EVIL OR WISDOM, THE GENDER CHOICE

 

1. Although one can generalize across the elements on the basis of the evil of metachemistry and the goodness of chemistry vis--vis the folly of physics and the wisdom of metaphysics, as regards a 'fall' from the cosmic, or polyversal, Many in fieriness to the natural, or impersonal, One in wateriness, and a 'rise' from the civilized, or personal, Many in vegetativeness to the beatific, or universal, One in airiness, with devolutionary/evolutionary implications, in reality the objective side of life is primarily characterized by evil irrespective of the element, given the ratio of particles to wavicles in both noumenal and phenomenal, metachemical and chemical, contexts, while the subjective side of life is primarily characterized by wisdom irrespective of the element, given the ratio of wavicles to particles in both phenomenal and noumenal, physical and metaphysical, contexts.

 

2. Therefore goodness is secondary to evil even in the chemical context of the natural One, where, as we have seen, soma stands to psyche in a two-and-a-half to one-and-a-half ratio of more (relative to most) particles/less (relative to least) wavicles, and negativity accordingly predominates over positivity in terms of more (relative to most) weakness and humility vis--vis less (relative to least) strength and pride, a situation that still favours the evil of somatic negativity, albeit to a lesser extent than in the metachemical context of the cosmic Many, since one is dealing with the impersonality of women rather than with the polyversality of devils.

 

3. But if evil is still hegemonic over goodness in chemistry, then it is so on different terms from those applying to metachemistry, namely with an emphasis on spirit as opposed to will, so that we can speak of a humble approach to somatic negativity as opposed to an ugly one, an approach that normally takes place in a co-operative rather than a competitive environmental framework. Conversely, the approach to psychic positivity in chemistry will favour the superego as opposed, in metachemistry, to the id, although I would guess that punishment arises in psyche less in relation to what has been conditioned by free soma to behave as a kind of accomplice to its evil than by more basic factors accruing to the self which, in reinstating some degree of ego and/or soul, turn against the somatic impositions upon psyche and freely contest the rule of evil from a less deterministic vantage-point, call it pseudo-wise or freely good.

 

4. For even females have a self, a brain stem and spinal cord, with capacities for ego and soul that are simply undermined and even temporarily eclipsed by the predominance of somatic factors owing more to the not-self, such that twist ego towards the spirit in spiritual subversion through superego of consciousness or, in metachemical evil, twist the soul towards the will in instinctual subversion through the id of subconsciousness, with effectively superconscious and unconscious consequences, neither of which are properly germane to the self but quasi-somatic in their enslavement to the supernaturalism and/or unnaturalism of somatic freedom.

 

5. However that may be, if goodness is secondary to evil on the female side of life, then folly can only be secondary to wisdom on its male side, the side of physics and metaphysics. Therefore folly is secondary to wisdom even in the physical context of the civilized Many, where, as we have seen, psyche stands to soma in a two-and-a-half to one-and-a-half ratio of more (relative to most) wavicles/less (relative to least) particles, and positivity accordingly predominates over negativity in terms of more (relative to most) knowledge and pleasure vis--vis less (relative to least) ignorance and pain, a situation that still favours the wisdom of psychic positivity, albeit to a lesser extent than in the metaphysical context of the beatific One, since one is dealing with the personality of men rather than with the universality of gods.

 

6. But if wisdom is still hegemonic over folly in physics, then it is so on different terms from those applying to metaphysics, namely with an emphasis on ego as opposed to soul, so that we can speak of a knowledgeable approach to psychic positivity as opposed to a joyful one, an approach that normally takes place in a collectivistic rather than an individualistic environmental framework. Conversely, the approach to somatic negativity in physics will favour natural will (natwill) as opposed, in metaphysics, to subnatural spirit (subspirit), although I would guess that sin arises in soma less in relation to what has been conditioned by free psyche to behave as a kind of accomplice to its wisdom than by more basic factors accruing to the not-self which, in reinstating some degree of will and/or spirit, turn against the psychic impositions upon soma and freely contest the rule of wisdom from a less deterministic vantage-point, call it pseudo-evil or freely foolish.

 

7. For even males have a not-self, a physical and/or metaphysical order of soma more usually associated, in sensual fashion, with the phallus and/or ears, with capacities for will and spirit that are simply undermined and even temporarily eclipsed by the predominance of psychic factors owing more to the self, such that twist the will towards the ego in intellectual subversion through natwill of unnaturalness or, in metaphysical wisdom, twist the spirit towards the soul in emotional subversion through subspirit of supernaturalness, with effectively natural and subnatural consequences, neither of which are properly germane to the not-self but quasi-psychic in their enslavement to the consciousness and/or subconsciousness of psychic freedom.

 

8. However that may be, the goodness of punishment is as much the exception to the female rule of somatic evil as the folly of sin to the male rule of psychic wisdom; for females are structured in terms of the somatic precedence of psyche and males, by contrast, in terms of the psychic precedence of soma, neither of whom approach life on identical terms but either in relation to a sensual hegemony, wherein soma is free and psyche bound, or in relation to a sensible hegemony, wherein psyche is free and soma bound, the punishing and sinful exceptions to the respective criminal and graceful rules more usually occurring when females come under male hegemonies in sensibility and, conversely, when males come under female hegemonies in sensuality, so that, in the one instance, punishment joins forces with grace to thwart crime, and, in the other instance, sin joins forces with crime to thwart grace, with contrary types of society the inevitable result. Either goodness links with wisdom to diminish evil, or folly links with evil to diminish wisdom, the net results being a sensible society, in the one case, that upholds the sovereignty of wisdom in phenomenal or noumenal subjectivity, and a sensual society, in the other case, that upholds the sovereignty of evil in noumenal or phenomenal objectivity, depending on the class bias of the society in question.

 

9. In the case of sensible societies, the relative grace of knowledge and pleasure in phenomenal subjectivity or the absolute grace of truth and joy in noumenal subjectivity. In the case of sensual societies, by contrast, the absolute crime of ugliness and hatred in noumenal objectivity or the relative crime of weakness and humility in phenomenal objectivity. The freedoms of the former are strictly incompatible with those of the latter, for the distinction between psychic freedom and somatic freedom permits of little or no compromise. Either one is free in grace, in wisdom, or one is free in crime, in evil. Evil is as much diminished and even excluded through goodness from the wise society as wisdom is diminished and even excluded through folly from the evil society. Either grace triumphs in male sensibility, or crime triumphs in female sensuality. That is the overall reality!