued that soma returns to soma and psyche to psyche, so that 'as in the beginning, so in the end', but this is not invariably in terms of Mother to Mother or Father to Father, since while such a return can and does happen, one must also allow for the spiritual manifestation of soma and the soulful manifestation of psyche, neither of which have anything to do with mothers or fathers, the former of which appertains to the will and the latter to the ego.

2. Therefore one can no more argue exclusively in favour of a return of soma to soma in the instinctual terms of the Mother than argue exclusively in favour of a return of psyche to psyche in the egocentric terms of the Father, for each element has a different fulcrum, or most characteristic attribute, and no two elements - and therefore class or gender parallels to them - are the same.

3. That which, as metachemistry, is almost absolutely somatic in its most particle/least wavicle subatomic ratio, is also, on that account, most wilful, most of the will, whereas that which, as chemistry, is only relatively somatic in its more (relative to most) particle/less (relative to least) wavicle ratio is also, on that account, most spiritual, or most of the spirit. Consequently, females whose principal affiliation, in upper-class fashion, is to the former will be predestined to return to soma primarily in terms of will, and hence the Mother, while those whose principal affiliation, in lower-class fashion, is to the latter will be predestined to return to soma primarily in terms of spirit, and hence some purgatorial parallel.

4. Conversely, that which, as physics, is only relatively psychic in its more (relative to most) wavicle/less (relative to least) particle subatomic ratio is also, on that account, most egocentric, or most of the ego, whereas that which, as metaphysics, is almost absolutely psychic in its most wavicle/least particle ratio is also, on that account, most soulful, or most of the soul. Consequently, males whose principal affiliation, in lower-class fashion, is to the former will be predestined to return to psyche primarily in terms of ego, and hence the Father, while those whose principal affiliation, in upper-class fashion, is to the latter will be predestined to return to psyche primarily in terms of soul, and hence some heavenly parallel.

5. But even if we have to distinguish between two types of somatic return and two types of psychic return at death, with due class distinctions between the ethereal eternality of the somatic and psychic absolutisms on the one hand, and the corporeal temporality of the somatic and psychic relativities on the other hand, the former the extremes of afterdeath and afterlife experience, the latter their more moderate counterparts, we cannot leave the matter there, as though the distinction between sensuality and sensibility were of no account in determining the nature, as it were, of each type of posthumous experience.

6. On the contrary, such a distinction is crucial in determining whether the somatic afterdeath for females and the psychic afterlife for males will be, as it were, perceptual or conceptual, outer or inner, superficial or profound. For, in truth, the scales of posthumous judgement tip in favour of either sensuality or sensibility according to how one, as an individual, had lived one's life, whether predominantly in the sensual contexts of evil and folly, clearness and unholiness, or predominantly in the sensible contexts of wisdom and goodness, holiness and unclearness, so that justice will be done accordingly on both a class and gender basis.

7. Let us take the metaphysical context of truth and joy in the self, in psyche, as against falsity and woe in the not-self, in soma, which is the prevailing element for upper-class males of a godly disposition. Such a disposition can be sensual or sensible, primarily affiliated to the ears/airwaves or primarily affiliated to the lungs/breath, which means that the metaphysical self, the self that identifies with either type of not-self, can be unwise/unholy or wise/holy, though not usually both at once! How, in that event, does one distinguish the one type of truth from the other, or the one type of joy from the other, not to mention their somatic counterparts?

8. Clearly, the answer to that vexed question must be based on an understanding of the fact that truth attaches to the metaphysical ego, to the self as ego, and therefore to what, in subatomic terms, will have reference to more (relative to most) wavicles and less (relative to least) particles, in short to a molecular as opposed to an elemental integrity especially germane, so I have contended, to God the Father. Therefore one cannot speak of truth in elemental, or absolutist, terms, as being most or least, but only in molecular, or relative, terms, as being more (relative to most) or less (relative to least). Only joy, which is a soulful reality having reference to most wavicles and least particles, permits of an absolutist approach, and therefore allows us to distinguish the sensual from the sensible on the basis of least joy and most joy.

9. Consequently, the metaphysical psyche permits of a sensible/sensual distinction between the more (relative to most) truth of God-the-Wise-Father and the most joy of Heaven-the-Holy-Soul as against the less (relative to least) truth of God-the-Unwise-Father and the least joy of Heaven-the-Unholy-Soul. But neither truth nor joy can really exist independently of falsity and woe, the falsity and woe of God the Son and Heaven the Spirit, and therefore we need to distinguish, in metaphysical soma, between the elemental absolutism of the will and the molecular relativity of the spirit, before we can arrive at a proper estimate of either in relation to both sensuality and sensibility.

10. Clearly, since the will of metaphysical soma is elemental in its most particle/least wavicle absolutism, we may distinguish the one type of falsity from the other on a like-absolutist basis, as between most and least false, while reserving to the molecular relativity of metaphysical spirit in more (relative to most) particles/less (relative to least) wavicles a more (relative to most) and less (relative to least) woeful distinction in respect of its sensual and sensible alternatives.

11. Consequently metaphysical soma permits of a sensual/sensible distinction between the most falsity of God-the-Unwise-Son and the more (relative to most) woe of Heaven-the-Unholy-Spirit as against the least falsity of God-the-Wise-Son and the less (relative to least) woe of Heaven-the-Holy-Spirit.

12. Therefore when we combine the psyche and soma of metaphysics we shall find that the sensible, or inner, context provides us with an overall distinction between more (relative to most) truth and most joy in God-the-Wise-Father and Heaven-the-Holy-Soul and least falsity and less (relative to least) woe in God-the-Wise-Son and Heaven-the-Holy-Spirit, whereas the sensual, or outer, context provides us with an overall distinction between less (relative to least) truth and least joy in God-the-Unwise-Father and Heaven-the-Unholy-Soul and most falsity and more (relative to most) woe in God-the-Unwise-Son and Heaven-the-Unholy-Spirit.

13. Consequently, those metaphysical types who have lived predominantly sensually in relation to the ears and the airwaves can expect their afterlife experience in the metaphysical soul to be least joyful, while, conversely, those who have lived predominantly sensibly in relation to the lungs and the breath can expect their afterlife experience in the metaphysical soul to be most joyful, since the metaphysical self is drawn rather more to the soul than to the ego, to joy than to truth, and will have either a perceptual or a conceptual, a sensual or a sensible bias according to how one had lived. Folly attaches no less to the self than wisdom to the not-self, but we have a duty, if wise, to live as much as possible in sensible truth in order that our joy may be the deeper.

14. For 'most joy' is only possible on the basis of 'more (relative to most) truth', and truth is only truly wise when it utilizes contexts of 'least falsity' and 'less (relative to least) woe' in order to achieve its heavenly resurrection, not when, in the folly of 'less (relative to least) truth', it utilizes contexts of 'most falsity' and 'more (relative to most) woe' to a least joyful end.

15. There are, in truth, three primary gods, or godly orders of male: there is the god who lives in the folly of God-the-Unwise-Father vis-à-vis God-the-Unwise-Son, the latter of whom is, of course, sinfully most false and not at all true. There is the god who lives in the wisdom of God-the-Wise-Father vis-à-vis God-the-Wise-Son, the latter of whom is sinfully least false though still far from true. And, in between, there is the abraxas-like dualistic god who lives in both folly and wisdom by turns, now metaphysically sensual in relation to the ears and airwaves of outer metaphysical soma, now metaphysically sensible in relation to the lungs and breath of inner metaphysical soma, alternating, it might be, between music and meditation, perhaps more in terms of some intermediate paradox like piping or chanting than strictly in either metaphysical extreme.

16. One might consider such a dualistic god, such an upper-class male, metaphysically amoral rather than either immoral or moral. However that may be, he would not be the best of the three, nor even the least, but simply intermediate between the other two, a sort of 'worldly' god who fights shy of foolish and wise, sensual and sensible, divine extremes. I shall not judge this god too harshly, but I maintain that ultimate godhead, short of complete cyborgization, resides in the meditator, who is alone of the divinely Saved and truly virtuous.

POSTHUMOUS FATES OF THE GENDERS IN RELATION TO CLASS

1. Truth and joy are no more equivalent than primary God and Heaven, the Father and the Soul, more (relative to most) wavicles/less (relative to least) particles and most wavicles/least particles of a metaphysical psychic predominance, while, conversely, falsity and woe are no more equivalent than secondary God and Heaven, the Son and the Spirit, most particles/least wavicles and more (relative to most) particles/less (relative to least) wavicles of a metaphysical somatic predominance. But truth precedes falsity and woe as joy succeeds them, since psyche precedes soma in this context and then succeeds it in returning to itself as soul, whether least gracefully in sensuality or most gracefully in sensibility. And in desiring to succeed falsity and woe, the Son and the Spirit, that which precedes them is obliged, in truth, to forgive them, since grace depends upon sin for its well-being - indeed, for its very existence. As in life, so in death, the soul would not long be without a surrounding somatic layer, even though more independent of the body than ever before.

2. But if the Metaphysical return in contentment to the soul at death, then the Physical must surely return, after their more formal natures, to the ego, viz. the Father, albeit it is Man the Father rather than God the Father which typifies that mode of ego corresponding to knowledge rather than truth, and which is really the principal manifestation of ego, as germane to physical form.

3. Let us, at any rate, distinguish here, as above, between the more (relative to most) knowledgeable ego of Man-the-Wise-Father and the most pleasurable soul of Earth-the-Holy-Soul vis-à-vis the least ignorant will of Man-the-Wise-Son and the less (relative to least) painful spirit of Earth-the-Holy-Spirit in relation to a sensible predilection, and contrast this with the less (relative to least) knowledgeable ego of Man-the-Unwise-Father and the least pleasurable soul of Earth-the-Unholy-Soul vis-à-vis the most ignorant will of Man-the-Unwise-Son and the more (relative to most) painful spirit of Earth-the-Unholy-Spirit in relation to a sensual predilection, with corresponding somatic distinctions between the brain and its capacity for thought on the one hand, and the phallus and its capacity for orgasm on the other hand.

4. Psyche nevertheless still precedes soma where men (as opposed, in this instance, to gods) are concerned, but what stems from an egocentric fulcrum should return to an egocentric fulcrum, as Father to Father, and such a return is much less psychically significant, in afterlife terms, than the soulful resolution characterizing the Metaphysical, since appertaining to the brain stem rather than to the spinal cord.

5. When we turn from males to females, however, we find the somatic distinction between spirit and will, Purgatory and the Mother, which is no less distinctive, in its own particle-based duality between feminine and diabolic females, than that between ego and soul, the Father and Heaven of masculine and divine males. Now if the Physical return to the ego at death, then the Chemical are likely to return, after their more glorious nature as feminine females, to the spirit, viz. Purgatory.

6. Let us therefore distinguish here, contrary to the above, between the most weak will of Woman-the-Evil-Mother and the more (relative to most) humble spirit of Purgatory-the-Clear-Spirit vis-à-vis the less (relative to least) strong ego of Woman-the-Evil-Daughter and the least proud soul of Purgatory-the-Clear-Soul in relation to a sensual predilection, and contrast this with the least weak will of Woman-the-Good-Mother and the less (relative to least) humble spirit of Purgatory-the-Unclear-Spirit vis-à-vis the more (relative to most) strong ego of Woman-the-Good-Daughter and the most proud soul of Purgatory-the-Unclear-Soul in relation to a sensible predilection, with corresponding somatic distinctions between the tongue and its salivary capacity for speech on the one hand, and the womb and its amniotic capacity for conception on the other hand.

7. But if the Chemical return to the spirit at death, then the Metachemical must surely return, after their more wilful nature as diabolic females, to the will, viz. the Mother, albeit it is Devil the Mother rather than Woman the Mother which typifies that mode of will corresponding to ugliness rather than to weakness.

8. Let us then distinguish here, similarly to the above, between the most ugly will of Devil-the-Evil-Mother and the more (relative to most) hateful spirit of Hell-the-Clear-Spirit vis-à-vis the less (relative to least) beautiful ego of Devil-the-Evil-Daughter and the least loving soul of Hell-the-Clear-Soul in relation to a sensual predilection, and contrast this with the least ugly will of Devil-the-Good-Mother and the less (relative to least) hateful spirit of Hell-the-Unclear-Spirit vis-à-vis the more (relative to most) beautiful ego of Devil-the-Good-Daughter and the most loving soul of Hell-the-Unclear-Soul in relation to a sensible predilection, with corresponding somatic distinctions between the eyes and their optical capacity for sight on the one hand, and the heart and its sanguine capacity for deception on the other hand.

9. Soma nevertheless still precedes psyche where devils (as opposed, in this instance, to women) are concerned, but what stems from an instinctual fulcrum in the will should return to an instinctual fulcrum in that aspect of soma, as Mother to Mother, and such a return is much more somatically significant, in afterdeath terms, than the spiritual resolution characterizing the Chemical, given the greater significance of will to spirit on the female side of life which contrasts, in most particles/least wavicles and more (relative to most) particles/less (relative to least) wavicles, with the correspondingly greater significance attaching to soul than to ego on the male side of life, wherein most wavicles/least particles is the ne plus ultra of psychic reality, and that which is merely more (relative to most) wavicles/less (relative to least) particles no more than a temporal counterpart, in masculine egocentricity, to the spiritual purgatory of women, viz. those females of a feminine, and therefore lower-class, disposition.

10. Yet all females, whatever their class, share a common origin in soma, and the precedence of psyche by soma and correspondingly correlative predominance of soma over psyche ensures that, whether in sensuality or sensibility, the primary Woman/Purgatory and Devil/Hell will always be somatic and the secondary Woman/Purgatory and Devil/Hell psychic, which is to say, of psyche as opposed to soma, of punishment as opposed to crime, positive as opposed to negative, in complete contrast to how the primary factors of males, whether in relation to Man and the Earth or to God and Heaven, are always psychic and the secondary factors alone somatic, so that psyche takes precedence over soma, grace over sin, and positivity over negativity.

11. The genders, in fact, are completely opposite, though both stand to gain more, in the long run, by sensibility than by sensuality, since wisdom and goodness are preferable to evil and folly, and attest to the reigns, in primary male and secondary female terms, of plenums rather than vacuums, the source of all or most evil and folly.

THE GENDER BASIS OF CONFLICTING FREEDOMS

1. Female soma is the alpha and male psyche the omega of life, though there is also what could be called the omega-in-the-alpha of female psyche and the alpha-in-the-omega of male soma, since psyche is secondary to soma in females and soma, by contrast, secondary to psyche in males - the former attesting to the triumph, in Wilde's proverbial phrase, of matter over mind, the latter, discarding Wildean facetiousness, to the triumph of mind over matter.

2. But when soma is free, psyche will be bound, or determined by somatic factors - in the case of females by the will and spirit of what makes in the one instance for instinctualized soul, viz. the id, and in the other instance for spiritualized ego, viz. the superego, neither of which are properly airy or vegetative but effectively transmuted by fire and water to such an extent that they become the accomplices, as omega-in-the-alpha, of free soma, of will and spirit, and never more so than in sensuality, where the female aspect of things is, of course, hegemonic in both upper- and lower-class contexts, viz. with respect to both metachemistry and chemistry, fire and water, eyes and tongue.

3. When psyche is free, on the other hand, soma will be bound, or determined by psychic factors - in the case of males by the ego and soul of what makes in the one instance for intellectualized will, viz. the mind, and in the other instance for emotionalized spirit, viz. the subspirit, neither of which are properly fiery or watery but effectively transmuted by vegetation and air to such an extent that they become the accomplices, as alpha-in-the-omega, of free psyche, of ego and soul, and never more so than in sensibility, where the male aspect of things is, of course, hegemonic in both lower- and upper-class contexts, viz. with respect to both physics and metaphysics, vegetation and air, brain and lungs.

4. Thus when soma is free, psyche will be bound, and even male psyche becomes subject to a quasi-binding as the soul is outflanked by the id of metachemical objectivity and the ego by the superego of chemical objectivity, thereby ceasing to condition soma in deterministic vein, but acquiescing in somatic freedom in secondary fashion to females.

5. But when, by contrast, psyche is free, then soma will be bound, and even female soma becomes subject to a quasi-binding as the will is undermined by the mind of physical subjectivity and the spirit by the subspirit of metaphysical subjectivity, thereby ceasing to condition psyche in deterministic vein, but acquiescing in psychic freedom in secondary fashion to males.

6. In general, one might say that the relationships of upper-class females and males are more characterized by either the id in sensuality or the subspirit in sensibility than by either the superego or the mind, whereas the relationships of lower-class females and males will be more characterized by either the superego in sensuality or the mind in sensibility, since metachemistry and metaphysics interpenetrate on the one level, and chemistry and physics on the other.

7. Obviously whether females condition males or males their female counterparts will depend on the circumstances, not least of all in relation to the nature of the society in which males and females happen to live on any given class basis; but it can be said, quite categorically, that societies characterized by a hegemonic soma, whether cosmic or natural, most particle/least wavicle or more (relative to most) particle/less (relative to least) wavicle, will attest to a female dominion in which the negativity of free soma must prevail at the expense of free psyche, and precisely in relation to the undermined positivity of a bound psyche such that sets science and politics free to do and/or give in somatic deference to hegemonic female criteria.

8. On the other hand, societies characterized by a hegemonic psyche, whether civilized or cultural, more (relative to most) wavicle/less (relative to least) particle or most wavicle/least particle, will attest to a male dominion in which the positivity of free psyche should prevail at the expense of free soma, and precisely in relation to the undermined negativity of a bound soma such that sets economics and religion free to take and/or be in psychic deference to hegemonic male criteria.

9. Therefore the decision for societies is, if we allow a class distinction, effectively between science and religion or politics and economics; for if science is somatically free then religion will be psychically bound and in no position to be its true or, rather, joyful best, and if politics is somatically free then economics will be psychically bound and in no position to take its knowledgeable best, whereas if religion, by contrast, is psychically free than science will be somatically bound and in no position to do its ugly worst, and if economics is psychically free then politics will be somatically bound and in no position to give its weak or, rather, humbling worst.

10. For the distinction between free soma and free psyche, free science or politics on the one hand, and free economics or religion on the other hand, is nothing less than that between the negativity of the Devil or Woman and the positivity of Man or God, as between the Mother or Purgatory and the Father or Heaven, the Will or the Spirit and the Ego or the Soul, Power or Glory and Form or Content(ment), and such a distinction is very significant in determining the nature of societies and how they should be judged - judged, that is, in relation to the dichotomy between sensuality and sensibility, vice and virtue, immorality and morality, the darkness of soma and the light of psyche, the evil of free soma coupled to the folly of bound psyche or the wisdom of free psyche coupled to the goodness of bound soma, crime and sin on the one hand, or grace and punishment on the other.

11. Life is certainly a gender tug-of-war, but if we are sensible we shall see the desirability of male hegemonies and do everything in our powers to maintain or advance them, so that economics and religion, and hopefully one day soon religion more than economics, will be uppermost in people's loyalties and the darkness of free soma officially consigned to the rubbish heap of antiquated history, where it can rot away in parallel to the Cosmos and Nature, to the free philistinism and barbarism of the Devil and Woman that is the enemy of civilized and cultural freedom, and thus of Man and God (the Cyborg).

12. But Man is, if not the enemy of God, then certainly his chief rival for representation of the male side of things; for so long as Man sits knowledgeably on the throne of life there will be no place for God to sit truthfully on it in the interests of heavenly joy, and therefore no place for free religion so long as economics continues to remain paramount, and even to defer, paradoxically, to politics and science, as to the imposition of female glory and power.

13. For Man, one is obliged to confess, is not quite convinced, in his more worldly manifestation, of the precedence of psyche over soma but continues to live the lie of soma over psyche in deference to female realities, especially in relation to a religious tradition in which the Son takes precedence - perhaps for that very reason - over the Father, like falsity over truth or, more pertinently to a physical mean, ignorance over knowledge. Did not Christ himself ask what truth was? For what can falsity know about truth, about the Father of a metaphysical ego, whether unwise in sensuality or wise in sensibility? And what can ignorance know about knowledge, about the Father of a physical ego who is the actual fulcrum of the vegetative context of Man, meaning principally that christianly and bourgeois order of mankind which, appertaining to a largely suburban environment, fights shy of criteria more applicable to the city and to those who, whether strictly proletarian or not, are potentially cyborg, are in effect already beyond Man in their environmentally-conditioned yearning for something else, for something better and, like the city to the town, higher, such that would return life to the noumenal heights from which it fell with Nature, albeit on diametrically opposite terms to the Cosmos and its Devil-slavering somatic absolutism.

14. It is not from Man but from that greater proportion of mankind who are literally or effectively urban that the will to the Beyond, to 'Kingdom Come', to the Cyborg, and to the overcoming of human limitations, including unrestrained economic freedom, emerges; for it is the will to self-overcoming in joyful soul out of truthful ego, not of egocentric self-affirmation in knowledge which tends to subsume pleasurable soul into itself and to subordinate it, in keeping with the vegetative nature of physics, a nature that sinfully fights shy of the airy nature, or rather subnature, of metaphysics, wherein not form but contentment is the principal attribute.

15. Only when the urban majority come to vote - being in a position to vote paradoxically in deliverance from political sovereignty - for religious sovereignty, the sovereignty beyond the world of mundane freedoms, whether psychic or somatic, will there be any possibility of progress towards the sort of society described above, one in which godly criteria take precedence over any other, and the overcoming of Man in terms of the Cyborg can accordingly get properly under way, and the Cyborg become the chief representative of the male side of life for all eternity.

16. For the Cyborg will be capable of an eternity that Man, in his twisted Son-affirming temporal nature, could only dream about, and then imperfectly. Only the Cyborg can lead beyond the earth to the heavenly bliss of a paradise more artificial and synthetic than even Baudelaire ever imagined - a paradise not of this world, nor of anything which preceded it, but fashioned by progressive humanity in the interests of their deliverance from the death-in-life, not to mention life-in-death and eternal death, of the ungodly.

THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN WORK AND PLAY

1. We have argued that life proceeds from a context of most soma and least psyche in the somatic absolutism of cosmic death to one of more (relative to most) soma and less (relative to least) psyche in the somatic relativity of natural life-in-death, as from the Cosmos to Nature, and thence, on the male side of the gender fence, that it proceeds from a context of more (relative to most) psyche and less (relative to least) soma in the psychic relativity of civilized death-in-life to one of most psyche and least soma in the psychic absolutism of cultural life, in short of the Life Eternal which we have equated with the desirability of a godly supersession of Man by the Cyborg, as, in some sense, of civilization by culture, knowledge by truth.

2. Therefore we have maintained that life devolves, on its objective or female side, from the most particles/least wavicles of absolute somatic freedom/psychic determinism to the more (relative to most) particles/less (relative to least) wavicles of relative somatic freedom/psychic determinism, and evolves, on its subjective or male side, from the more (relative to most) wavicles/less (relative to least) particles of relative psychic freedom/somatic determinism to the possibility of most wavicles/least particles of absolute psychic freedom/somatic determinism, though the struggle between devolution and evolution is complicated by class and ethnic factors deriving from different gender standpoints.

3. When we contrast soma with psyche, we are in effect contrasting work with play and, in another context, the State with the Church, however broadly or narrowly we might interpret each. For work is no less an aspect of soma in its overall negativity than play is an aspect of psyche in the overall positivity of what accrues, when genuine, to a wavicle hegemony, be it molecular or elemental, of the ego or the soul, and when we contrast state and church we find a like distinction between that which affirms and supports work and that, by contrast, which - at any rate theoretically - affirms and supports play, meaning the rejection of bodily negativity in favour of some psychic positivity, be it punishing to females or graceful to males.

4. On a similar pattern to the above, it could be said that life devolves from a context of maximum work to one in which there is more work than play, and then evolves from a context in which there is more play than work to one in which play is maximized, as from an age of death to one of life-in-death, and from an age of death-in-life to one of life.

5. Let us put it this way: that life proceeds from an age of death to an age of life via the intermediate relativities of life-in-death and death-in-life, as from an age of effective state absolutism to one of near church absolutism via the intermediate relativities of church-in-state and state-in-church, which is equivalent to saying from an age of work to an age of play via the intermediate relativities of play-in-work and work-in-play, as from devils to gods via women and men.

6. For what began in most soma and least psyche was that in which such religion as existed, or was permitted to exist, was subsumed into a scientifically-based state absolutism, whereas what may end in most psyche and least soma will be that in which such science as continues to exist will be subsumed into a religiously-centred church absolutism, while 'down below' and 'in between' one may distinguish the politically-biased church-in-state relativity in more (relative to most) soma and less (relative to least) psyche from the economically-biased state-in-church relativity in more (relative to most) psyche and less (relative to least) soma, as befitting a descent from netherworldly hell into worldly purgatory, the philistine Cosmos into barbarous Nature, and an ascent, on the opposite side of the gender fence, from worldly earth towards otherworldly heaven, civilized Man towards the cultural Cyborg and the possibility, thereby, of genuine Godliness.

7. In truth, work or, more correctly, objective work, by which is meant working for others, is actually against the grain of men and gods and only really acceptable, as a primary commitment, to devils and women, since those in whom psyche predominates over soma will naturally be more disposed to play, whether egocentrically or soulfully, in civilized or cultural vein, while their work will be correspondingly subjective and thus reflective of some kind of self-employment, be it in business or, higher up, in the arts.

8. Not for nothing was the age of state absolutism, of cosmic death, one of slavery, for not only must males be compelled to work against their psychic and even somatically subjective grains, but work becomes all-important in an overly philistine age and society, with a near-absolutist somatic freedom of death and darkness, ugliness and hatred, which enslaves psyche to its devil-worshipping evil.

9. Obviously one cannot advance a more enlightened society on the basis of selfless work, whether compulsory or otherwise, but only in relation to self-oriented play and, as a subordinate corollary to this, the more subjective kinds of work, and for that to be given maximum encouragement, give and take the allowances that have to be made for females, free work must be curbed as free psyche conditions somatic determinism and keeps work within certain carefully prescribed bounds such that will remain subservient to play and even capable, at the utmost stage of evolutionary development, of being subsumed into and eclipsed by play, as the Church becomes near absolutist in most psyche and least soma, most particles and least wavicles, and society accordingly comes, at its highest level, to reflect not merely a play/work relativity, as with Man, but a well-nigh playful absolutism in which being, for those who are 'up to it', is maximized in truth and, especially, joy, compliments of a religious lead.

10. That which seeks to advance the skilled worker at the expense of the skilled player simply sets the clocks back to a darker and more scientific age, an age characterized not by air, as with ethereal play, but by fire; while, down below space and time in the more mundane realms of mass and volume, that which seeks to advance the manual worker at the expense of the manual player simply sets the clocks back to a darker and more political age, an age characterized not by vegetation, as with corporeal play, but by water, and while the first is avowedly philistine, the second is simply barbarous.

11. Neither Communism nor Socialism can have any part to play in the advancement of humanity beyond Capitalism to a world centred in play, in short a world led by genuine religion and putting the welfare of the soul above every other concern, including that of the ego.

12. I look forward to such an otherworldly prospect, for I believe I can be instrumental, through the ideological philosophy of Social Transcendentalism, in helping to bring it about and thus delivering the greater proportion of humanity from the somatic burden of work, a burden which, in all too many cases, tends to outweigh their capacity for and enjoyment of play.

13. For there is nothing higher, in truth, than play, and the sooner we advance towards the maximizing of play in terms of a sort of church absolutism, as previously defined by me in relation to 'the Centre' of 'Kingdom Come', the sooner will we abandon evil and folly for goodness and wisdom, and thus come to live in or under, directly or indirectly, the light of God, according to one's class and gender status.

AS IN THE BEGINNING, SO NOT QUITE IN THE END

1. Christianity has erred, all along, in placing undue emphasis on the Son at the expense of the Father, on soma at the expense of psyche, the not-self at the expense of the self, ignorance and/or falsity at the expense of knowledge and/or truth. Would one normally place ignorance above knowledge, or falsity above truth? - Few sane people would, and the fact that the Church has condoned, wittingly or unwittingly, such a procedure, in its adherence to and emphasis upon a Son who knew not what truth was and probably had little idea about knowledge either, is regrettably not the least of reasons for its moral failure and lack of credibility in an age which puts knowledge above all else and may soon, in moving beyond the information technology (IT) boom, come to a greater understanding of truth and the true nature and status of God.

2. Unfortunately the Christian emphasis upon the Son at the expense of the Father, soma at the expense of psyche, led to a situation in which ignorance and falsity, and ignorance more than falsity, could be paradoxically regarded as being in some sense preferable, if not superior, to knowledge and truth, the former in relation to sensibility, the latter, it has to be said, in relation to sensuality, since the Church, and the Catholic Church most especially, tended to encourage a situation in which sensible physics was anchored diagonally back and up to sensual metaphysics, the brain to the ears, so to speak, with the Word tending to be eclipsed or coloured, more often than not, by music, with a consequence that such wisdom and holiness as existed in the sensible context of physics was merely relative, of man and the earth, whereas what existed more absolutely in the sensual context of metaphysics was not wisdom and holiness but folly and unholiness, as germane to God and Heaven in their 'once born' as opposed to 'reborn', outer as opposed to inner, manifestations.

3. For the metaphysical manifestations of wisdom and holiness in relation to sensible modes of God and Heaven, one requires the coming to pass of a new messiah, a new religious leader, call him Second Coming if you like, who can offer salvation from metaphysical sensuality to sensibility, sequential time to spaced space, ears to lungs, on a parallel if higher basis, for those who are entitled to it (see previous texts), to the Christian salvation from massive mass to voluminous volume, phallus to brain, physical sensuality to sensibility.

4. Therefore when the Church speaks of God the Son in connection with the Holy Spirit it is speaking falsely, since God the Son can only exist in relation to holy Spirit in the inner or sensible metaphysical context of lungs and breath, where His falsity is the means for the truth of God-the-Wise-Father to achieve redemption in Heaven-the-Holy-Soul via the out-breath woe of Heaven-the-Holy-Spirit in what amounts to a process of transcendental meditation, in which one is solely conscious, as a saved god, of the breath and the breathing process in the interests of the enhancement of psychic grace from ego to soul, truth to joy, and thereby acquiesces in a metaphysical order of somatic sin for purposes of self-transcendence, of the transmutation of self from ego into soul, God-the-Wise-Father into Heaven-the-Holy-Soul, something that doesn't obtain at all in the Christian context where, as we all know, prayer, and thus the utilization of the brain and its capacity for thought, is the focus and principal manifestation of religious devotion, a kind of vegetative, or cerebral, sensibility which owes more to the knowledge of Man-the-Wise-Father and the ignorance of Man-the-Wise-Son, viz. Christ, coupled to holy manifestations of spiritual and soulful Earth, than ever it does to the inner truth of God-the-Wise-Father and the inner falsity of God-the-Wise-Son coupled to their spiritual and soulful manifestations of Heaven.

5. And if, fleeing Christian physics, you go back up diagonally to what could be called, somewhat paradoxically, Christian metaphysics, you find yourself in an ear/airwaves context where God and Heaven do actually obtain, but in relation to the folly and unholiness of sensuality, as in the outer truth of God-the-Unwise-Father and the outer falsity of God-the-Unwise-Son, in connection with the latter of which there emerges the outer woe of Heaven-the-Unholy-Spirit from which the former (the Father) may recoil to the outer joy of Heaven-the-Unholy-Soul, the redemption of egocentric self in that soulful self-transcendence which, in contrast to the conceptual redemption which follows from a sensible metaphysical disposition in transcendental meditation, can only be of a perceptual order, and thus comparatively shallow or superficial.

6. No, quite apart from the fact that there is no God the Holy Spirit, there is no God-the-Wise-Son in relation to Heaven-the-Holy-Spirit in Christianity, but only either Man-the-Wise-Son in relation to Earth-the-Holy-Spirit in physical sensibility or, diagonally back upwards to sensual metaphysics, God-the-Unwise-Son in relation to Heaven-the-Unholy-Spirit, and then, on both counts, one is alluding to somatic factors which have no bearing on sensible knowledge/pleasure or sensual truth/joy but are their negative counterparts, as in sensible ignorance/pain and sensual falsity/woe.

7. What a lie the Church was and, in some sense, still continues to be! The Church fights shy of God-the-Wise-Father and Heaven-the-Holy-Soul even as it effectively proclaims its allegiance, falsely, to God-the-Wise-Son and Heaven-the-Holy-Spirit through its equation of God the Son with holy Spirit. But, in truth, the only holy Spirit it relates to is premised upon Man, upon Man-the-Wise-Son, and is accordingly of the Earth rather than Heaven, a giver of pain.

8. The Church hypes itself even as it denies, in practice, the terms and procedures by means of which God-the-Wise-Son and Heaven-the-Holy-Spirit come into play, namely as secondary factors, in somatic falsity and woe, to the psychic grace of God-the-Wise-Father and Heaven-the-Holy-Soul, the latter of which is only possible in relation to the utilization by the former, by God-the-Wise-Father, of both the lungs and the breath, the inner metaphysical will and spirit, to a transcendent end, and precisely through the practice of transcendental meditation.

9. Therefore it behoves us to move beyond the lie and the hype and all the other shortcomings of the Christian Church, as outlined by me in previous texts, and opt for the inner truth of God-the-Wise-Father as the salvation of the self from the outer truth, necessarily constrained to psychic determinism by a female hegemony in eye-based metachemistry, of God-the-Unwise-Father, though when I say 'us' I don't of course mean everyone, irrespective of gender or class or ethnicity, but only those who, whatever the fate of others, would be capable of such a salvation in the first place, and largely because they had been more metaphysical than physical, more ears than brain, and thus, in Christian terms, significant of a triangular decadence such that resulted in the ears being upstaged by the eyes as the Father was eclipsed, in effect, by the Risen Virgin coupled, in metachemical sensibility, to the Sacred Heart of the so-called Risen Christ, the guarantor, in that context, of perpendicular triangularity.

10. However that may be, salvation and/or damnation, according to gender, from triangles, whether perpendicular in space and time (Catholic) or inverted in volume and mass (Protestant) is what will return humanity to sensibility, as to their rightful senses, and the possibility of wisdom and goodness to a greater extent, in direct relation to what I have customarily termed (see previous texts) the triadic Beyond of 'Kingdom Come', than was ever possible in the Christian past, given the paradoxes and delusions of the Church, not the least of which was to adhere to the Old Testament concept of some cosmic 'First Mover' as God!

11. We cannot accept or continue to condone such a gross delusion! For we know that cosmic 'First Movers', being metachemical, tend to be characterized by a near somatic absolutism, and thus by what I have called Devil-the-Evil-Mother, which of course exists in relation to Hell-the-Clear-Spirit (Light), and out of which there eventually emerges, in secondary vein, the psychic realities of Devil-the-Evil-Daughter and Hell-the-Clear-Soul, neither of which commend themselves to truth or joy, but rather to beauty and love, and then in effectively subordinate standing to ugliness and hatred, the more characteristic attributes of the particle hegemony which, in metachemistry, typifies a near somatic absolutism, i.e. most particles/least wavicles, as germane to the stellar aspect, in particular, of the Cosmos.

12. People need to move, via a democratically mandated assumption of religious sovereignty, beyond the restrictions and delusions of religious tradition, and for that they will require the assistance of one who does speak for truth and joy, albeit in the wise and holy terms of metaphysical sensibility, and who would save and/or damn them, in consequence, from all unwise/unholy and, in the female case, evil/clear obstacles to religious and moral progress.

13. Is this man truly a Second Coming, a second Son, or is he not rather one who, centred in the inner truth of God-the-Wise-Father, is effectively antithetical, in his metaphysically-biased psyche, to the Son, albeit to a Son who, unlike Christ, appertains, in the lungs, to metaphysical wisdom, and thereby equates with sensible falsity as opposed to either sensual falsity in the ears or sensible ignorance in the brain, the latter of which is not even godly in unwise terms but manly wise, and therefore merely physical.

14. I identify, in short, with sensible truth, not sensible falsity, and therefore I am antithetical to what appertains, as God-the-Wise-Son, to the latter, a sort of sensible antison or, as some would have it, sensible antichrist who, correctly in male terms, upholds the primacy, in metaphysics, of psyche over soma, of self over not-self, of grace over sin, of play over work, of 'church' over 'state', of truth/joy over falsity/woe, of noumenal over phenomenal, of transcendentalism over idealism, of positivity over negativity, of nurture over nature, of ego/soul over will/spirit, of brain stem/spinal cord over lungs/breath, and therefore I uphold the inorganic or incorporeal or infinite sanctity of God-the-Wise-Father, with Whom I now identify, over the organic or corporeal or finite profanity of God-the-Wise-Son, Who is for me but an untruthful means to a joyful end in self-respecting recoil from the out-breath of His woeful spirit.

15. Let this end be the end of my teachings, and may my teachings be instrumental in bringing to pass, for those who are especially entitled to it, that bliss which is commensurate with the return of metaphysical psyche to psyche, of God-the-Wise-Father to Heaven-the-Holy-Soul via the metaphysical soma of God-the-Wise-Son and Heaven-the-Holy-Spirit, the lungs and the breath, so that the return in the end is not quite to what was in the beginning, but is as to a higher manifestation of metaphysical self, a deeper omega point, as it were, of the psyche such that, in the joyful purity of its turned-on spinal cord, redeems the brain-stem truth of God-the-Wise-Father for all eternity. So may it be!

PART TWO

DEVOLUTION AND EVOLUTION IN PERSPECTIVE

1. I outlined in PART ONE a theory of stages of life on both devolutionary and evolutionary terms which reflects the fourfold natures/nurtures of the Elements and can be said to proceed from the fieriness of the Cosmos to the airiness of the (hypothetically future) Cyborg via the wateriness of Nature and the vegetativeness of Man, as from the Cosmos to the Cyborg via Nature and Man, or, alternatively, from the Devil to God via Woman and Man, or even from the unnaturalness/unconsciousness of metachemistry to the subconsciousness/subnaturalness of metaphysics via the supernaturalness/superconsciousness of chemistry and the consciousness/naturalness of physics.

2. However that may be, we can distinguish, as before, the most particles/least wavicles of the metachemical context par excellence, as between photons in sensuality and photinos in sensibility, from the more (relative to most) particles/less (relative to least) wavicles of the chemical context par excellence, as between electrons in sensuality and electrinos in sensibility, and both of these objective, or female, contexts from the more (relative to most) wavicles/less (relative to least) particles of the physical context par excellence, as between neutrons in sensuality and neutrinos in sensibility, and the most wavicles/least particles of the metaphysical context par excellence, as between protons in sensuality and protinos in sensibility, both of which latter contexts, being male, are rather more subjective and, hence, conditioned by plenums rather than vacuums, thereby proceeding in curved rather than straight lines.

3. The contexts of the Cosmos and Nature, to return to our original categorization, are therefore ones in which soma predominates over psyche, as in relation to particle hegemonies, and to which, in general terms, one can ascribe a basis in soma, as in the not-self or nature (with specific reference to its unnatural and supernatural manifestations). On the other hand, the contexts of Man and the Cyborg are ones in which psyche predominates over soma, as in relation to wavicle hegemonies, and to which, again in general terms, one can ascribe a basis in psyche, as in the self or nurture (with specific reference to its conscious and subconscious manifestations), so that, in contrast to the objective, or female, contexts, psyche precedes soma and things revert to psyche in the end, as, in biblical parlance, from ashes to ashes rather than from dust to dust, presuming upon a psychic - and therefore male - correlation for the former and a somatic correlation, avowedly female, for the latter.

4. However that may be, one can distinguish, on a broad gender-conditioned basis, between the most devolution/least evolution of the Cosmos and the more (relative to most) devolution/less (relative to least) evolution of Nature on the objective side of things, and between the more (relative to most) evolution/less (relative to least) devolution of Man and the most evolution/least devolution of the Cyborg on the subjective side of things, the side not of the Devil and Woman but, beyond philistinism and barbarism, of Man and God, civilization and culture.

5. For the cosmic reality of most particles and least wavicles is indeed commensurate with most devolution and least evolution, most somatic negativity and least psychic positivity, while the coming cyborg reality, as it were, of most wavicles and least particles will correlate, no less absolutely, with most evolution and least devolution, most psychic positivity and least somatic negativity, while 'down below' and 'in between', the natural reality of more (relative to most) particles and less (relative to least) wavicles correlates with more (relative to most) devolution and less (relative to least) evolution, more (relative to most) somatic negativity and less (relative to least) psychic positivity, to be contrasted, in no-less relative vein, with the more (relative to most) wavicles and less (relative to least) particles, more (relative to most) evolution and less (relative to least) devolution, of that phase of things proceeding, in more (relative to most) psychic positivity and less (relative to least) somatic negativity, from the triumph of Man as a creature for whom knowledge, and self-knowledge above all, is the key to his existence and opposition, through civilization, to Nature, meaning that which 'fell', in watery fashion, out of the fiery inception of life in the Cosmos.

6. Most of what was said in PART ONE still stands here, since the categorizations outlined above had their reasons and boundaries which it would be difficult if not impossible to refute or deny, neither refutation nor denial being on my current agenda! Life is a struggle, to repeat, between objective and subjective, female and male forces, and whether the particle predominates over the wavicle or the wavicle over the particle, soma and psyche are the twin alternatives, with soma preceding psyche in the female cases of the Cosmos and Nature, but psyche preceding soma in the male cases of Man and the Cyborg, the latter of whom will be the means by which, in Nietzschean parlance, man should be 'overcome' and superseded by that which is no mere precondition of a rise to God and antithesis to the diabolic Cosmos, like Man, but the fulfilment of that precondition in the utmost psychic absolutism of most wavicles and least particles, most evolution and least devolution - in sum, most psychic positivity and least somatic negativity.

7. Soma and psyche are no more equivalent than not-self and self, nature and nurture, sanctity and profanity, play and work, noumenal and phenomenal, 'matter' and 'mind', body or, more correctly, will and/or spirit and soul or, more correctly, ego and/or soul; for the one is only possible on the basis of a particle hegemony, whereas the other presupposes a wavicle hegemony in which either ego or soul is the principal protagonist of psychic grace, and such grace differs not merely from somatic sin, duly constrained by free psyche to the determinism of mind (conscious will) and/or subspirit (subconscious spirit), but also from the punishment, or punishing nurture, of the female forms of psyche whereby free soma conditions psychic determinism in terms of the id (unconscious soul) and the superego (superconscious ego), and the instinctualized soul of the one and the spiritualized ego of the other are as subordinate to the will and spirit of free soma ... as the intellectualized will and emotionalized spirit of bound soma are subordinate, on the male side of the gender fence, to the ego and soul of free psyche.

8. Therefore the real antithesis between soma and psyche is less within the context of either gender, where one or the other is modified by the predominating factor, than across the gender division between free soma on the one hand and free psyche on the other, the former issuing in objective vein from a vacuous precondition in either fire or water, metachemistry or chemistry, and the other issuing in subjective vein from a plenumous precondition in either vegetation or air, physics or metaphysics.

9. I have said it before and I shall say it again: sexism, or the ability to think on a basis allowing for opposite gender standpoints, is the beginning of all wisdom. For that man who is insufficiently aware of the extent to which gender factors-in to the way in which we think or, worse, who believes that there is no distinction between how the genders think or what they think, will be a self-deceiving fool and hypocrite, from whom nothing demonstrably true or knowledgeably credible can be expected.

10. Before females entered into letters in a major way, statements made by males could often be taken as implicitly expressing, when genuine, a male standpoint. Nowadays, nothing of the sort can be taken for granted! The plethora of objectively-oriented ideas flowing from female authors makes it imperative that male writers explicitly state their positions in relation to gender, and that, assuming a degree of knowledge as to what constitutes their rightful gender position, they refrain from allowing female minds to deceive them into taking for authentic truth or knowledge that which, in reality, owes its origins not to free psyche, in properly male vein, but to free soma, and which will not, in the nature of things, even approximate to the innate rationality of genuine knowledge or truth but be reflective of the intrusion, to varying extents, of either beauty and strength or, more probably, ugliness and weakness, their negative - and somatic - counterparts.

THE SUBVERSION OF KNOWLEDGE

1. In fact, genuine knowledge about sensible truth is not, and has rarely if ever been, characteristic of the West, or of Western civilization in general, since such truth as has existed or been permitted to exist has been of the sensual, and therefore, foolish variety of metaphysics, while, more prevalently in relation to Christian criteria-proper, knowledge has claimed truth to itself and been hyped out of all proportion to its real worth which, though considerable, is nowhere near as ne plus ultra as intellectuals and churchmen of a certain stamp might lead one to believe.

2. In fact, ever since the victory of Christianity over the West, Man has usurped the domain of Truth to himself and effectively subsumed it, or something approximating to it, into knowledge, so that Man has become the necessarily restricted measure of all things, and all things have had to bow to his limitations and pretensions, meaning to that category of humanity, in particular, which has a self-assured image of itself in relation to knowledge as the product of egotistical or egocentric form, whether sensually or, more prevalently in the Christian past, sensibly.

3. Therefore, excepting the sensual metaphysics of 'the Father', with the Christian concept of 'Creator', God has had to bow to Man, and Man has assumed the mantle of God in the 'Person' of the Son, Who has tended to act for Christians as the principal focus and manifestation of Godhead. But this has meant that knowledge has eclipsed truth, that religion has come to be primarily identified with knowledge, of which prayer is a form, at the expense of any possibility, barring aural sensuality, of Truth, conceiving the latter in relation to transcendental meditation and thus consciousness of the breath or breathing process as the methodology of psychic redemption in the soul. Manliness, not Godliness, has remained the measure of all things sensibly religious, and therefore the masculine 'meek' could indeed be said to have inherited the earth and to have squeezed out of it all that nobly threatened or exposed the limitations of their egocentric perspectives.

4. At least this was the case until, following the Reformation, Protestantism burst on to the European scene and, before long, knowledge itself came under threat and was duly eclipsed by, first, strength and then beauty, as the masculine sensibility of Catholicism found itself eclipsed, in various countries, by the feminine - and chemical - sensuality of Protestantism, particularly in its Nonconformist guise, and this in turn underwent further female modification towards the diabolic, or metachemical, sensuality of those more extreme Protestant sects largely associated, like Jehovah Witnesses, with the New World, and thus the American offshoot of European civilization. Knowledge might still be there, but it is less the truth-subsuming and corrupting knowledge of the Catholic tradition with these radical, and even moderate, Protestant denominations than strength and/or beauty, if not in the ongoing secularization of Western decadence, weakness and/or ugliness posing as knowledge and claiming to itself, in typically female vein, virtues more becoming genuine knowledge and/or truth, which of course owe more to the innate archetypes of psychic precedence.

5. In short, even knowledge has fallen on bad times, and such knowledge as survives in the Western world is increasingly informed by factors owing more, in female vein, to strength and/or beauty, and thus to an outright denial of Truth, than to self-respecting egocentric assertions of knowledge such that derive from a more masculine, and even Catholic, tradition, in typically Old-World vein. Man has himself fallen on hard times, and the only winners in this ongoing decadence or degeneration or refutation of sensible values are females of one persuasion or another, be it feminine or diabolic, strong and/or weak or beautiful and/or ugly, with all due Feminist consequences and implications which, equivocally if not unequivocally, add-up to the worst of all possible worlds - a world dominated by all that is somatically free and therefore evil or foolish, with nonconformism subordinate, in bound psyche, to realism, like strength to weakness, and fundamentalism no less subordinate to materialism, like beauty to ugliness. And all because of that fateful split in Western civilization that led to Protestantism and worse.

6. Clearly, I believe in a different, indeed vastly different type of civilization from that which still casts its somatic shadow over the greater part of the West at the present time, a civilization led by Truth, genuinely sensible truth, and subordinating both knowledge and strength, man and woman, to its godly resolve, as it leads the way towards a brighter future in which, in complete contrast to the Christian tradition, Man or, at any rate, mankind are taken up to God rather than God being brought down to, if not low by, mankind or, rather, Man, as that manifestation of humanity for whom egocentric form, and hence knowledge, is the cornerstone of authenticity and self-justification - call it bourgeois or suburban, if you will.

7. But such a civilization has little in common with that in which the masses, mankind dominated by Man, the bourgeois, the middle-class businessman or politician or professional, is sovereign and effectively the ne plus ultra of things. For when 'the meek' inherit the earth, be it in relation to masculine or to feminine criteria, the earth becomes an end-in-itself and all higher values, the values that alone have the power to elevate the common man or woman beyond their humble station to one in which they are capable of participating in Truth, to the extent that a knowledgeable or strong disposition permits, are necessarily denied or subverted and corrupted, so that either the wrong sort of truth, effectively sensual and foolish, or, worse again, beauty posing as truth and often showing her real, and therefore ugly, face tends to take its place, and consequences not unlike those outlined above inevitably come to pass, to the detriment of even 'the meek' and the earth of which they are indubitably a mundane part.

8. For in the end, as in the beginning, it is not God but the Devil posing as God, the Devil upheld by the powers-that-be, as God ... that becomes the representative of 'higher values', and from being sovereign in itself the earth becomes but the idolatrous worshipper and slave, whether on civilized or natural, masculine or feminine, vegetative or watery terms, of the Cosmos.

9. No people who are enslaved to the somatic freedoms and psychic determinisms of the Cosmos can possibly advance towards the Cyborg and the 'overcoming' of Man in terms of what is truly and more authentically godly. Even Man is not quite as in control of the situation as he might like to think but is subsumed into the glorification of both Woman and, worse, the Devil, whose dances he must pander to with all the entrepreneurial flair at his morally bankrupt disposal. No wonder that the People, that great majority of urban-dwelling humanity who yearn for a better future, grow restive and disillusioned with their predicament as every promise of salvation or deliverance from the World is hijacked by their opportunistic adversaries and used to baser ends, ends which only enslave them the more to ungodly powers and render them all the more cynical towards and despairing of the future.

10. But things can be different! For, ultimately, the People, the great masses of masculine and feminine males and females, have more to gain from what trickles down from the heights of a godly dispensation in the way of authentic truth than from either undue freedom for themselves in knowledge and strength or the gradual subversion and erosion of that knowledge and strength from a standpoint that is effectively closer to the Devil and to Her cosmic fundamentalism and materialism, the latter of which, in ugliness and hatred, is always likely to be more prevalent than the former, and to an extent somewhat in the ratio of 3:1, given the subatomic facticity, for metachemical reality, of most particles/least wavicles, most devolution/least evolution, most negativity/least positivity, most soma/least psyche.

11. The World is bad, but what reigns over it, in the absence of authentic Godhead premised upon a cyborgian resolve, is far worse, and emblematic of the worst of all possible elemental worlds or categories or situations. Such is the situation in which the West, whether on ecclesiastic or secular grounds, still finds itself in the first decade of the twenty-first century.

ALTERNATIVE AFTERDEATH AND AFTERLIFE EXPERIENCES

1. I wrote in PART ONE about the distinction between a female afterdeath characterized by the return of soma to soma, or 'dust to dust', and a male afterlife characterized by the return of psyche to psyche, or 'ashes to ashes', since the precedence of psyche by soma in the one case, that of females, and the precedence of soma by psyche in the other case, that of males, inevitably led to the conclusion that 'as in the beginning, so in the end', that which was particle-hegemonic would duly return to soma and that, by contrast, which was wavicle-hegemonic duly return to psyche.

2. It is interesting that in Heaven and Hell, Aldous Huxley distinguishes between what he calls visionary and mystical afterlife experiences, the former being more earthly and the latter more heavenly, since in the one case one is dealing with the fruits of human knowledge and in the other case with pure truth, which is to say, unitive knowledge, as he puts it, of the Godhead rather than with visionary experience at one or other of the mind's antipodes.

3. Such visionary experience is, in a sense, less elevated or profound or pure than the mystical experience of unitive knowledge, and Huxley's contention here is certainly commensurate with my distinction between self-absorption in the brain stem at a sort of egocentric level of afterlife experience and self-absorption in the spinal cord at the deeper level of the soul, wherein one has passed beyond visionary symbolism into the pure light of inner truth or, rather, joy, as commensurate with Heaven, and thus the redemption of godly selfhood in the peace that surpasses all conscious understanding, the subconscious justification of God in heavenly bliss.

4. Huxley was, in a sense, crudely foreshadowing my own contentions and beliefs in relation to afterlife experience, with a distinction, rather more implicit in his case, between a masculine afterlife in visionary experience (wherein the brain stem, avowedly more physical than metaphysical, is virtually an end-in-itself) and a divine afterlife in mystical union with the Godhead; though, in fact, I tend to believe that, at the metaphysical level, the brain-stem self is the Godhead, is commensurate with God, and that such union with the deeper self, or spinal cord, as may occur is more to be conceived of in terms of heavenly redemption and fulfilment of the Godhead, viz. the metaphysical brain stem, than of unitive knowledge of God as such, so that truth leads to joy and is not an end-in-itself but, rather, the means whereby, through metaphysical self-knowledge, full soulfulness may be achieved.

5. Granted, then, a class distinction between physical and metaphysical males, the latter of whom have a capacity to pass joyfully beyond the brain stem into the spinal cord, Huxley further distinguishes positive afterlife experience from its negative counterpart, citing the possibility of a visionary hell for those who fall short, as it were, of positive visionary experience or who are unable to abide the purity of mystical union with the Godhead, meaning soul. That got me thinking again. For I had simply distinguished, in PART ONE, between the afterdeath experience of females in a return to soma, and the afterlife experience of males in a return to psyche, the former commensurate with either hell or purgatory, depending on the class of female, i.e. whether diabolic or feminine, devilish or womanly, metachemical or chemical, and the latter commensurate with either the earth or heaven, again depending on the class of male, i.e. whether masculine or divine, manly or godly, physical or metaphysical.

6. Huxley, of course, makes no such gender distinctions, but that is only to be expected from a major British author, since the British are among the most androgynous, if not gender-neutral, people on earth and rarely bother to consider things from a specific gender standpoint, least of all male. Also he is less than logically consistent in his equation of negative visionary experience with hell, since the visionary in general is less than that which transcends visions in unitive knowledge of the divine Ground and therefore cannot be other than purgatorial if negative or earthly if positive, which is to say, beneath either Hell or Heaven in the more mundane realms habitually frequented by masculine males and feminine females, viz. men and women.

7. However that may be, I was obliged to rethink my own position in relation to such afterlife contentions, and to see whether it wasn't possible to come to some kind of accommodation with the plurality of afterlife experiences outlined by Huxley in Heaven and Hell, barring those which suggested the continuation of normal consciousness in the Other World and the possibility of some ghost-like haunting of the world or susceptibility to being discovered or uncovered by mediums and the like. Frankly I have no desire to go down that road, unlike the poet W.B. Yeats, but I do think that the afterdeath/afterlife dichotomy between somatic nothingness for females on the one hand, and psychic somethingness for males on the other hand, affords a wider solution, as John Cowper Powys would say, than what I had offered myself to the vexing question of posthumous fate.

8. Now, in general, I stick by what I said in PART ONE, i.e. that hell and purgatory are to be conceived of in terms of different class approaches by females to somatic perdition, whereas their male counterparts would seem destined for either earthly or heavenly afterlife experiences on the basis of psychic redemption, and a return, in consequence, to either egocentric or soulful, visionary or unitive, manifestations of the self - a thing, incidentally, which Huxley failed, in his paradoxical obsession with the not-self, to grasp as that which is of the very essence of male psyche in relation to either the brain stem or the spinal cord.

9. But if there is also the possibility of negative afterlife experience, it must mean that males are the people who would suffer it, not, however, in terms of purgatory or hell, outright somatic perdition, but in terms of quasi-purgatorial or quasi-hellish experiences attendant upon the subversion of psyche, whether physical or metaphysical, egocentric or soulful, by soma, and not just by vegetative or airy, physical or metaphysical soma, which are germane to the male side of things anyway and would quickly be subordinated by psyche in the course of its return to source, but, rather, in gender-bender fashion, by either watery or fiery orders of somatic influence carried over, into posthumous experience, by dint of the extents to which, contrary to one's gender interests or norms as a male, they had obtained in life, and which now undermined such psychic positivity as should, by rights, accrue to what is properly male, whether from the standpoint of physical ego or, deeper and higher, the standpoint of metaphysical soul.

10. Thus the intrusion, if you will, of chemical soma into physical psyche on the one hand, that of a quasi-purgatorial negative afterlife experience, and of metachemical soma into metaphysical psyche on the other hand, that of a quasi-hellish negative afterlife experience, in both instances of which the light of male psyche, whether visionary or pure, egocentric or soulful, is eclipsed or, at the very least, undermined by the darkness of female soma, whether spiritual or wilful, chemical or metachemical, to extents which result in what I have described as either quasi-purgatorial or quasi-hellish subversions of afterlife experience.

11. Therefore if, as a male, whether manly or godly, lower class or upper class, one had been insufficiently true to one's self, or loyal to one's gender in life, one can expect to suffer consequences in an afterlife which will be less than either earthly or heavenly but quasi-purgatorial or quasi-hellish, as the elemental case may be! Consequently the sensual male, who is much the more likely than his sensible counterpart to be 'bent' from his gender position by dint, in sensuality, of the female hegemonies in chemistry and metachemistry over physics and metaphysics, can expect nothing less than the subversion of psychic predominance in the afterlife, as posthumous judgement goes against him in consequence of the extents to which he had lived life on the wrong side of the gender fence from that to which he was psychologically and physiologically entitled, as a male. For him, the crematorium may well be the solution, if rather paradoxically, to the likelihood of negative judgement in consequence of a consistently foolish life.

12. But if males can, contrary to their gender entitlements, experience negative afterlife experience, is it not likely that females can experience positive experiences if not in an afterlife then certainly, according to their gender predestination, in an afterdeath, so that we would have the logical right to speak of a positive afterdeath experience for those categories of female who, contrary to their somatic grain, had lived to a greater extent than the generality of females on the male side of the gender fence, as it were, and were accordingly more given to psyche of either a vegetative or an airy type than simply to the more prevalent somatic freedoms conditioning psychic determinism in relation to chemistry and metachemistry, water and fire, women and devils.

13. Therefore the heathenistic 'bent' male has to be contrasted, presumably as the exception to a general rule, with the christianly 'bent' female, whose sensible orientation, in living under the sway of a male hegemony in either physics or metaphysics, marks her out as a female exception with an entitlement to or, at the very least, likelihood of some kind of quasi-earthly or even quasi-heavenly afterdeath experience such that would logically follow from the informing of soma, whether chemical or metachemical, by the relevant kind of male psyche, be it physical and egocentric or metaphysical and soulful, in consequence of which the inevitable return by females to soma was, as it were, coloured by and infused with a lingering of male psyche to an extent whereby somatic perdition was nowhere near as categorical or swift as with un-Christian females, so to speak, but became subject to psychic intrusion to a degree which would permit us to speak, as above, of either quasi-earthly or quasi-heavenly afterdeath experience, thereby justifying the burial of such females in traditionally Christian fashion.

14. Yet both positive afterdeath experience for females and negative afterlife experience for males would, I maintain, be - and always have been to greater or lesser extents, depending on the age or society - more the exception than the rule, since females are by nature soma over psyche, 'matter over mind' in Oscar Wilde's proverbial phrase, and males, by contrast, mind over matter or, in more philosophical language, psyche over soma, given the physiological and psychological differences which indubitably characterize each gender, making for what I believe the Bible calls the 'friction of the seeds', or the virtual immutability of gender, and its principal role in historical change.

STATE SOMA AND CHURCH PSYCHE

1. Certainly nurture can be brought to bear on nature, and more in the male cases of men and gods than in those of their female counterparts where, no matter how determined or earnest the civilizing or cultural endeavour, nature, in the sense of soma, still tends to get the better of psyche and to condition psyche from a free somatic basis towards a 'bovaryized' and subordinate image of itself in terms of the id and the superego, instinctive emotion and spiritualized intellect, with a foaming up, in porter-like vein, of psychic determinism from the dark depths of somatic freedom below, a freedom that will continue to wreak havoc with the male psyche so long as it is insufficiently free in either physical or metaphysical sensibility to resist succumbing to female dominion in hegemonic sensuality and suffer the outflanking consequences of being undermined by either the id or the superego, if not, in paradoxical instances, by both at once, in craic-like vein.

2. For what is the much-vaunted Irish craic, after all, but a porter-inspired license for dance and speech, jig and yap, to do their blessed most, and enslave the male to female dominion through metachemistry and chemistry, fire and water, and this contrary to the teachings of the Church, with its emphasis upon salvation from the World and hope and promise of otherworldly redemption.

3. Clearly the Church is one thing - imperfectly at that - and the State quite another, and rarely if ever do they pull in the same direction, except, of course, when the Church is so weak as to be little more than an adjunct to the State and the concept of state religion takes on a whole new meaning, or, alternatively, when the State is so weak as to be little more than an adjunct to the Church and the concept of church politics likewise takes on a completely new dimension.

4. But state and church are pretty much gender opposites when, like work and play, genuinely themselves, and can hardly exist in a balanced relationship when a people are either predominantly female and, hence, objective, or predominantly male and, hence, subjective, with the inevitability of modifications to the subordinate factor, be it state or church.

5. I do not, myself, believe in the desirability of a people being predominantly female and thus characterized by a somatic hegemony; for that leads to a genuine state and a 'bovaryized', or corrupted church. Neither am I much given to the idea of a balance between female and male alternatives in worldly amoral fashion, since both state and church will be androgynously other than what each of them should be if genuine. I believe, quite categorically, in the moral desirability of a people being predominantly male and thus characterized by a psychic hegemony; for that entails a genuine church and a 'bovaryized', or emasculated, state, the sort of state that will not go against the interests of the Church, be it Christian or more than Christian, but serve it and thus serve the People's moral interests in relation to the protection and advancement, through environmental and cultural conditioning, of sensibility, with the inevitability of male hegemonies in both physical and metaphysical contexts over the chemical and metachemical dispositions of females.

6. Such is my blueprint for 'Kingdom Come', and it takes religion, and thus morality, to the absolutist heights of sensible metaphysics, wherein Truth is enthroned and Godliness is elevated over both men and women to their mutual advantage, since both knowledge and strength can only profit from the infusion of Truth, and when all alike are served from the profoundest beauty of the most good devil, so to speak, in an administrative aside, the aside of a transmuted state such that takes statecraft to a new and unprecedented level of devolved existence, then religion will be enabled to expand as never before, and thus to evolve beyond the parameters of the Christian Church towards the Centrist freedom, the freedom of the Social Transcendentalist Centre, of a transcendent eternity, wherein the 'Kingdom of God' becomes manifest.

7. Truly, 'Kingdom Come' would be beyond both state and church as we have known them in the World; for that which emerges out of them is akin to the synthetic transmutation of a dialectic between female and male, somatic and psychic elements, and in that transmutation something more and better than each will come to light - namely, the Cyborg, who will be the offspring of the Centre, and thus of that which, through Social Transcendentalism, transcends the World and its paradoxical dialectics, consigning not only Man, as we have knowledgeably known him, but Woman and the Devil, Nature and the Cosmos, to the rubbish heap of both human and pre-human history, insofar as their masculine, feminine, and diabolic successors would be subordinate to the divine lead and in no position to represent, govern, or rule independently of the prevailing ethic.

CONTRASTING FREEDOMS OF BARBARISM AND CULTURE

1. I have stated that there is a sense in which the devolutionary regression from the Cosmos to Nature is equivalent to philistinism devolving to barbarism, the Devil to Woman, and that the evolutionary progression which emerges in opposition to this, as from Man to the Cyborg, is equivalent to civilization evolving to culture, and thus to that which, in genuine Godliness, would be antithetical to the Cosmos. Therefore I have identified, in general terms, the Cosmos with philistinism, Nature with barbarism, Man with civilization, and the Cyborg with culture.

2. There is nothing, so far as I am aware, wrong with this theory. But it is only one, and not necessarily the best or most credible in all instances! For it occurs to me that it would also be possible to distinguish culture from philistinism on the basis of grace and sin, psyche and soma, self and not-self, the Father and the Son, and this whether in relation to physics or metaphysics, Man or God, and no less possible, on the other side of the gender fence, to distinguish barbarism from civilization, or barbarity from civility, on the basis of crime and punishment, soma and psyche, not-self and self, the Mother and the Daughter, equally whether in relation to chemistry or metachemistry, Woman or the Devil.

3. If so, then we have a gender-based distinction between the crime and punishment, barbarity and civility, of a female disposition or reality on the one hand, and the grace and sin, culture and philistinism, of a male disposition or reality on the other hand, with the former vacuously characterized by free soma and bound psyche, but the latter, issuing from a plenum, characterized by free psyche and bound soma, so that while civility, or civilization, and culture are both psychic, or of the psyche, they are unequally so, the one being secondary to the prevailing barbarity, or barbarism, of free soma, and the other being primary in relation to the philistinism, or undue naturalism, of bound soma, its secondary complement.

4. Therefore, regarded in this light, civilization and culture would be the female and male approaches, respectively, to psyche, the one bound, or determined by somatic freedom, and the other free, while barbarism and philistinism would be their somatic counterparts, the one free and the other bound, or determined by psychic freedom.

5. Hence whereas civilization, or civility or civic duty, would be secondary to barbarism or barbarity or barbarous freedom, like bound psyche to free soma, philistinism, by contrast, would be secondary to culture, like bound soma to free psyche, and we would have a right to distinguish that society which was somatically free, and therefore barbarous, from any society that was psychically free, and therefore cultural, with an emphasis on grace and sin rather than, in female vein, on crime and punishment.

6. No society would, of course, be entirely the one thing or the other, but there is still a sense in which a bias towards one or the other options, according with the prevailing gender of a given people, can be discerned, and we can note a distinction, once again, between free state and bound church on the one hand, that of a female-oriented society, or matriarchy, and free church and bound state on the other hand, that of a male-oriented society, or patriarchy.

7. Short of an androgynous, or very neutral, compromise between female and male alternatives, it is difficult to imagine a society in which the State was free one moment and bound the next, or, conversely, that the Church was bound one moment and free the next, since one would not be referring to one type of state or church but either to a state and a church which changed its integrity, like a chameleon its colours, as and when expedient, or, no less paradoxically, to the co-existence, in mutual rivalry, of two types of state and two types of church, neither of which had any desire to compromise with the other.

8. Clearly, states and societies tend to be one thing or the other, either free or bound, whether in relation to the State or to the Church, and states are established and maintained, more usually, on the basis of the prevalence of one type of state and corresponding type of church, irrespective of whether this means that a minority who might happen to belong to a different type of church or even to relate to a different type of state in relation to that are denied sovereignty and the official endorsement of their sense of freedom.

9. In philosophical terms, one might say that societies advocating and upholding the reality of a free state, with a correspondingly bound church, are more prone, in Protestant fashion, to empiricism, while those upholding the reality of a free church, with a correspondingly bound state, are more likely, in Catholic fashion, to favour rationalism, as demonstrated by the historical division between British and Continental philosophy, since empiricism thrives in a somatically free environment, where science and politics are barbarously free, and sensuality tends to take precedence, in avowedly female vein, over sensibility, whereas rationalism only really thrives in a psychically free environment, where economics and religion are culturally free, and sensibility tends to take precedence, in typical male vein, over sensuality. For the distinction here is not between freedom and binding, but between contrasting types of freedom and their correlative orders of determinism, whether psychic or somatic.

10. Societies in which the State is free and the Church bound, being of the not-self and therefore notself-consciously female, will maintain a situation in which civility is secondary to barbarity, punishment to crime, since, in the very nature of things, punishment, and therefore civility, can only be secondary to crime, and therefore the barbarous pursuit of somatic freedom at the expense, on the other side of the gender fence, of psychic freedom.

11. Societies, on the contrary, in which the church is free and the state bound, being of the self and therefore self-consciously male, will uphold a situation in which philistinism is secondary to culture, sin to grace, since, in the very nature of these things, sin, and therefore philistinism, can only be secondary to grace, and therefore the cultural pursuit of psychic freedom at the expense, on the opposite side of the gender fence, of somatic freedom.

12. I will not say that empiricism is wrong or that rationalism is alone right; for such a reductionist claim would hardly do justice to the legitimacy of sensuality from a hegemonic female standpoint in the free state or to the legitimacy of sensibility from a hegemonic male standpoint in the free church, but, rather, that, as the evidence suggests, empiricism will not take precedence over rationalism from a properly male standpoint in psychic freedom, while rationalism can hardly be expected to take precedence over empiricism from a properly female standpoint in somatic freedom.

13. Either a society opts for observation in female vein or it opts for reason in male vein, for, at the end of the day, you cannot have a state that is free one moment and bound the next, or a church that is bound one moment and free the next, but either a stable polity or a stable religiosity, the former based in somatic barbarism but allowing for civilized constraints, the latter based in psychic culture but allowing for philistine alternatives, since one cannot have punishment without crime nor, conversely, sin without grace. Just as crime is the somatic precondition of punishment, its psychic corollary, so grace, by gender contrast, is the psychic precondition of sin, its somatic corollary. The Mother precedes the Daughter no less surely than the Father precedes the Son.

14. Obviously, societies in which either a female bias or a male bias obtain are incompatible and incommensurate. You can't blend that which won't mix but reacts against any such compromise. You can either carry on, in the well-worn tracks of secular or ecclesiastic tradition, or you can forge a new society in which such a dichotomy, and in some limited sense dialectic, no longer obtains, because one has found a way to transcend it via some kind of synthetic transmutation of the antagonists such that does away with the ethnic and political rivalry and establishes a fresh basis for society to develop from, a basis, I mean, which is neither Protestant nor Catholic, Parliamentary nor Republican, Loyalist nor Nationalist, but doggedly Social Transcendentalist in its design to forge a supra-national union of the peoples concerned in what I have described, in previous texts, as 'Kingdom Come', as instanced by the concept of a Gaelic federation of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales as the means whereby lasting peace can be brought to the British Isles, and the hideous division of Ireland between Protestant North and Catholic South be consigned, democratically and peaceably, to the rubbish heap of schismatic history.

15. For until the Gaelic peoples, in particular of Ireland, Scotland, and hopefully even Wales, opt for some kind of federal unity within the supra-national context of such a 'Kingdom' as that to which I have dedicated a considerable period of my vocational time, it is hard to envisage any substantial progress being made in the way of a united Ireland and an end to centuries of sectarian and political rivalry. Such a rivalry can only be ended, I contend, by Social Transcendentalism, and thus by the synthetic transcendence of Catholic/Protestant sectarianism and an end, in consequence, to the Christian religion, that great failure of Western civilization.

EMPIRICISM AND RATIONALISM REVIEWED

1. It is not usually true that the Father takes precedence over the Son in regard to Christianity, for all too often the Son, in response to the Christian emphasis upon Christ, takes precedence over the Father, and somatic philistinism rides out at the expense not only of psychic culture but in cahoots, seemingly, with that somatic barbarism conditioning psychic civility, so that, contrary to the societal divisions that afflict the British Isles, the Son turns upon the Daughter and transforms Her into the Mother, though not without the Daughter's express wish and consent!

2. I shall not elaborate, but it is clear to me that Christianity has not always or even regularly been true to the self, even in relation to cerebral knowledge, which is the context par excellence of the Catholic Church, but has allowed the philistine ignorance of the physical not-self to take on a position of prominence due to a Messianic emphasis upon the Son and the culturally undermining effect this has had upon the self, and hence the Father, as the source from which all physical, not to mention metaphysical, soma flows, in response to a wavicle hegemony.

3. But He is not, of course, the source from which all chemical, not to mention metachemical, soma flows, for soma does not follow from psyche on the female side of the gender divide but, on the contrary, psyche follows from soma in response to a particle hegemony, whether elemental or molecular, so that the Mother, as it were, is the source from which all metachemical and/or chemical psyche flows, this latter of course being deterministic and therefore no less secondary to the free soma of the Mother, whether the Mother be devilish or womanly, fiery or watery, than the bound soma of the Son is secondary to the free psyche of the Father, whether the Father be manly or godly, vegetative or airy.

4. Therefore God has not created 'matter' except insofar as metaphysical 'matter', or soma, is concerned, and then we would have to allow for two different orders of paternalistic deity, one foolish and prone to aural soma, the other wise and prone to respiratory soma, as well as to their corresponding secondary deities in the aural or respiratory types of metaphysical soma itself, whom we have identified with the concept of 'Son' and believe to be either foolish or wise, sensual or sensible, in like manner, with a distinction between immorality in the one and morality in the other.

5. Even where physical 'matter', or soma, is concerned, we have no right to speak of God the Father, but only of Man the Father; for the metaphysical self cannot be accorded responsibility for the physical self, which pertains to a different element and presupposes a different order of will or, rather, ego, one less truthful than knowledgeable in its vegetative rather than airy nature, and thus more properly germane to the brain stem and thus to the ego per se.

6. God is a term that can only apply to the metaphysical self and its corresponding order of not-self, in the one case primarily in relation to the Father and in the other case secondarily in relation to the Son. For the physical self and not-self, whether sensual or sensible, we have to allow, by contrast, for manly orders of father and son, while on the opposite side of the gender divide, 'matter' is not created by 'mind', soma by psyche, but psyche is created and modified by soma, and therefore we have to allow for both metachemical and chemical orders of the Mother and the Daughter, as described, with a like distinction, albeit more to do with evil and good than folly and wisdom, between their sensual and sensible manifestations - the former directly immoral and the latter, subordinate to a male hegemony, indirectly moral.

7. However that may be, the distinction in philosophy between empiricism and rationalism, so long the basis of philosophical conflict between contrasting worldly agendas, is clearly deducible to the gender distinction between societies upholding free soma and bound psyche in typically female vein, and those, on the contrary, for which free psyche and bound soma is the desired mean in typically male vein, a vein which correspondingly allows for a free church and a bound state, for cultural grace and philistine sin, as opposed, on the female - and sensual - side of the gender fence, to the upholding of a free state and a bound church, in which barbarous crime necessarily takes precedence, in somatic freedom, over the punishing civility of psychic determinism.

8. Empiricism, of which the British tradition of Bacon, Hobbes, Locke, and Hume is second to none, is simply a reflection, in largely Protestant fashion, of the sensual rule of female criteria in which soma, and hence the State, is barbarously free and psyche, and hence the Church, civilly bound, in consequence of which the psychic, or intellectual, findings of philosophy must be derived from somatic material lying without the self, and observation and classification of material data form the basis of philosophical enquiry and the guarantor through experience, for empiricists, of its knowledgeable authenticity - in reality an egotistical shortfall from anything innate and more genuinely, or egocentrically, knowledgeable.

9. For on the female side of life, wherein metachemistry and chemistry, fire and water, are the prevailing elements, soma takes precedence over psyche, and such psyche as fictitiously derives from a somatic precondition must reflect, in deterministic vein, the hegemonic freedom of soma and be subservient to it, not rationalistically independent of sense data in truthful vein. Reason of a sort can, of course, obtain in empiricism; for even protestant Englishmen are not entirely bereft of male subjectivity, least of all when Anglican, but it is constrained by the prevailing sensuality from being true to itself in self, and is accordingly subverted, in id- or superego-like vein, by the metachemical and chemical powers-that-be from egocentrically drawing knowledgeable conclusions that assert rationalistic independence of Nature, as though from a psychic subversion, through conscious will, or mind, and subconscious spirit, or subspirit, of soma.

10. But such a subversion and subordination of soma by free psyche is only really germane to contexts in which the male elements of physics and metaphysics, vegetation and air, are in contention, not to their female - and objective - counterparts, and so we cannot maintain that rationalism, striving for psychic independence and/or overlordship of Nature, is valid right across the elemental board irrespective of gender factors or elemental differences. It is only really valid in contexts, so often conditioned in the past by the Catholic Church, where sensibility is hegemonic in male vein, with respect to both physics and (to a much lesser extent traditionally) metaphysics, and therefore it would be as much out of place and ineffectual in contexts of metachemistry and chemistry, fire and water, as empiricism is or would be out of place on the male side of the gender fence, where the subjective treatment of the male orders of soma from a freely psychic basis is perfectly legitimate, and one expects nothing less than a principled commitment to rationalism, whether equivocally in physics or unequivocally in metaphysics, its more absolutist male counterpart.

11. Therefore, from a strictly philosophical standpoint, which is concerned with the pursuit of knowledge and, especially, truth, that guarantor of maximum beingfulness, rationalism will always be superior to empiricism, since philosophy is less concerned with metachemistry and chemistry than with physics and, especially, metaphysics, and any attempt to broaden its scope to embrace the female - and objective - elements of fire and water simply vitiates and subverts it, making it akin to some kind of science wherein facts established on the basis of empirical evidence relating to apparent and quantitative phenomena, more usually metachemical in the one and chemical in the other, should be categorically differentiated from truths established on the basis of rational cogitation relating to qualitative and essential noumena, more usually physical in the one and metaphysical in the other, and we have, in the latter case, that which, when genuine, should stand closer to religion, even as the logical and theoretical guide to the development of religious praxis, or devotion, through an enhanced concept of Truth founded upon the mastery, through somatic determinism, of Illusion.

12. For on the male side of life the self takes precedence over the not-self, psyche over soma, truth over illusion, grace over sin, sanctity over profanity, play over work, and anything that advances the freedom of psyche at the expense of somatic freedom, constraining soma, especially when male, to deterministic subordination in relation to either mind (conscious will) or subspirit (subconscious spirit), advances the cause of rational enlightenment, and never more so than in relation to the properly philosophical sphere of metaphysics, wherein the ratio of psyche to soma is somewhat in the region of 3:1, as in most wavicles/least particles, and an unequivocal commitment to rationalism announces the presence not of Man, the developer through equivocal reason of physical knowledge, but God, of the godly human being who portends the Cyborg and the cultural victory of metaphysical truth, which is equivalent to the Truth.

FAILED ALTERNATIVES TO THE LIBERAL WORLD

1. But Truth, as I have argued, isn't to be found on the female, or objective, side of life, but only Beauty, where metachemical psychic appearances are concerned, or strength, its chemical counterpart. In fact, so much does psyche stand in the shadow of soma, when the female side of life is free, that one has a right to distinguish, as intimated above, between the facticity of soma premised upon a particle hegemony and the fiction of psyche, since the latter derives its principal attributes in the id and the superego from the free will and spirit of the former and would have virtually no objective significance or reality without them. Female psyche is not - I repeat, not - the same as male psyche, and therefore its existence in quasi-essential (id) and quasi-qualitative (superego) terms is very much dependent upon and subordinate to the factual existence in apparent (wilful) and quantitative (spiritual) terms of free soma, both metachemical and chemical.

2. Therefore just as bound psyche is subordinate and secondary to free soma within the objective contexts of metachemistry and chemistry, so civility is secondary to barbarity, as punishment to crime, or, in institutional terms, the Church to the State, the latter of which, when genuinely free, is the barbarous source of all crime. Verily, the relationship of bound psyche to free soma is one of psychic fiction to somatic fact, and those who, whether literally female or twisted male, uphold the primacy of somatic freedom invariably condemn themselves to a plethora of psychic fictions, of which the punishment of crime is not the least salient in a situation where, whether metachemical or chemical, crime is primary and punishment secondary, and such civility as is brought to bear on the facticity of barbarism is not a solution to but a symptom of objective reality.

3. Verily, one does not stamp out crime through punishment, any more than the bound church can eradicate the free state. The two go hand in glove, and so long as female criteria persist hegemonically in sensual vein there can be no end to the reality of crime and punishment, barbarity and civility, and no appreciable change in the relationship of the one to the other. The fictional civility of bound psyche trailing along in the factual wake of somatic barbarity will persist in society as, empirically, in philosophy, and no amount of wishful thinking or subversive arrogation of truth by fact will do a jot to demonstratively change or ameliorate the situation. Heathenistic criteria will simply persist, shutting out the possibility of male liberation and deliverance from sensuality to sensibility, immorality to morality, which is commensurate with salvation.

4. But where such sensibility does obtain, as traditionally within the purview of the Catholic Church, and all those societies, not least of all on the Continent, for whom the precedence of psyche over soma, of church over state, of culture over philistinism, is a Man- or God-given right, confirmed by the nature, in vegetation and air, of physical and metaphysical orientations, matters can and have been different, as evidenced by the emphasis upon grace and sin, the Father and the Son, psychic freedom and somatic determinism, and the correlative development of rationalism at the expense of both scholastic tradition, heavily compromised by Aristotelianism, and, more contemporaneously, empiricism.

5. Yet the Continental emphasis upon rationalism, as evidenced by Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, et al, equivocally rationalistic as it was, was insufficiently rationalistic to avoid the scorn of Rousseau and the German Romantics, beginning with Kant, who sought a rapprochement between rationalism and empiricism, and one must look to the underlining weakness or inability of the Church to remain sufficiently faithful to the male reality of psyche over soma, as a cause in the growth, in opposition to rationalism, of that philosophy of feeling and ultimately will which was to characterize much of the nineteenth century and lead to devastating consequences in the twentieth, not least of all in relation to two world wars.

6. In fact, both empiricism and rationalism, the alpha and omega of the world, inspired non-liberal offshoots in the respective extremes of Communism and Fascism, and both were guilty, if unequally so, of an undue emphasis upon soma at the expense of psyche - Communism in terms of materialism, Fascism in terms of idealism, neither of which owe anything to psyche but, rather, to those absolutist orders of criminality and philistinism which derived, in no small part, from the importance attaching to soma in the World.

7. For the liberal opposition of empiricism and rationalism, feminine objectivity and masculine subjectivity, was rarely a clear-cut distinction between free soma on the one hand and free psyche on the other, since the worldly fatality of the Christian Church itself ensured that, for all but a minority of privileged elite, the male reality of psyche over soma could not be guaranteed outside the purview of the Church, and that the majority of males, ever subject to female pressures within and without the family, and obliged to earn a living in manners often dependent upon a somatic predominance, were fated, then as before, to exist in the shadow of females, with a greater emphasis, especially within physics, on soma than on psyche, on the not-self than on the self, on the Son than on the Father.

8. Small wonder, then, if, in contradistinction to male reality, naturalism came to take precedence over humanism for the generality of Catholic rationalists, the ignorance of the Son over the knowledge of the Father, and thus to level, albeit on the paradoxical terms of bound soma, with the female context, within the world of liberal objectivity, in which realism took precedence over nonconformism, as free soma over bound psyche, and the negativity of weakness and humility, if not humiliation, accordingly prevailed over the positivity, ever secondary, of strength and pride.

9. Accustomed to deferring, outside the narrow confines of the Church, to the hegemony of female soma, which is ever negative, the majority of males would have granted more substance to their own somatic attributes and become conditioned to a context in which, contrary to their gender interests, soma took precedence, to all practical intents and purposes, over psyche.

10. Therefore instead of humanism leading to transcendentalism, as physical psyche to metaphysical psyche, the change, when it came, was of the order of naturalism leading to idealism, as from Rousseau through the German Romantics, particularly Fichte, Hegel, and Nietzsche, to Hitlerian Fascism. For the Romantic revolt against rationalism had to lead somewhere, and if materialism was ruled out because of its derivation, through Marx and subsequent Marxian Socialists, from liberal realism, with its empirical traditions, then the only alternative course of development led logically beyond naturalism, and the filial emphasis of the Church, to idealism, which is precisely the context in which metaphysical negativity, whether in falsity or woe, becomes somatically predominant.

11. But that is perhaps too facile a progression. The revolt against reason was not above seeing in any grand passion or emotional outburst the key to liberation from the fetters of intellectualism and egocentric rationality. The will to soul as opposed to the continuation of ego is, of course, a noble one, since it can bring one to the peaks of metaphysical beatitude. But when the notion of soul is corrupted, as the Western one has always been, by appeals to the heart as the 'seat of the soul', a metaphor for the self, or brain stem/spinal cord, and thus the core of life, then the resulting emphasis upon love which accrues to this metachemical not-self or, rather, to the psychic extrapolation from somatic materialism, leads to the opposite effect of what was expected, namely to the triumph of the will and to the advocacy of will as the means whereby divine redemption may be achieved.

12. Nothing, however, could be further from the truth! For the Western tradition is rooted in the Lie of the Old Testament, wherein the cosmic First Mover is identified with God, and the First Mover, whether stellar or Venusian, sensual or sensible, is in reality anything but divine, being a female reality whose diabolic nature, in metachemical objectivity, ensures that not only does the will take precedence over the soul, but that soul is itself undermined or conditioned by will to such an extent that it has nothing in common with genuine soul, which in any case is a subconscious rather than unconscious essence, but is the wilful product of somatic intrusion.

13. For cosmic metachemistry, no less than the universal metachemistry in which the eyes and the heart have their space-time devolutionary throne on what could be regarded as the Cupidian axis, is that in which soma predominates over psyche in the ratio of 3:1, as most particles/least wavicles, and in such an unnatural/unconscious context it is impossible for the soul, or what passes for soul, in reality the id, to be anything but a fourth-rate order of feeling commensurate with the utmost 'bovaryization' of the concept 'soul' in relation not to essence, as with metaphysics, but to appearance, the principal attribute, in will, of metachemistry.

14. Therefore not only is any appeal to the heart bound to lead, sooner or later, to the substitution of fourth-rate emotion, namely love, for the reality or potential of any higher emotion, such as joy; it is a context associated, through metachemistry, with a situation in which psyche is least prevalent and soma most prevalent, so that the prospects for even love are 1:3 compared with the more prevalent emotion, in general terms, of hate, which characterizes both the sensual and sensible manifestations of the soma in question, as are the prospects for beauty compared to the more prevalent reality, ever somatic, of ugliness.

15. Therefore Romanticism ends up glorifying that which is most inimical to the soul, to all noble feelings, to enhanced emotional positivity. It plays into the hands of the Devil and ends-up forfeiting its claim to emotional sovereignty as first the psychic fiction of love and then the somatic facticity of ugliness brutally intrude to sweep away psychic freedom and subordinate the resulting puppet to its wilful and spiritual machinations, turning what was once a graceful concerto into an infernal dance, a danse macabre.

16. And all because the heart is not 'the seat of the soul' but the seat, par excellence, of the will in its sensible mode, in relation to which the somatic negativity of ugliness and hatred take precedence over the psychic positivity of beauty and love in the ratio of at least 3:1, which is to say, in relation to a context, necessarily metachemical, in which the particle hegemony of somatic predominance is of the order of most particles/least wavicles. No-one in his right mind would wish for an outcome like that!

17. Yet, at the same time, the retreat from liberal realism to socialist materialism, to the dialectical materialism of Marxian Communism, is no great improvement on matters either, but a degeneration from more (relative to most) particles/less (relative to least) wavicles to most particles/least wavicles, as from Nature to the Cosmos, and thus to an outright metachemical absolutism untempered by idealism but having ugliness and hatred, the ugliness of the industrial proletariat and their hatred of the bourgeoisie, as it prime motivation and principal characteristic, and more, in contrast to Romantic materialism, from a sensual basis in the stellar cosmos and/or eyes than from a sensible one in the Venusian cosmos and/or heart.

18. Romanticism may be the tragically paradoxical failure of a noble urge to transcend liberal rationalism, but the Classical Communism, as it were, of dialectical materialism is simply the degenerate offspring of liberal empiricism, and thus the worst possible form of empiricism such that accrues rather more, in metachemical soma, to the Cosmos than to Nature, and thus to the Devil than to Woman, to radically hegemonic unnatural factors than to moderately hegemonic supernatural ones.

19. Even sensible idealism tempered by sensible materialism is less morally objectionable than outright sensual materialism, whether or not tempered, in paradoxical Marxist vein, by sensual idealism. It is rather more a corrupted wisdom than a straightforward evil, since, with the metaphysical will untempered by metaphysical ego, it has unregeneratively embraced, in its mindless state, the unnatural context of metachemistry via the idiotic 'unconscious', or unnaturally-tempered subconscious, rather than subordinated itself, in properly male vein, to the metaphysical subconscious, the context of soul per se.

RETURNING TO SELF

1. Clearly before any progress beyond liberal rationalism can be made, one has to be capable of respecting the male reality of psyche over soma, of a cultural precedence over philistinism, as grace over sin, and thus of understanding that feelings which lead to the aggrandizement of will are strictly undesirable from a higher, or post-liberal, standpoint. One needs to be capable of respecting one's self, the self that is a combination, for males, of brain stem and spinal cord, the former the effective seat of the ego, the latter the seat of the soul, and thus have come to an accommodation with either humanism primarily in relation to physical ego or with transcendentalism primarily in relation to metaphysical soul, notwithstanding the lesser soulful and egocentric counterparts to each which, though deriving from the same sources, stand in a subordinate relationship to the prevailing attribute of the self, be it egocentric or emotional.

2. In fact, such a prevalence is so determined by the nature of one's class as a male, whether manly or godly, that one cannot simply imagine a man, say, opting to become a god or vice versa, since those who are predominantly self-oriented in relation to the brain stem, and hence ego, are ever distinct from those whose psychic orientation is closer to the spinal cord, and hence the soul. One is either masculine or divine, as a rule, not both at once or by turns, although alternations between sensual and sensible masculinity and/or divinity are not uncommon, as witness those Catholic males who subscribe, prayerfully, to physical sensibility one moment and, audibly or musically, to metaphysical sensuality the next.

3. Readers familiar with my texts will know enough, by now, about my projected theories concerning the structural pluralism of the triadic Beyond and its tier subsections to realize how the divine is to be distinguished from the masculine, or the soulful from the intellectual, even within any given tier, quite apart from the position of feminine females in each of the tiers, with due distinctions between persons of Nonconformist, Anglican, and Catholic denominational background, presuming, with 'Judgement', upon a majority mandate for religious sovereignty and their deliverance, in consequence, from the schismatic dialectics of inverted and/or perpendicular triangularity to the Social Transcendentalist synthesis of the triadic Beyond.

4. Certainly the patterns for salvation and damnation that I have outlined in previous texts need no apologetics or further mention here, so I shall content myself with reminding the reader that the development of Truth in 'Kingdom Come' is not anti-rationalistic but an enhancement of rationalism beyond the liberal or equivocal traditions, especially those of the Catholic Continent, to the level of an unequivocal endorsement of the possibility, for those who are 'up to it' and have been earmarked for such a destiny, of unitive knowledge of God and, more especially, experience of Heaven through transcendental meditation, which of course presupposes the acceptance of a psychic predominance in the region of most wavicles/least particles, and therefore of a pretty absolutist commitment to transcendentalism and the right of transcendental psyche to utilize somatic idealism for purposes of its graceful enhancement from metaphysical ego to soul, as from the metaphysical consciousness of God-the-Wise-Father to the metaphysical subconsciousness of Heaven-the-Holy-Soul via the metaphysically mindful 'naturalness', or consciously-tempered unnaturalness, viz. bound will, of God-the-Wise-Son and the metaphysically emotionalized 'subnaturalness', or subconsciously-tempered supernaturalness, viz. bound spirit, of Heaven-the-Holy-Spirit, the latter two of which orders of not-self, appertaining in metaphysical sensibility to the lungs and the breath, stand in a secondary relationship to the prevailing primacy of the metaphysical self, which is alone free.

5. For one cannot, as a self-respecting male, tolerate or condone a situation in which the Son takes precedence over the Father, in somatic subversion of the male reality of psyche over soma, whether in the absolutist context of idealism, as witness the drift of German Romanticism towards Hitlerian Fascism (Hitler a kind, I have to say, of Second Coming who stands closer to the Son than to the Father, to the negative profanity of metaphysical soma in falsity and woe, tempered, and further corrupted, as it indubitably was, by, first, fundamentalism and, then, materialism), or in the relativistic context of liberal rationalism wherein humanism loses ground to naturalism as the generality of masculine Christians, or Christian males, increasingly find themselves identifying with soma at the expense of psyche, not only in consequence of the fatality of Christianity to emphasize the Son at the expense of the Father, nor even solely in relation to wives and family, and thus to somatic precedence of psyche by females, but also in response to the growth of Protestant criteria and influence throughout society, and Europe in particular, with its more openly somatic hegemonies, as evidenced by the subordination of nonconformism to realism and, ultimately, of fundamentalism to materialism in the 'march of history' towards ever more secular freedoms, for which read: somatic predominance.

6. Whatever the reasons, the failure of Christianity to sufficiently uphold the male reality of psyche over soma, of the precedence of soma by psyche, or to prevail against Nature and the brute sexual realities of life, has led to the somatic freedoms, with all due attendant barbarities and crimes, of the contemporary world, and it is from the pit of that crime-ruled barbarous world that we must now climb, Protestant and Catholic alike, back to sanity and thus the sensible lead of culture, with an emphasis upon grace and sin, not, as before, upon sin at the expense of grace, in all too paradoxically Christian and lower-class fashion, but upon grace at the expense of sin, upon culture utilizing philistinism for its own enhancement of sanctity.

7. I have outlined the ways and methods by means of which this may be achieved, and therefore it requires the authorization, at some future date, of a paradoxical kind of election in which the electorates of the relevant countries, particularly Ireland (North and South) and Scotland, are granted the opportunity to elect for religious sovereignty and thus for deliverance from the 'sins and/or crimes' of the somatic World in which, through political sovereignty of one liberal persuasion or another, they still remain bogged down at the time of writing.

8. So much does the criminal reality of soma over psyche, of free soma conditioning bound psyche, currently prevail, that even males have been, for the most part, twisted against their gender and gender interests and brought to a sinful and even quasi-criminal low which, unlike in the past, cannot even depend upon the tenuous consolations of Catholic grace or, for that matter, of Protestant punishment, in primary or secondary psyche. For the churches, both truthfully free and fictitiously bound, have been further compromised or undermined by the reluctantly subordinate illusory bindings and frantically galloping factual freedoms of state soma, and cannot even pretend to offer mankind a way out of the dilemma in which the greater proportion of it now languishes, irrespective of denomination.

9. The only way out, as I have taught, can come via 'Kingdom Come', and therefore through the rejection of political sovereignty, and its scientific and even economic corollaries, in favour of the religious sovereignty, the enhanced commitment to self, which Social Transcendentalism has to offer the World, and not really through the Second Coming of Christ, through another Son, but in relation to an understanding of the primacy of the Father over the Son, of psyche over soma, of culture over philistinism, taken to an unprecedentedly sensible level of metaphysical development. Call me Anti-Son, or Anti-Christ, if you like, but I am one who offers a truthful alternative to the Lies of both the New Testament personal Son and the Old Testament cosmic Father, the so-called First Mover (Jehovah) as God.

10. I offer you the prospect, through salvation, of the universal Father, whether in relation to God (for Catholic males) or in relation to Man (for Protestant males), and I tell you that as the Germanic equivalent of the Second Coming acted physically, as a sort of Son, upon what was considered irrelevant to and even dangerously subversive of any prospects for the growth and development of Western civilization from a somatic standpoint, so will the Gaelic equivalent of the Second Coming, a higher order of Messianic deliverer commensurate with the Father, be obliged to act metaphysically upon the psychic manifestations, so to speak, of that same irrelevance and subversive threat - namely, the Bible, and have it removed from the sphere of our daily life.

11. For until we - and by 'we' I mean Gaels in particular - are free of that cultural irrelevance, we shall not be able to grow into our full stature as free beings for whom the culture of Social Transcendentalism is the Final Solution to all subversive underminings of Truth.

12. Verily a higher phase, characterized by the enhancement of Gaelic religiosity, of the European evolutionary struggle is about to begin, and out of it will emerge a new human being, a godly being who leads, and elevates, the generality of men and women to pastures new and even, ultimately, to the overcoming of mankind in the Cyborg, the meaning and justification of the heavenly Beyond.

PART THREE

CONCRETE AND ABSTRACT REVALUATED

1. In the previous two parts of Alpha and Omega I have drawn distinctions between the absolute alpha, so to speak, of most particles/least wavicles and the relative alpha of more (relative to most) particles/less (relative to least) wavicles, and contrasted both of these objective, or female, realities with the relative omega, as it were, of more (relative to most) wavicles/less (relative to least) particles and the absolute omega of most wavicles/least particles, contending that a struggle is discernible in history between devolution of the objective and evolution of the subjective, as between the Cosmos and Nature on the one hand, and Man and (to anticipate the future) the Cyborg on the other - the former pair female and the latter pair their male counterparts.

2. Assuming one can speak of an overall progression or, rather, gradual development from alpha to omega, as from a devolutionary regression from the Cosmos to Nature on the one hand, and an evolutionary progression from Man to the Cyborg on the other hand (the latter of which is still only potential), it must transpire that life is a gender-based struggle between objectivity and subjectivity, in which, though neither side is totally victorious or totally vanquished, things will favour the one side or the other according to whether sensual or sensible, female or male, criteria are hegemonic at any given time, both in society generally and the individual members of which it is composed.

3. Therefore whilst all the elements, from fire and water on the objective, or female, side of the gender fence to vegetation (earth) and air on its subjective, or male, side, will be present to greater or lesser extents in the world, a situation must nevertheless be possible for societies or ages in which one element is especially prominent and the others are subordinate, in different degrees, to it, with an overall distinction, in consequence, between upper-class female criteria, lower-class female criteria, lower-class male criteria, and upper-class male criteria, as between most particles/least wavicles, more (relative to most) particles/less (relative to least) wavicles, more (relative to most) wavicles/less (relative to least) particles, and most wavicles/least particles, or, in historical terms, the Cosmos, Nature, Civilization, and the Cyborg, or the Devil, Woman, Man, and God.

4. In the past I have tended to equate particles with soma and wavicles with psyche, contending a distinction to exist between the 'matter' of the one and the 'mind' of the other, as between phenomenal and noumenal, corporeal and ethereal, concrete and abstract. In general terms, this is a fair distinction to draw, since soma and psyche are neither identical on the one side of the gender fence nor on the other, but reflect a gender differential between the objectivity of most particles/least wavicles and more (relative to most) particles/less (relative to least) wavicles on the one hand, and the subjectivity of more (relative to most) wavicles/less (relative to least) particles and most wavicles/least particles on the other hand, the hand in which, with a wavicle hegemony, psyche could be said to precede soma and soma is accordingly conditioned by psyche in terms of what has been called somatic determinism, the opposite, in effect, of that psychic determinism stemming from the precedence of psyche by soma on the female side of life, where soma will be free to condition psyche in the manner described.

5. But this can only happen when the female side of life is free, in sensuality, to be loyal to itself or, rather, to its not-self, in soma, and females are accordingly hegemonic over males. In sensibility, on the other hand, no such freedom is generally possible to females, and consequently male hegemonies in vegetation and/or air, physics and/or metaphysics, over the female sensibilities of water and/or fire, chemistry and/or metachemistry, will ensure that males are in a position to remain loyal to their selves, their psyches, and to condition soma in the best interests of that freedom, which is to say, in relation to somatic determinism, both directly in relation to themselves and indirectly in relation to the undermining of female somatic freedom through the hegemonic influence of bound soma.

6. All this has been stated before, but the fact that soma corresponds to the corporeal and psyche to the ethereal, to 'matter' and 'mind', the phenomenal and the noumenal, does not mean, as I was formerly apt to suppose, that this is equivalent to the concrete on the one hand and to the abstract on the other, as though concretism, or the fact of something's being concrete, was equivalent to somatic corporealism, so to speak, and the fact, by contrast, of its being abstract equivalent to psychic etherealism. On the contrary, that which is abstract has been abstracted from a concrete basis or precondition, and therefore can exist in relation to either the corporeal or the ethereal, soma or psyche.

7. Let me explain. The female, or objective, side of life, we have found, bears testimony to the precedence of psyche by soma, of wavicles by particles, since it exists either absolutely in objective time and space, viz. space-time devolution, in relation to most particles/least wavicles or relatively in objective volume and mass, viz. volume-mass devolution, in relation to more (relative to most) particles/less (relative to least) wavicles, and therefore in contexts where either the somatic predominance is absolute (metachemical) or relative (chemical), in consequence of which one can argue that psyche has been abstracted, or extrapolated, from a concrete basis in soma, which, being free, has conditioned psyche from its own somatic standpoint, the standpoint or, rather, standpoints of will and spirit, the former of which has its principal manifestation in fire, the latter in water.

8. Therefore, in relation to free females, it can certainly be said that psyche has been abstracted from soma, and precisely in terms of a fiction extrapolated from a fact, the fact of either metachemical soma in the absolute case or chemical soma in the relative case; for facts are ever objective and germane to the sensuality of a particle hegemony, be that hegemony absolute or relative. Facts condition fictions, which are abstracted, in psychic determinism, from free soma. So much for the relationship of concrete to abstract on the female side of life!

9. On the male side of life, by contrast, no such abstraction of psyche from soma can be properly said to apply, since psyche, as we have found, precedes soma in terms of a wavicle hegemony, be that hegemony relative or absolute, physical or metaphysical, and consequently in contexts of more (relative to most) wavicles/less (relative to least) particles, viz. those of subjective mass and volume, or mass-volume evolution, and most wavicles/least particles, viz. those of subjective time and space, or time-space evolution, one should speak of soma abstracted from psyche, so that, contrary to the female elements, psyche is concrete and soma abstract, in consequence of which one can argue that soma has been extrapolated from a concrete basis, or precondition, in psyche which, being free, has conditioned soma from its own psychic standpoints, the standpoints of ego and soul, the former of which has its principal manifestation in vegetation, the latter in air.

10. Therefore, in relation to free males, it can certainly be maintained that soma has been abstracted from psyche, and precisely in terms of an illusion extrapolated from a truth, the truth of either physical psyche in the relative case or metaphysical psyche in the absolute case; for truths are ever subjective and germane to the sensibility of a wavicle hegemony, be that hegemony relative or absolute. Truths condition illusions, which are abstracted, in somatic determinism, from free psyche.

11. How different, then, is the relationship of concrete and abstract on the male side of life from its female counterpart! Fact conditioning fiction makes for empiricism, or the binding of psyche to the corporeal freedom of somatic fact. Truth conditioning illusion makes for rationalism, or the binding of soma to the ethereal freedom of psychic truth. In the one case, the rule of corporeal reality. In the other case, the rule of ethereal reality. A free state and a bound church, as against a bound state and a free church.

12. Hence the concrete is no more invariably equivalent to the corporeal, or phenomenal, than the abstract to the ethereal, or noumenal. Fictions are ethereal abstractions, in bound psyche, from the corporeal facts of somatic concretion, whereas illusions are corporeal abstractions, in bound soma, from the ethereal truths of psychic concretion. The psychic determinism of the bound church extrapolated from the free state is an example of ethereal abstraction. The somatic determinism of the bound state extrapolated from the free church is an example, by contrast, of corporeal abstraction. A female-dominated society, characterized by sensuality, must favour the former, a male-dominated society can only, in its sensibility, favour the latter. Therein lies the distinction, for example, between Protestant Britain and Catholic Ireland, as, indeed, between such divergent philosophical traditions as British empiricism and Continental rationalism.

FICTIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND TRUE KNOWLEDGE

1. Empiricism is a slave of fact, but what is fact? Simply the metachemical and/or chemical manifestations of the not-self, which is to say, of free soma as that which issues from a vacuum in relation to a particle hegemony, be it absolute and unequivocal or relative and equivocal, of the Cosmos or Nature, or some modern artificial equivalents thereof. Empiricism is the psychic fiction of 'knowledge' that follows from the precedence of psyche by somatic fact in metachemical and/or chemical elemental contexts. But such 'knowledge', avowedly objective, is really antithetical to genuine knowledge, its subjective psychic counterpart, and therefore false by any authentic standards of what constitutes genuine knowledge.

2. In fact, such 'knowledge' as empiricism boasts of has been conditioned and subverted by somatic facts stemming from a particle-hegemonic vacuum to such an extent that one cannot even mention it in the same breath as rational knowledge, which is a product of concrete etherealism operating in the wavicle-hegemonic plenum of free psyche, whether physical or metaphysical, but must allot to its concern with predominantly ugly or weak realities a measure of beauty or strength which attests to the subversion of psyche by free soma and underlines the fiction of knowledge to which it empirically subscribes, complements of a female hegemony in sensual objectivity.

3. But metachemistry attests to a context in which somatic freedom is well-nigh absolute in most particles/least wavicles, and therefore to that in which the negativity of soma predominates over the positivity of psyche somewhat in the region of 3:1, which is to say, three parts materialism to one part fundamentalism, or three parts ugliness and hatred to one part beauty and love. One would expect, in such a context, considerably more ugliness than beauty, and therefore the further undermining of knowledge in terms not merely of ignorance, or the much-vaunted scientific humility before the facts of experience, but of ugliness, or recourse to metachemically-inspired experimentation, which does not a jot to enhance male self-esteem, but simply renders what residue of self-respect may still cling to the empirical male all the more vulnerable to female subversion in the overall experimental scheme of things.

4. However, if the unequivocal empiricism of a metachemical disposition is as bad as it gets from a male standpoint or, rather, from a standpoint which is effectively female in diabolic terms, then at least the equivocal empiricism of chemistry, hitherto the more prevalent form of empiricism in Europe, attests to a context in which somatic freedom is merely relative in more (relative to most) particles/less (relative to least) wavicles, and therefore to that in which the negativity of soma predominates over the positivity of psyche in the feminine region of 2½:1½, which is to say, two-and-a-half parts realism to one-and-a-half parts nonconformism, or two-and-a-half parts weakness and humility to one-and-a-half parts strength and pride. Consequently one would, in such a context, expect substantially more weakness than strength, and therefore the chemical undermining of knowledge by weakness, or chemically-inspired experiments, with consequences similar to those noted above.

5. Whatever the exact ratio of factors, depending on the extent to which empiricism is really empirical and not still, to some extent, paradoxically rationalistic, knowledge is the only real loser in this erroneous approach to philosophy, to the enhancement of knowledge not only in terms of physics but, more significantly, of metaphysics, the context of infinite knowledge and, hence, Truth, and those who empirically shout the loudest are bound to be among the principal denigrators of genuine knowledge, which is to say, of knowledge conceived as subjectively innate and having reference to the self in its psychically free mode, a mode which is either equivocal in relation to the physicality of finite knowledge or unequivocal in relation to the metaphysicality, as it were, of infinite knowledge, the knowledge not of egocentric reason but of soulful or, rather, psychocentric reason, of the utmost rationality in terms of the maximizing of positive being through the truthful pursuit of joy.

6. But if the equivocal rationalism of physics, hitherto the more prevalent form of rationalism (prior to the naturalistic decadence) in Europe, attests to a context in which psychic freedom is merely relative in more (relative to most) wavicles/less (relative to least) particles, and therefore to that in which the positivity of psyche predominates over the negativity of soma more in the region of 2½:1½, which is to say, two-and-a-half parts humanism to one-and-a-half parts naturalism, or two-and-a-half parts finite knowledge and pleasure to one-and-a-half parts ignorance and pain, no knowledge can compare to the metaphysical or unequivocal variety which, when properly wise in sensibility, attests to a context in which psychic freedom is well-nigh absolute in most wavicles/least particles, and therefore to that in which the positivity of psyche predominates over the negativity of soma somewhat in the region of 3:1, which is to say, three parts transcendentalism to one part idealism, or three parts truth and joy to one part illusion (infinite ignorance) and woe. One would expect, in such a context, considerably more positivity than negativity, and therefore the further enhancement of self-esteem in relation to the utmost free psyche - a psyche not of Man, but of God; not of the brain-stem in its physical mode, but of the spinal cord as the more properly metaphysical manifestation of selfhood.

7. Certainly there is no concretism to compare with the ethereal variety of metaphysical psyche, for even the ethereal concretism of physical psyche must reckon with the finite limitations of physics, as of a vegetative elemental context, and thus with a ratio of positivity to negativity which is anything but absolute, even in the best, or least decadent, of masculine circumstances. Nevertheless even the finite knowledge of a physically free psyche is preferable, from a male standpoint, to the empirical corruptions of knowledge which accrue to both the chemical and metachemical fictions of that psyche which, punishingly bound in subconscious (where applicable) and conscious manifestations of self by instinctual and spiritual factors emanating from free soma, as from the not-self, is ever enslaved to corporeal fact and in no position to do justice to finite knowledge, much less Truth (or infinite knowledge), by dint of the sheer pressure of predominantly weak and ugly phenomena criminally raining down on it from the particle-hegemonic sensual vacuums of a female objectivity, be it feminine and equivocal, or diabolic and unequivocal.

8. To sum up, the absolute corporeal concretism of the metachemical context of space-time devolution, corresponding to most particles/least wavicles, is that in which soma is maximized and psyche minimized or, as stated above, in which soma both precedes psyche and exists in a ratio to it of 3:1, which is to say, three parts materialism and one part fundamentalism. Therefore it is a context in which ugliness and hatred considerably predominate over beauty and love, and in which psychic positivity should be regarded as the absolute ethereal exception to the general rule of somatic negativity.

9. Within the 'fallen' context of Nature, however, the relative corporeal concretism of the chemical context of volume-mass devolution, corresponding to more (relative to most) particles/less (relative to least) wavicles, is that in which soma both precedes psyche and exists in a ratio to it of approximately 2½:1½, which is to say, two-and-a-half parts realism to one-and-a-half parts nonconformism. Therefore it is a context in which weakness and humility substantially predominate over strength and pride, and in which psychic positivity should be regarded as the relative ethereal exception to the general rule of somatic negativity.

10. By contrast to this, the relative ethereal concretism of the physical context of mass-volume evolution, corresponding to more (relative to most) wavicles/less (relative to least) particles, is that in which psyche both precedes soma and exists in a ratio to it of approximately 2½:1½, which is to say, two-and-a-half parts humanism to one-and-a-half parts naturalism. Therefore it is a context in which knowledge and pleasure substantially predominate over ignorance and pain, and in which somatic negativity should be regarded as the relative corporeal exception to the general rule of psychic positivity.

11. Conceived as a godly 'rise' from Man, the absolute ethereal concretism of the metaphysical context of time-space evolution, corresponding to most wavicles/least particles, is that in which psyche both precedes soma and exists in a ratio to it of 3:1, which is to say, three parts transcendentalism to one part idealism. Therefore it is a context in which truth and joy considerably predominate over falsity and woe, and in which somatic negativity should be regarded as the absolute corporeal exception to the general rule of psychic positivity.

FACTUAL PRIMACY VIS-À-VIS TRUTHFUL SUPREMACY

1. The distinction between devolution and evolution, objective and subjective realities, broadly divisible between the Cosmos and Nature on the one hand, and Man and the Cyborg on the other, is one in which things devolve from the absolute to the relative and evolve, on the opposite side of the gender fence, from the relative to the absolute, as from pre-worldly alpha to worldly alpha, and, in evolutionary opposition to this, from worldly omega to post-worldly omega.

2. But such a distinction is also one between primacy and supremacy, between the primacy of soma preceding psyche in corporeal concretism, and the supremacy of psyche preceding soma in ethereal concretism, and therefore between fact, accompanied by an abstracted fiction, on the one hand, and truth, accompanied by an abstracted illusion, on the other hand.

3. Thus facts and fictions correspond to primacy in their respective ways, with regard to a primary order of soma and a secondary order of psyche, while truths and illusions correspond to supremacy in their respective ways, as regarding a primary order of psyche and a secondary order of soma. For illusion can only be secondary, in soma, to fact, while, conversely, fiction can only be secondary, in psyche, to truth. The primary adversaries in each context are fact and truth, which is to say, free soma as a metachemical and/or chemical sensual reality, and free psyche as a physical and/or metaphysical sensible reality.

4. For in sensibility fact, together with its fictional abstraction, is likely to come under the hegemonic sway of males and accordingly be undermined, assuming a quasi-rationalistic stance, whereas in sensuality, by contrast, truth, together with its illusory abstraction, is likely to come under the hegemonic sway of females and accordingly be undermined - as in the cases of equivocal and unequivocal empiricism.

5. But just as the psychic positivity of 'truth' implies knowledge, whether finite or infinite, physical or metaphysical, so the somatic negativity of ‘fact’ implies weakness, whether infinite or finite, metachemical or chemical.

6. Finite truth is knowledge, and is generally so regarded, whereas infinite knowledge is truth, or truth per se, and therefore that which has been more usually conceived in terms peculiar to itself. A distinction between knowledge and truth is nevertheless one between man and God, between physical and metaphysical orders of male, the former effectively lower class, the latter their upper-class counterparts, for whom the element of air is more significant than that of vegetation (earth), and who can accordingly be identified with a transcendental as opposed to a humanistic order of psychic concretism, one which is essential rather than qualitative and therefore of the soul rather than the ego.

7. On the female side of the gender fence, however, infinite weakness is ugliness, and is generally so regarded, whereas finite ugliness is weakness, or weakness per se, and therefore that which has been more usually perceived in terms peculiar to itself. A distinction between ugliness and weakness is nevertheless one between the Devil and woman, between metachemical and chemical orders of female, the former effectively upper class, the latter their lower-class counterparts, for whom the element of water is more significant than that of fire, and who can accordingly be identified with a realistic as opposed to a materialistic order of somatic concretism, one which is quantitative rather than apparent and therefore of the spirit rather than the will.

8. Therefore the gender contrast between the primacy of free soma on the one hand and the supremacy of free psyche on the other, of the sensual hegemony of somatic negativity and the sensible hegemony of psychic positivity, is effectively between the weakness of things female and the knowledge of things male, as between will and spirit in relation to free soma, whether metachemical or chemical, and ego and soul in relation to free psyche, whether physical or metaphysical. That which, when objectively loyal to itself, is somatically free will always be weak, whether infinitely in ugliness or finitely in weakness per se, whereas that which, when subjectively loyal to itself, is psychically free will always be knowledgeable, whether finitely in knowledge per se or infinitely in truth.

9. Clearly the ugliness of infinite weakness and the truth of infinite knowledge will tend to be less prevalent, in the World, than the weakness of finite ugliness and the knowledge of finite truth, since the World, conceived in mass/volume terms, is by and large revelatory of a finite dichotomy between the relativity of corporeal concretism on the one hand, that of feminine females, and the relativity of ethereal concretism on the other hand, that of masculine males, who correspond to the Many as opposed to the Few and thus continue to be reflective, in different ways and to differing extents, of a lower-class bias, whether for spirit or for ego, as the watery or vegetative case may be.

10. Devils and gods can only, in the time/space nature of things hellish or heavenly, be exceptions to the general mass/volume rule, for the World, of women and men; though play a part in the nature and direction of the World at any given time they most assuredly can, whether in terms of its rulership by the former or of its leadership by the latter, neither of whom can prevail in equal measure within any given society or age.

11. My sympathy, as a philosopher, is and always will be with gods, since only divine males can lead the greater proportion of mankind from a standpoint based in truth, in the ethereal concretism of absolute psychic freedom, as germane to a metaphysical disposition, with especial applicability, as far as wisdom and holiness are concerned, to the sensible context of spaced space, wherein transcendental meditation has its godly throne, and the institutional development of such transcendentalism would require nothing less than the establishment, with general consent, of 'Kingdom Come', and thus of the subordination of worldly criteria, in 'world overcoming', to godly truth, as described in previous texts.

12. Certainly, criteria appertaining to the World will continue to exist, but more in relation to sensibility than to sensuality, given the need, justified by urban environmental conditioning, of male hegemonies in knowledge, both finite and, especially, infinite, in order to ensure that the negativity of somatic facts can never again dominate society after the fashion of secular modernity, but is undermined and effectively cast down upon the rubbish heap of alpha-slavering history, to be replaced, where females are concerned, by a greater respect for psychic positivity, if only in relation to the informing - and undermining - of sensible beauty and strength by knowledge in quasi-rationalistic vein - the opposite, in effect, of that informing - and corrupting - of knowledge by sensual strength and beauty or more usually, in relation to soma, by weakness and ugliness which typifies the experiences of empirical philosophers in those societies where somatic freedom was the only concept of freedom that really mattered, to the lasting detriment of male self-respect and the supremacy of moral sensibility.

PRIMACY AND SUPREMACY IN THE ELEMENTS

1. The metachemical axis of space-time, devolving from the photonic sensuality of spatial space to the photonic sensibility of repetitive time, as from photons to photinos, the metachemical elements and elementinos par excellence, is not only that in which materialism predominates, in soma, over fundamentalism, its psychic abstraction, in the most particle/least wavicle ratio of 3:1, making for a very negative overall situation, but also that in which the will of absolute primal doing, being paramount in infinite weakness, or ugliness, and the spirit of absolute primal giving that issues, in infinite humility, or hatred, from this will together constitute the corporeal concreteness of metachemically free soma from whose power and glory flows, in ethereal abstraction, the bound psyche characterized by the instinctualized contentment of the absolute primal being of love on the one hand, that of the metachemical id, or metachemically unconscious soul, and the spiritualized form of the absolute primal taking of beauty on the other hand, that of the metachemical superego, or metachemically superconscious ego.

2. The chemical axis of volume-mass, devolving from the electronic sensuality of volumetric volume to the electronic sensibility of massed mass, as from electrons to electrinos, the chemical elements and elememtinos par excellence, is not only that in which realism predominates, in soma, over nonconformism, its psychic abstraction, in the more (relative to most) particle/less (relative to least) wavicle ratio of approximately 2½:1½, making for a pretty negative overall situation, but also that in which the spirit of relative primal giving, being paramount in finite hatred, or humility, and the will of relative primal doing that precedes, in finite ugliness, or weakness, this spirit together constitute the corporeal concreteness of chemically free soma from whose glory and power flows, in ethereal abstraction, the bound psyche characterized by the spiritualized form of the relative primal taking of strength on the one hand, that of the chemical superego, or chemically superconscious ego, and the instinctualized contentment of the relative primal being of pride on the other hand, that of the chemical id, or chemically unconscious soul.

3. The physical axis of mass-volume, evolving from the neutronic if not deuteronic sensuality of massive mass to the neutronic if not deuteronic sensibility of voluminous volume, as from neutrons and/or deuterons to neutrinos and/or deuterinos, the physical elements and elementinos par excellence, is not only that in which humanism predominates or can predominate, in psyche, over naturalism, its somatic abstraction, in the more (relative to most) wavicle/less (relative to least) particle ratio of approximately 2½:1½, making for a pretty positive overall situation (especially, one could argue, in relation to a sensibly deuteronic bias), but also that in which the ego of relative supreme taking, being paramount in finite truth, or knowledge, and the soul of relative supreme being that accompanies, in finite joy, or pleasure, this ego together constitute the ethereal concreteness of physically free psyche from whose form and contentment flows, in corporeal abstraction, the bound soma characterized by the intellectualized power of the relative supreme doing of ignorance on the one hand, that of the physical will, or physically natural will, and the emotionalized glory of the relative supreme giving of pain on the other hand, that of the physical subspirit, or physically subnatural spirit.

4. The metaphysical axis of time-space, evolving from the protonic sensuality of sequential time to the protonic sensibility of spaced space, as from protons to protinos, the metaphysical elements and elementinos par excellence, is not only that in which transcendentalism predominates, in psyche, over idealism, its somatic abstraction, in the most wavicle/least particle ratio of 3:1, making for a very positive overall situation, but also that in which the soul of absolute supreme being, being paramount in infinite pleasure, or joy, and the ego of absolute supreme taking that precedes, in infinite knowledge, or truth, this soul together constitute the ethereal concreteness of metaphysically free psyche from whose contentment and form flows, in corporeal abstraction, the bound soma characterized by the emotionalized glory of the absolute supreme giving of woe on the one hand, that of the metaphysical subspirit, or metaphysically subnatural spirit, and the intellectualized power of the absolute supreme doing of illusory falsity on the other hand, that of the metaphysical will, or metaphysically natural will.

5. Consequently, in overall female terms, metachemistry provides evidence of an elemental context (fiery) in which absolute primal doing and giving precede and considerably predominate over absolute primal being and taking, as metachemical will and spirit over metachemical soul (id, or unconscious soul) and ego (superego, or superconscious ego), or ugliness and hatred over love and beauty, whereas chemistry provides evidence of an elemental context (watery) in which relative primal giving and doing precede and substantially predominate over relative primal taking and being, as chemical spirit and will over chemical ego (superego, or superconscious ego) and soul (id, or unconscious soul), or humility and weakness over strength and pride.

6. In overall male terms, by contrast, physics provides evidence of an elemental context (vegetative) in which relative supreme taking and being precede and substantially predominate over relative supreme doing and giving, as physical ego and soul over physical will (conscious or, rather, natural will) and spirit (subconscious or, rather, subnatural spirit), or knowledge and pleasure over ignorance and pain, whereas metaphysics provides evidence of an elemental context (airy) in which absolute supreme being and taking precede and considerably predominate over absolute supreme giving and doing, as metaphysical soul and ego over metaphysical spirit (subnatural spirit) and will (natural will), or joy and truth over woe and falsity.

7. Just as metachemistry is the elemental context of absolute primal doing par excellence and chemistry the elemental context of relative primal giving par excellence, so physics is the elemental context of relative supreme taking par excellence and metaphysics the elemental context of absolute supreme being par excellence.

8. Absolute primal doing has reference to the Devil conceived in primary terms as the will per se, whether with regard to the sensual metachemical context of spatial space, wherein one can speak of Devil-the-Evil-Mother, or with regard to the sensible metachemical context of repetitive time, wherein one can speak of Devil-the-Good-Mother.

9. Relative primal giving has reference to Purgatory conceived in primary terms as spirit per se, whether with regard to the sensual chemical context of volumetric volume, wherein one can speak of the Clear Spirit of Purgatory, or with regard to the sensible chemical context of massed mass, wherein one can speak of the Unclear Spirit of Purgatory.

10. Relative supreme taking has reference to Man conceived in primary terms as ego per se, whether with regard to the sensual physical context of massive mass, wherein one can speak of Man-the-Unwise-Father, or with regard to the sensible physical context of voluminous volume, wherein one can speak of Man-the-Wise-Father.

11. Absolute supreme being has reference to Heaven conceived in primary terms as soul per se, whether with regard to the sensual metaphysical context of sequential time, wherein one can speak of Heaven the Unholy Soul, or with regard to the sensible metaphysical context of spaced space, wherein one can speak of Heaven-the-Holy-Soul.

12. Metachemistry affords evidence, in the corporeal objectivity of space-time devolution, of an absolutely primal elemental context in which the ugliness of a primary devil and the hatred of a primary hell considerably prevail over the love of a secondary hell and the beauty of a secondary devil, whereas chemistry affords evidence, in the corporeal objectivity of volume-mass devolution, of a relatively primal elemental context in which the humility of a primary purgatory and the weakness of a primary woman substantially prevail over the strength of a secondary woman and the pride of a secondary purgatory.

13. Physics affords evidence, in the ethereal subjectivity of mass-volume evolution, of a relatively supreme elemental context in which the knowledge of a primary man and the pleasure of a primary earth substantially prevail over the ignorance of a secondary man and the pain of a secondary earth, whereas metaphysics affords evidence, in the ethereal subjectivity of time-space evolution, of an absolutely supreme elemental context in which the joy of a primary heaven and the truth of a primary god considerably prevail over the woe of a secondary heaven and the falsity of a secondary god.

14. Therefore, in overall terms, metachemistry is the elemental context of the will, and hence of the Devil, par excellence; chemistry is the elemental context of the spirit, and hence of purgatory, par excellence; physics is the elemental context of the ego, and hence of man, par excellence; and metaphysics is the elemental context of the soul, and hence of Heaven, par excellence.

15. The objective elements, being female, attest to a somatic predominance due to a particle hegemony in both will and spirit, the apparent and quantitative attributes of free soma, in which corporeal primacy precedes ethereal primacy as the factually concrete precondition of a fictionally abstract extrapolation.

16. The subjective elements, being male, attest to a psychic predominance due to a wavicle hegemony in both ego and soul, the qualitative and essential attributes of free psyche, in which ethereal supremacy precedes corporeal supremacy as the truthfully concrete precondition of an illusory abstract extrapolation.

DIVISIONS IN BOTH THE SELF AND THE NOT-SELF

1. The male self, as we have seen, is both physical and metaphysical, qualitative in egocentric form and essential in psychocentric contentment, and therefore divisible between the brain stem and the spinal cord, the former of which corresponds to its physical aspect and the latter of which to its metaphysical aspect, so that even in terms of the self we can distinguish if not between 'matter' and 'mind', as between soma and psyche, then certainly between 'mind' that is less psychic and 'mind' that is more psychic, as between ego and soul, with the one more dependent on the physiology of the self than the other, given its correlation with more (relative to most) wavicles/less (relative to least) particles as opposed, in the metaphysical self, to most wavicles/least particles.

2. Therefore even the male self has a physiological dimension, which accords with both the brain stem and the spinal cord, except that it is structured in such a way as to be the seat of psyche and subordinate, in consequence, to psychological functioning, whether in the molecular relativity of egocentric form or in the elemental absolutism, as it were, of psychocentric contentment, wherein the ratio of psychic to somatic, or quasi-somatic, factors is so one-sided as to permit of a 3:1 inference in terms of most wavicles/least particles, and therefore most transcendental joy and least idealistic woe.

3. But if the self is so structured that complete psychic independence of some kind or degree of somatic support is inconceivable, then what can prevent us from conceiving of some such division, stopping short of an outright dichotomy between soma and psyche, as existing in the not-self, with specific reference, in this instance, to the metaphysical not-self, be it sensual and aural or sensible and respiratory. There must be a sense in which even soma contains at least some degree of quasi-psychic functioning or capacity, and never more so than in the context which we have equated with most wavicles/least particles, even if the wavicle aspect of it has been identified primarily with psyche proper and the particle aspect of it with soma proper - namely with either the ears/airwaves or the lungs/breath.

4. Therefore metaphysics would seem to be that context in which the 'most wavicles' accords with the spiritual aspect of metaphysical soma, viz. airwaves and/or breath, and the 'least particles' with the wilful or instinctual aspect of it, viz. the ears and/or lungs, allowing for the fact that no one elemental context is exclusively the property, in organic reality, of only one subatomic element, even if what it is exists as such primarily because of the predominance of a particular subatomic element, be it protonic, as here, or neutronic or even deuteronic, as in the relatively less psychic context of physics.

5. Be that as it may, we can conclude, I think, that the soma and the psyche of a given elemental context tend to mirror each other, and that as psyche proper is divisible between particles and wavicles, somatic and psychic factors, so soma proper is likewise divisible on a similar basis, in consequence of which neither psyche nor soma is ever - not even in comparatively absolutist contexts like metaphysics - exclusively any one thing but a combination, to greater or lesser extents, of both somatic and psychic factors - soma proper and what might be called quasi-psyche being characteristic of the not-self and, conversely, psyche proper and quasi-soma characterizing the self.

6. For soma proper will always be primarily of the not-self and psyche proper of the self. Yet without degrees, proportionate to their elemental integrity, be it physical or metaphysical, of both quasi-psychic and quasi-somatic factors, neither would be able to relate to or communicate with the other, since while soma may support psyche in the self, the psychic predominance of that self would be unable to prevail either egocentrically or psychocentrically upon the corresponding not-self without some intermediate channel which enabled soma proper to respond to the commands coming down 'from above', i.e. from psyche proper. And that intermediate channel is precisely the quasi-psyche of the not-self, which acts as a liaison agent or channel between psyche and soma, allowing the latter to carry out the conscious or subconscious instructions, duly transmuted along natural or subnatural lines, which the former has authorized.

7. And in relaying such information, be it qualitative or essential, formal or contented, the quasi-psyche of soma proper transforms that soma into a mirror image of the psyche, endowing the will with a conscious-like capacity which we have equated with natural will, or natwill, and the spirit with a subconscious-like capacity which has been equated with subnatural spirit, or subspirit, so that in neither the physical nor the metaphysical contexts is soma free to be either unnatural or supernatural, properly instinctual or properly spiritual, but is conditioned by both the ego and the soul of free psyche to function along lines which mirror, from a bound standpoint, that freedom and maintain a wavicle hegemony, be it relative in physics or absolute in metaphysics, more (relative to less) wavicles/less (relative to least) particles or most wavicles/least particles.

8. Now obviously, in the physical context of masculine vegetativeness, it is the ego which humanistically prevails upon somatic will, molecular wavicles upon elemental particles, quality upon appearance, knowledge upon ignorance, maintaining naturalistic determinism, since physics is characterized by an egocentric hegemony or fulcrum of selfhood in which the brain stem takes precedence over the spinal cord, even to the extent of effectively excluding or at least minimizing the latter, such joy or happiness as is soulfully experienced usually being finite and therefore more intimately associated, through pleasure, with the physiology of the self than would otherwise, as in the metaphysical course of psychocentric selfhood, be the case.

9. With the metaphysical context of divine or, rather, sublime airiness, however, it is the soul which transcendentally prevails upon somatic spirit, elemental wavicles upon molecular particles, essence upon quantity, joy upon woe, maintaining idealistic determinism, since metaphysics is characterized by a psychocentric, or soulful, hegemony or fulcrum of selfhood in which the spinal cord takes precedence over the brain stem, even to the extent of effectively excluding or at least minimizing the latter, such consciousness as is egocentrically experienced being proportionately infinite and therefore more intimately associated, through truth, or infinite knowledge, with the psychology of the self than would otherwise, as in the physical course of egocentric selfhood, be the case.

10. The distinction between the Physical and the Metaphysical, to the extent that we allow ourselves the categorical luxury of upholding one in the first place, is effectively between manly, or masculine, males and godly, or divine, males, which is equivalent to one between lower- and upper-class males - the former, for reasons of environmental and social conditioning, generally more prevalent than the latter both now and traditionally, and therefore enabling us to distinguish, somewhat academically, between the mass-volume Many and the time-space Few, as, in psychic terms, between humanism and transcendentalism.

11. Whether this would continue to be the case in a post-worldly and even otherworldly social environment like 'Kingdom Come' must remain subject to dispute; though I, for one, would anticipate the development of fewer men and more gods, whether this resulted in a different relationship of 'many' to 'few' or, indeed, in the transformation of life to such an extent that there were more transcendentalists than humanists and therefore a new order, paradoxically, of the Many.

12. Doubtless the cyborgization of life, as I think I described it earlier on, would permit of an enhancement of godly potential to an extent whereby distinctions between men and gods no longer obtained, all or most men having become gods. For if equality, or the concept thereof, can come down from the alpha heavens to the alpha earth, there is certainly no reason, short of technological or ideological incompetence, why it should not rise up from the omega earth to the omega heavens, as indeed it would surely have to do in the event of world-overcoming in 'Kingdom Come' and a whole new emphasis upon space as opposed to volume or mass, even given the case that genuine equalitarianism is only possible between those in any given context, be it godly or manly, rather than across either class or gender divisions, and that even this specific qualification relating to equality should be distinguished from notions like equality of opportunity, which have little or no bearing on the outcome of things, like who wins a race or reaches the top in any given profession, but simply provide a common starting point for people who, in the class/gender nature of things, will have diverse motives and abilities.

13. I do not propose to suggest that everyone should become as gods, for that would strike me as overly utopian and much too partisan to satisfy the requirements of a viable social structure, which my concept of a triadic Beyond has all along been intended to advance, but rather that even with the inevitability of some social - not to mention gender - distinctions in the future, we become more aware of the extent to which distinctions between the Many and the Few are not set in an eternal mould but subject to flux and redefinition, according to both environmental and ideological circumstances.

14. Certainly, Social Transcendentalism would not be true to its otherworldly mission if it failed to envisage a situation in which more people were given the opportunity to become gods or godly in the context of 'Kingdom Come' than could ever obtain, or indeed ever has obtained, in the World, meaning the context in which democratic sovereignty was the sovereign norm and the People were left, by and large, to their own mass/volume devices. Social Transcendentalism, by contrast, holds out the prospect of religious sovereignty, and religious sovereignty would confer a whole new pattern of rights and responsibilities from what currently still exists in the so-called 'free world'.

THE MANY AND THE ONE

1. I distinguished above, if rather sketchily, between devolution from the alpha heavens to the alpha earth and evolution from the omega earth to the omega heavens, and it seems to me that such a contention, amounting to our old dichotomy between the Cosmos and Nature on the one hand, that of female objectivity, and Man and the Cyborg, or Civilization and God on the other hand, that of male subjectivity, lends itself to notions if not of the Few and the Many, then arguably of the One and the Many, since the former distinction would appear to have a specifically human correlation, as for instance between a privileged elite and an underprivileged or exploited generality, whereas the latter distinction seems to be wider in scope, even to the extent of embracing the as yet theoretical entirety of devolutionary and evolutionary possibilities.

2. However, even with a distinction between the Few and the Many, we have to allow that such a concept is not static but subject to flux, so that privilege does not necessarily or invariably attach to the one category and want of privilege, or exploitation, to the other. Each category can be privileged or underprivileged according to environmental or social circumstances, and we may well find instances, such as war, in which the generality is more in time/space, if with regard to the diabolism of space-time devolution, than in mass/volume.

3. In worldly contexts, however, it is usually the case that the generality will be in mass/volume, whether with regard to the femininity of volume-mass devolution or, alternatively, the masculinity of mass-volume evolution, and that such a generality may well, in the democratic nature of things worldly, constitute a privileged class in terms of the prevailing standards of the day.

4. When we come, on the other hand, to distinctions between the One and the Many, it is a different matter, for this is not simply how society is arranged in social or opportunistic terms, but rather a more elementally-conditioned reality, or series of realities, that would seem to proceed on a devolutionary basis from the Many to the One, as from the fiery Cosmos to watery Nature, alpha heavens to alpha earth, and thence, in contradistinction to this, on an evolutionary basis from the Many to the One, as from vegetative nurtures, or civilizations, to the airy Universe, or universal omnipresence of air, omega earths to the omega heaven.

5. Therefore from the alpha heavens to the alpha earth, as from fiery pluralism to watery monism, and from the omega earths to the omega heaven, as from vegetative pluralism to airy monism - a devolutionary/evolutionary duality between female objectivity on the one hand and male subjectivity on the other, the competitive pluralism of fiery crime leading to the co-operative monism of watery punishment, as from the objective Many to the objective One, and the collectivistic pluralism of vegetative sin leading to the individualistic monism of airy grace, as from the subjective Many to the subjective One, call it the Omega Point or Heaven or God or 'Kingdom Come', or what you will.

6. Contrary therefore to the 'Big Bang' concept of the origins of the Universe or, rather, Cosmos (which, in conjunction with words like 'universe', seems to me all too indicative of a tendency, especially prominent among female-dominated peoples, or matriarchies, to divinize the diabolic), we should rather allow for a pluralistic explanation of the Cosmos, both initially and subsequently, and perceive in the development from polytheism to monotheism a corollary of the 'fall' from the Cosmos to Nature, as from the metachemical Many to the chemical One, stellar pluralism to oceanic monism, with the latter inevitably pulling rank on the former as the earth began to supplant the heavens in the overall hierarchy of things, and the punishment of crime came to take feminine precedence over the criminal punishments or punishing criminality of the diabolic.

7. But the myth of the Adamic revolt against the taboo of the forbidden 'tree of knowledge' in the 'Garden of Eden' would suggest that, whatever the motive, a split from the chemical Oneness of watery Nature was in the offing, and thenceforward a pluralistic alternative to that Oneness signalled, in some worldly sense, a new fall, as from watery monism to vegetative pluralism, from a context dominated, in somatic vein, by finite ugliness, or weakness, to one that would increasingly become associated with the development of knowledge and, hence, the search for truth, and thus of an evolutionary alternative, in male subjectivity, to the devolutionary punishments of objective Nature.

8. Such an earthly fall from watery monism into vegetative pluralism we can characterize as sinful, though the preconditions of sin in airy grace would already have been in place, given the precedence of soma by psyche on the male, or subjective, side of life and the inevitability of graceful redemption for those who repented of their sins and sought an accommodation with God, meaning ultimately the airy context of sensible metaphysics, but more usually embracing, in Western civilization, the vegetative context of sensible physics in its psychic mode, and therefore what I would call Man-the-Wise-Father.

9. For if the vegetative pluralism of Man is sinful and a fall not only from the airy monism of God but, in worldly terms, from the punishing watery monism of Woman, as of objective Nature, then the struggle for civilization and knowledge in the face of natural and weak conventions or traditions can only be an uphill one, constantly thwarted by reactionary currents that strive to drag Man back and down towards the earthly dominion of watery monism from which, in post-Adamic vegetativeness, he had revolted in the interests of knowledge and self-discovery.

10. The evolutionary endeavour is beset with devolutionary constraints and oppositions which it must vanquish if it is to prevail and make the world safe for civilization and the triumph, through knowledge, of Man, who yet continues to exist, by and large, in a sinful shortfall from the grace of true Godliness, no matter how much his opposition to the punishing monism of traditional Woman may have been shored up by such manly grace as, through Christianity, he could muster in the teeth of his own pluralistic shortcomings.

11. But Woman is no longer quite the monistic threat to his earthly pluralism as was formerly the case, but is herself being pulled over the earthly dividing line, as it were, between monistic tradition, exemplified by maternal duty, and pluralistic modernity, exemplified by career, so that, pseudo-cosmic exceptions to the general rule notwithstanding, she increasingly acts like Man in his pluralistic defiance, through civilization, of monistic traditions.

12. The male side of life is gradually gaining the upper hand, it would appear, over its female adversary, traditionally given to the objective monism of watery weakness, and what could be called the polydeism of masculine knowledge, as of Man, standing defiantly aloof, as it must, from both polytheistic and monotheistic traditions, would seem ready to rise towards the monodeism, as it were, of God, as of the Cyborg, and the supersession of vegetative pluralism by airy monism, of the subjective Many by the subjective One, the Omega Point and goal of all evolutionary striving, in which the universal replaces or, at any rate, upstages the personal, as psychic freedom comes to an absolutist consummation.

13. For psychic freedom is what evolution is all about, freedom for the male from being tyrannized over, contrary to his gender interests, by female criteria owing more, in the objective precedence of psyche by soma, to somatic freedom and the correlative enslavement of psyche to the corporeal dominion of both will and spirit, power and glory, to the lasting detriment of 'mind', which is to say, of free ego and free soul, knowledge and joy, form and contentment, ethereally independent of somatic dominion.

14. The time has at last come, with the progress of free thought to Messianic extents, for male-oriented mankind to rise up, democratically and rationalistically, from the subjective Many to the subjective One, Man to the Cyborg, physical collectivism to metaphysical individualism, ego to soul, and thus return to the heavenly heights from which their female counterparts objectively fell as from the objective Many to the objective One, the Cosmos to Nature, metachemical competitiveness to chemical co-operativeness, will to spirit.

15. The evolutionary struggle would now seem to be entering its most crucial and critical stage, a stage which will determine whether grace ultimately prevails over sin and godliness over manliness, or whether, in all-too-humanistic fashion, Man will continue to remain the measure of all things and all things accordingly bow to his physical limitations, as to vegetative pluralism and the reign of democracy, of worldly sinfulness still beset by the twin evils of punishment and crime, natural and cosmic objectivity, if arguably to a lesser naturalistic and/or more transmutably artificial extent than in the more corporeal past.

16. Only the reign of airy monism can restore life to the eternal heights, albeit to a universal grace which will be as far removed from the cosmic criminality of polytheistic pluralism as is possible for any evolutionary reality - the omega point of Eternal Life as opposed to the alpha points of Eternal Death, psychic absolutism as opposed to somatic absolutism, most wavicles/least particles as opposed to most particles/least wavicles, God or, rather, Heaven as opposed to Hell or, rather, the Devil.

17. For the alpha-most reality is characterized by corporeal absolutism, which is of the Devil, whereas the omega-most reality is characterized by ethereal absolutism, which is of Heaven, and between the somatic freedom of the former and the psychic freedom of the latter, between infinite weakness and infinite happiness, ugliness and joy, there is absolutely nothing in common.

18. Verily, what began in the corporeal Many must end in the ethereal One, having passed through and beyond both the corporeal One and the ethereal Many. In between materialism and transcendentalism, realism and humanism run their diurnal course, but the redemption of Man is set on course for Eternity, and only Social Transcendentalism can lead free psyche beyond the finite limitations of physics to the infinity of metaphysics, wherein the saved self of the metaphysically Elect will find its joyful redemption in the beingful supremacy of the One, Heaven-the-Holy-Soul, for all eternity, and even those who, for class or gender reasons, are less than metaphysical will find a new lease of life or death in the lower tiers of the triadic Beyond.

19. For the triadic Beyond lies beyond the World as the guarantor of deliverance from crimes or sins to the punishments or graces of 'Kingdom Come', should the People opt, in some paradoxical future election, for religious sovereignty and thus for that which would deliver them from the reign of Man to the reign of God, whose 'Kingdom' is not of this world but otherworldly in its ethereal dedication to the One.

THE TUNE AND DANCE OF THE MANY

1. At the beginning of PART THREE I gave the impression that terms like noumenal and phenomenal were equivalent to ethereal and corporeal, whereas the abstract and the concrete had to be regarded in a different light. On reconsideration, however, it seems to me that a distinction should continue to be drawn between the noumenal nature of time/space, whether in relation to space-time devolution or to time-space evolution, metachemistry or metaphysics, and the phenomenal nature of volume/mass, whether in relation to volume-mass devolution or to mass-volume evolution, chemistry or physics.

2. Therefore my customary use, going back several years, of the terms 'noumenal' and 'phenomenal' should be reinstated to enable us to distinguish contexts in time and space from their counterparts in mass and volume, irrespective of whether those contexts happen to be primarily corporeal or primarily ethereal, and regardless of whether they happen to coincide with concrete or abstract standings.

3. For if we proceed on this basis we shall have terms which enable us to distinguish planes and axes from subatomic structures, as well as each of these from the female gender precedence, as it were, of psyche by soma or, in male contexts, of soma by psyche, as we proceed on devolutionary terms from the noumenal corporeal concretion and ethereal abstraction of metachemistry to the phenomenal corporeal concretion and ethereal abstraction of chemistry, as from most particles/least wavicles to more (relative to most) particles/less (relative to least) wavicles, and thence, on an evolutionary basis, from the phenomenal ethereal concretion and corporeal abstraction of physics to the noumenal ethereal concretion and corporeal abstraction of metaphysics, as from more (relative to most) wavicles/less (relative to least) particles to most wavicles/least particles.

4. And as we proceed on this elemental basis from alpha absolutism to omega absolutism via alpha relativity and omega relativity, we shall find a devolutionary descent from the Many to the One, metachemical pluralism to chemical monism, and an evolutionary ascent from the Many to the One, physical pluralism to metaphysical monism, as from crime to punishment on the objective, or female, side of the historical gender divide, and from sin to grace on its subjective, or male, side, the side not of doing and giving par excellence, power and glory, but of taking and being par excellence, form and contentment.

5. Yet, in general terms, one can speak of a devolution from evil to good, as from competitiveness to co-operativeness, crime to punishment, and of an evolution, by contrast, from folly to wisdom, as from collectivism to individualism, sin to grace, as fire is superseded by water, and vegetation by air, the latter of which has still to come properly to pass in terms of the overcoming of Man by God, of vegetative pluralism by airy monism, and the triumph of metaphysics over the physical world as the guarantor of otherworldly redemption in grace. For as long as Man remains sinfully in the driving seat of life, physical collectivism will continue to have its way at the expense of metaphysical individualism, and economics continue to take precedence over religion.

6. Certainly it is appropriate to evolutionary progress that neither science nor politics, metachemical competitiveness nor chemical co-operativeness, should remain chiefly representative of the age or characteristic of a given society, since neither are proper to the male side of life, but indicative of devolutionary regression from noumenal objectivity to phenomenal objectivity, crime to punishment, and therefore of corporeal hegemonies in which soma precedes psyche and the State is accordingly free.

7. Only contexts in which the Church is free, complements of ethereal hegemonies in either physical collectivism or metaphysical individualism, can deliver the prospect of evolutionary progress from phenomenal subjectivity to noumenal subjectivity, sin to grace, and thus the overcoming of Man in the godly Cyborg, as Man previously overcame Woman and Woman overcame, through corporeal monism, the corporeal pluralism of the Devil, for which read: the criminal audacities of cosmic science.

8. But Man did not overcome Woman without paying a heavy price, part of which was a deal with the Devil and the technological rejuvenation of science in terms of artificial manifestations of metachemical pluralism, so that while economics may have progressed at the expense of politics, it did so in cahoots with science, which continues even now to call the infernal tune to which Man must dance, complements of the money to be made from its act.

9. Vegetative pluralism did a deal with fiery pluralism at the expense of watery monism, and for those who especially relate to and periodically renew this deal, who would traditionally be more Protestant than Catholic, and contemporaneously more American than European, the prospects for airy monism are virtually non-existent, since vegetative pluralism is not exactly in a position to be redeemed from sin to grace, folly to wisdom, when contractually bound to the fiery pluralism of the Devil, the criminal evil of which, unrestrained by the punishing goodness of watery monism, viz. Woman, is freer than ever before and all the more lucrative to Man in consequence.

10. I believe it was Faust who conducted a similar deal with the Devil in Goethe's classic work of the same name, and Faust came to grief in view of the extent to which he had sold his soul and thrown away his birthright as a man, a male, to defer to God and be elevated by God beyond the sinfulness of the vegetative world towards the gracefulness of the airy Other World.

11. When one turns one's back on God or Godliness, one has to make one's own masculine way in the world, and it is not long before that way, caught up in a struggle with Woman, is obliged to sell out to the Devil, since Woman can only be mastered by Man if he makes a pact with the Devil and, between them, they outmanoeuvre politics and make the world safe for science and economics, for crime and sin, for the Many, both evil and foolish. The good, divided and ruled by Man and the Devil, are no longer in a position to punish either the one or the other, but become active, if reluctant, participants in the rule of crime and sin, science and economics, while the wise are marginalized and excluded, as a religiously anachronistic threat to the secular status quo.

12. Small wonder that the world becomes the plaything of the Devil, as of the noumenally corporeal concretion of metachemical pluralism. For this is highly profitable to a physical pluralism which no longer defers to humanistic grace, much less metaphysical monism but, having turned away many centuries ago from any such pretensions, finds itself in a position to undermine and defeat chemical monism in the interests of economic freedom, which is to say, freedom for economics to dance to the latest tune which science comes up with from the criminally free vantage-point of metachemical evil. The tune, needless to say, is completely soulless in its materialistic structures, its rhythmic intensities, and the dance is the impulsive behaviouristic reactions of godless automata. We need, and deserve, a better world!

RETURNING (PROGRESSIVELY) TO THE ONE

1. I have maintained all along that such a better world, veritably otherworldly in its metaphysical bias, is possible and can be developed, although it will require the repudiation, democratically and peaceably, of the morally bankrupt one which wears an economic face and bows down only to the money-generating power of the Devil, as to metachemical pluralism. For the worship of materialism (science) has replaced the worship of realism (politics) and even of naturalism (economics), and history has shown that the worship of idealism (the false religion of fascism), which stemmed from classical economics and an unduly naturalistic inversion of physics, is no solution to the dilemma in which mankind finds itself, complements of the Faustian pact between Man and the Devil at the expense of Woman and God.

2. Worship of any description is proof of a somatic hegemony to which psyche defers in the absence of faith in itself, a faith which is all the more lacking in contexts where soma is, in any case, hegemonic over psyche, as in those elemental contexts characterized by corporeal concretism, and where the ratio of negative to positive factors is always either considerably or substantially in favour of the former, with predictably materialistic or realistic results!

3. It is not the worship of the State by the Church, of state freedom by church determinism, that is required, if society is to escape the clutches of the Devil and mankind be set on course for an accommodation, directly or indirectly, with God, but the subordination of the State to the Church, and not in the traditional Christian context of Roman Catholicism, wherein naturalism deferred, if rather imperfectly, to humanism, and humanistic devotion entailed not so much the forgiveness of physical sins (naturalism) as the cultivation of physical grace, if only in terms of the egocentric sensibility of humanistic cogitation. Rather is it in the revolutionary Messianic context of Social Transcendentalism that 'the State' should bow to 'the Church', wherein idealism will defer to transcendentalism, and transcendental devotion entail not so much the forgiveness of metaphysical sins (idealism) as the cultivation of metaphysical grace, the grace that revolves around the psychocentric, or soulful, sensibility of transcendental meditation, and in which the victory of soul over ego is proclaimed through the lasting presence of heavenly joy, through the Oneness, in sum, of Heaven-the-Holy-Soul.

4. Man has, it is true, got the upper hand over Woman, meaning of that chemical monism typifying objective Nature, but the majority of females are not of the metachemical persuasion which has been set free in the course of the general co-option of females to vegetative pluralism and would not, in the nature of things feminine, relish the spectacle or reality of that freedom criminally raining down from above over the generality of males and females alike, but would want, I feel confident, to use the gains accruing to vegetative pluralism to join with the generality of non- or even anti-capitalist men in voting, at the opportune moment, for religious sovereignty and the right to religious self-determination in what has been described as the triadic Beyond of 'Kingdom Come'.

5. For denied ample scope for punishing crime, the majority of females, or women proper, have little to gain from the sinful folly of vegetative pluralism, but would be better off in a society structured in such a way that a new order of chemical monism was possible on the basis of the subordination of physical pluralism to metaphysical monism, and the relegation of metachemical pluralism, sensibly transmuted, to the administrative aside of the triadic structure in question. For in such a society it would not be vegetation and fire that were 'calling the shots', to the exclusion or marginalization of water and air, but, on the contrary, these latter elements to the marginalization of vegetation (within the triadic Beyond) and the exclusion of fire (from the triadic Beyond), so that monism rather than pluralism was hegemonic, and the Many had returned to the One ... if not directly, in chemical or metaphysical terms, then indirectly in physical deference towards it.

6. Yet this time it would not be the phenomenally corporeal Oneness of chemical monism that was hegemonic in overall terms, but the noumenally ethereal Oneness of metaphysical monism, the Oneness, in sum, of heavenly soul which lies beyond the worldly One and its purgatorial spirit, a Oneness in which the ethereal is concrete and predominates over its corporeal abstraction in the ratio of 3:1, making for a very positive outcome, one centred in joy and vindicating truth.

7. The purgatorial spirit of the worldly Oneness of chemical monism was always rather humble, and this humility was the source of its own undoing and subsequent humiliation at the hands of triumphant knowledge, since knowledge could - and did initially - boast positive correlations which spirit per se was unable to match, being quantitatively somatic and therefore germane to corporeal concretion in its chemical mode.

8. But knowledge itself presently 'went to the dogs' of somatic negativity, both within the physical pluralism of vegetative naturalism, wherein ignorance began to rear its quasi-empirical head in paradoxically naturalistic vein, and, across the gender divide, in the chemical monism of watery realism, wherein weakness proclaimed the phenomenal manifestation of empiricism, and in the metachemical pluralism of fiery materialism, wherein ugliness rode out of its somatic darkness to proclaim the noumenal manifestation of empiricism, the unequivocally empirical absolutism which wears a scientific mask and still plays havoc with the contemporary world as it dances to the Devil's evil tune.

9. Knowledge, patently, can no longer be trusted to lead anywhere godly, least of all on sensibly metaphysical terms, but has both corrupted itself through naturalism (not to mention its romantic and fascist offshoots in idealism) and been corrupted and vitiated through, first, realism and, then, materialism, which currently has what passes for knowledge firmly in its diabolic grasp, so that there is nowhere else for knowledge to go and nothing else for it to do than defer, in worshipful slavery, to the hate-inspiring ugliness of industrial and technological materialism.

10. Obviously something better and higher than such knowledge is required, if mankind are to be released from this sorry state of pluralistic affairs and granted the opportunity to rise to a new monism, superior to that which Man dethroned in his hell-bent obsession with earthly riches. And that something, needless to say, is Truth, is the infinite knowledge which pertains not to Man but to God, to God-the-Wise-Father, whose spokesperson proclaims it through the ideological philosophy of Social Transcendentalism and offers mankind the prospect of a new society based around religious sovereignty and the rejection of worldly sin and crime, of the pluralistic conspiracy in physical collectivism and metachemical competitiveness of that sinfulness and criminality which, between them, have squeezed the chemical co-operativeness of goodly punishment out of the worldly frame and reduced life to the foolish dance of an evil tune which, in the audacity of its scientific liberties, is the sworn enemy of otherworldly wisdom and whatever leads beyond the competitive-oriented collectivism of worldly folly to the monistic heights of metaphysical individualism.

11. God's ways are not the ways of Man but infinitely superior, in the wisdom of a noumenally ethereal concretion, to those ways, not least in terms of the subordination of metaphysical soma to metaphysical psyche, of idealism to transcendentalism, and the consequent development of truth in the interests of joy, of infinite knowledge in the interests of infinite pleasure, and the psychocentric redemption of the godly ego through that self-enhancement which is commensurate with the heavenly soul, the raison d'etre of genuine religion.

12. There are enough people in the world now who would want an alternative to what Man, in money-grubbing partnership with the Devil, has to offer, and they include, besides the generality of women who have been co-opted to - and corrupted by - the sinfulness of vegetative pluralism, the generality of the Dispossessed and Exploited in all walks and shades of life, for whom the prospect of a democratically-mandated deliverance from both the crimes and sins of the pluralistic world to the punishments and graces of 'Kingdom Come' would be the monistic redemption which they have been hoping and praying for all along, the guarantee that, with the institutional development of the triadic Beyond, neither evil nor folly, violence nor greed, would ever again play a major role in life, to the detriment of all that is most precious, both spiritually and, above all, soulfully.

13. Therefore I say unto you, join with me in bringing to pass this new order of society which can only happen on the basis, come judgement, of a majority mandate for religious sovereignty, and together we can triumph over the forces of pluralistic shame and all who would hold us back from the metaphysical One, from the goal and destiny of the Righteous in the joyful resurrection of Heaven-the-Holy-Soul. Join with me, and even if your predestined place in the triadic Beyond is not sensibly metaphysical but sensibly physical or chemical, still you will know a new order of wisdom or goodness commensurate with Eternity and the elevation and leadership of mankind in general by the noumenally ethereal concrete monism of primary God and Heaven, which is both the beginning and the end of metaphysical psyche, of omega absolutism, in the truth and joy of ultimate wisdom and holiness.

PART FOUR

CONTRARY TYPES OF VIRTUE AND VICE

1. The distinction between virtue and vice is really between soma and psyche, matter and mind, the not-self and the self, since that which is virtuous corresponds to the positivity of psyche, be it metachemical, chemical, physical, or metaphysical, whereas that which is vicious can only correspond to the negativity of soma, whatever the element.

2. Since we have distinguished, in PARTS ONE-THREE, between the somatic absolutism of most particles/least wavicles and the somatic relativity of more (relative to most) particles/less (relative to least) wavicles on the objective, or female, side of life, and contrasted this to the psychic relativity of more (relative to most) wavicles/less (relative to least) particles and the psychic absolutism of most wavicles/least particles on its subjective, or male, side, the side not of metachemistry and chemistry, fire and water, but of physics and metaphysics, vegetation (earth) and air, we may now distinguish what I shall call primary vice from secondary vice in connection with those contexts where soma predominates and those where, on the basis of what is strictly male, it doesn't, while likewise distinguishing what shall be called primary virtue from secondary virtue in connection with those contexts where psyche predominates and those where, on the basis of what is strictly female, it doesn't, so that we shall have an overall distinction between primary vice and secondary virtue in relation to metachemistry and chemistry, but primary virtue and secondary vice in relation to physics and metaphysics.

3. The objective elements of metachemistry and chemistry, fire and water, will therefore be those to which we can ascribe a primary order of vice and a secondary order of virtue, since they will correspond to crime and punishment, evil and good, whereas the subjective elements of physics and metaphysics, vegetation and air, will be those to which a primary order of virtue and a secondary order of vice can be ascribed in view of their correspondence to grace and sin, wisdom and folly.

4. But if vice corresponds to soma, to matter, and virtue to psyche, to mind, then to what are we alluding when we draw such a distinction? - Quite simply to power and glory on the one hand, that of soma, and to form and contentment on the other hand, that of psyche. In other words, vice will always be associated, no matter what the element, with power and glory, the will and the spirit, whereas virtue can only be associated, in whatever element, with form and contentment, the ego and the soul.

5. Therefore because the objective elements of metachemistry and chemistry are that in which soma predominates over psyche, the not-self over the self, in terms of most particles/least wavicles in the one case and more (relative to most) particles/less (relative to least) wavicles in the other, they are the contexts in which vice is hegemonic over virtue, negativity over positivity, in absolute or relative ratios corresponding to the above particle/wavicle dichotomies,