Light, heat, motion, and force, corresponding to the photon, the proton, the electron, and the neutron, with implications of space, time, volume, and mass that contrast space with time in relation to the noumenal antithesis between metachemical light and metaphysical heat on the one hand, and volume with mass in relation to the phenomenal antithesis between chemical motion and physical force on the other hand, notwithstanding the 'pseudo' forms of light, heat, motion, and force that take subordinate positions as pseudo-elements to elements, with:-


1.                pseudo-metaphysical pseudo-heat unequivocally subordinate to metachemical light, as pseudo-time to space;

2.                pseudo-metachemical pseudo-light unequivocally subordinate to metaphysical heat, as pseudo-space to time;

3.                pseudo-physical pseudo-force equivocally subordinate to chemical motion, as pseudo-mass to volume;

4.                pseudo-chemical pseudo-motion equivocally subordinate to physical force, as pseudo-volume to mass.


Equivalent to the above, to cite only the fulcrum and pseudo-fulcrum of each context, would be:-


1.                The unequivocal subordination of pseudo-soul to will at the northwest point of the intercardinal axial compass on the apex of the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis.

2.                The unequivocal subordination of pseudo-will to soul at the northeast point of the intercardinal axial compass on the apex of the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis.

3.                The equivocal subordination of pseudo-ego to spirit at the southwest point of the intercardinal axial compass on the base of the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis.

4.                The equivocal subordination of pseudo-spirit to ego at the southeast point of the intercardinal axial compass on the base of the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis.


1.                The power of photons to create a spatial light; the contentment of protons to recreate a repetitive heat; the glory of electrons to create a volumetric motion; the form of neutrons to recreate a massive force.

2.                Conversely, the pseudo-power of pseudo-photons to pseudo-create a spaced pseudo-light; to pseudo-contentment of pseudo-protons to pseudo-recreate a sequential pseudo-heat; the pseudo-glory of pseudo-electrons to pseudo-create a voluminous pseudo-motion; the pseudo-form of pseudo-neutrons to pseudo-recreate a massed pseudo-force.


1.                The power of photons is hegemonic over the pseudo-contentment of pseudo-protons, as spatial light over sequential pseudo-heat.

2.                The contentment of protons is hegemonic over the pseudo-power of pseudo-photons as repetitive time over spaced pseudo-light.

3.                The glory of electrons is hegemonic over the pseudo-form of pseudo-neutrons, as volumetric motion over massed pseudo-force.

4.                The force of neutrons is hegemonic over the pseudo-glory of pseudo-electrons, as massive force over voluminous pseudo-motion.


Power, contentment, glory, and form = space, time, volume, and mass = light, heat, motion, and force = will, soul, spirit, and ego = intention, emotion, instinct, and intellect = photons, protons, electrons, and neutrons = devil, god, woman, and man = hell, heaven, purgatory, and earth = doing, being, giving, and taking. The 'pseudo' out of 'anti' modes, appertaining to pseudo-elements subordinate to elements, are as described above; though it should not be forgotten that both elements (hegemonic) and pseudo-elements (subordinate) are divisible between somatic and psychic, particle and wavicle, sensual and sensible aspects on both noumenal and phenomenal, absolute and relative terms, with a positive/negative distinction between the free and the bound, whether soma or psyche (depending on gender) and, correlatively, a pseudo-positive and pseudo-negative distinction between the pseudo-free and the pseudo-bound, again whether in relation to soma or psyche (according to gender). For the free is ever positive and bright, but the bound ever negative and dark, or in shadow, on both genuine (hegemonic) and 'pseudo' (subordinate) gender terms.


It is not where you are born, but who you were born from that dictates not only your genetic make-up, but also your racial or ethnic composition.


The Virgin and Child or, more accurately, Mother and Child scenario of Christianity signifies a fait accompli of chemistry over pseudo-physics, corresponding to electrons over pseudo-neutrons, whereby spirit is hegemonic over pseudo-ego and the former is free to address the latter in terms of speech, cooing, caressing, even recourse to tears, while the child remains dependent on its mother for protection and sustenance. What this does not reveal is the stage of female experience intermediate between seduction and maternity that can only be identified with pregnancy, which has nothing to do with chemical spirit but is, rather, symptomatic of a kind of damnation from metachemistry to pseudo-chemistry (on the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis) that suggests and, indeed, confirms varying degrees (coinciding with the stages of pregnancy) of pseudo-natural neutralization of the female as pseudo-female under a temporary male hegemony in physics, whose transformation from pseudo-metaphysical lover to physical father-to-be would suggest a counter-salvation analogous to a counter-rise as male corollary of the female's fall (in damnation) from metachemistry to pseudo-chemistry. But such a pseudo-natural order of neutralization vis-a-vis a realistic hegemony in bound soma conditioned by a humanistic preponderance of free psyche in physics is, alas for the physical male, all too temporary, since confined to the later stages of pregnancy, and it will not be long before, following birth, the pseudo-chemical pseudo-spirituality of the pseudo-female under a physically egocentric hegemony on the male's part, analogous to voluminous volume (pseudo-volume) a plane down from massive mass (or mass per se), is superseded, with cross-axial transference, by the aforementioned chemical hegemony over the pseudo-physical dependency of the pseudo-egocentric child upon the spirited mother who, operating through maternal instinct on the plane of volumetric volume (or volume per se) over massed mass (pseudo-mass), is then and only then in the mainstream worldly position to which the Christian iconography of Mother and Child alludes, a position at once purgatorial and pseudo-earthly in terms of the respective gender, or familial, standings. Of course, such a slide from metachemistry to pseudo-chemistry, seduction to pregnancy, and then, following childbirth, a cross-axial transference to chemistry might be the lot of the average female, but it would not and did not appeal to theologians to ascribe such a fate to Mary, the so-called 'Mother of God', and therefore the fait accompli, as I described it, of the Virgin and Child having no prior relationship with the female poles of the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis, viz. metachemistry and pseudo-chemistry, seduction and pregnancy, is a taken-for-granted aspect of Catholic theology, which necessarily has to ascribe miraculous powers to Mary, notwithstanding providential intervention on the part of the so-called Father or attenuated Creator, commensurate with the 'Virgin birth', that ensure she remains recognizably church-hegemonic/state-subordinate, and on hegemonic terms, moreover, vis-a-vis the so-called Christ Child. Consequently, in relation to this, the notion of 'Mother Church' is not without theological significance, even if it still leaves something to be desired from the standpoint of salvation from 'the world' (of chemistry/pseudo-physics) to the otherworldly benefits of metaphysics, as traditionally represented by a Christ 'On High', whose mother, far from now being hegemonic over him, is then prone if not prostate at the foot of the 'True Cross' (meaning non-materialistically the one upon which, in Roman Catholic vein, the arms of the Crucified stretch upward towards what I hold to be a Y-chromosomal intimation of male psychic freedom) in a manner suggestive of a pseudo-metachemical subordination to a metaphysical (no matter how limited to and by the bound soma of the crucifixional paradigm) hegemony and, hence, to the 'Son of God'. Whereas the fate of any chemical hegemony over pseudo-physics, whether Marian or otherwise, can only be counter-damnation (up the axis on a southwest-to-northeast tangent) to pseudo-metachemistry, as to the Easter-time prone Virgin at the foot of the Cross, with a reversal of gender positions which ensures that the feminine female hegemony over pseudo-male pseudo-masculinity below will be superseded by a supermasculine or, more correctly (in relation to the limitations of bound metaphysical soma), a subfeminine nominally male hegemony over pseudo-female pseudo-superfemininity above, corresponding less to a 'Risen Virgin' than to a counter-fallen (counter-damned) pseudo-Virgin whose actual status is akin to pseudo-Devil-the-pseudo-Mother (of pseudo-metachemical pseudo-bound soma) under a 'Son of God' (of metaphysical bound soma) in a kind of double darkness symbolic of the Christian tragedy. For there can be no brightness here, neither in the one context nor in the other, because the absence of metaphysical free psyche primarily commensurate with the super-emotionality of Heaven the Holy Soul (and only secondarily with the once-bovaryized ego, or super-intellectual mind, of God the Father-proper) ensures that the bright side of metaphysics, corresponding to superconscious supermasculinity, remains above and beyond the Christian pale by dint of the extent to which the Judaic roots of Christianity in Devil the Mother hyped as God the Creator (whether one calls this Jehovah or the Father, depending on one's ethnic bias) precludes all but a truncated metaphysics from existing, simultaneously ensuring that the sub-intentional 'Son of God' coupled, in secondary bound somatic vein, to the sub-instinctual 'Holy Spirit of Heaven' remain as far as things go metaphysically, with a consequence that pseudo-metachemistry is itself compromised by a want of pseudo-submasculine pseudo-free psyche in relation to the supermasculine absence of metaphysical free psyche, so that it is, in a sense, doubly 'pseudo' and, with a pseudo-bound somatic emphasis upon the pseudo-superfemininity of pseudo-Devil-the-pseudo-Mother coupled (in secondary pseudo-bound somatic vein) to pseudo-Hell-the-Unclear-Spirit, is no more than a pseudo-ugly/pseudo-hateful corollary of the illusion/woe typifying metaphysical bound soma in each of its (bound sub-will and bound sub-spirit) subfeminine manifestations, with the properly church-hegemonic attributes of pseudo-beauty and pseudo-love (corresponding to pseudo-free sub-ego and pseudo-free sub-soul) in pseudo-metachemical pseudo-free psyche, and truth and joy (corresponding to free super-ego and free super-soul) in metaphysical free psyche lying somewhere beyond the pale of what Catholic Christianity is in a position to allow, given the continuing and effectively dominating parts being played by the beauty and love (in free super-will and free super-spirit) of metachemical free soma on the one hand and, subordinately, the pseudo-truth and pseudo-joy (in pseudo-free sub-will and pseudo-free sub-spirit) of pseudo-metaphysical pseudo-free soma on the other hand - the former attributes effectively superfeminine and the latter pseudo-subfeminine. That is why, from the standpoint of metaphysics, Catholicism is a failure and why, if a full complement of metaphysics and a properly deferential pseudo-metachemistry (no longer susceptible to subsuming the subfeminine bound soma of metaphysics into its own pseudo-superfeminine pseudo-bound soma 'Sacred Heart'-wise, with intent to deferring, in trianglular vein, to the rule of metachemistry over pseudo-metaphysics in back) is to be forthcoming or at all possible, both metachemistry and pseudo-metaphysics will have to be repudiated, and not simply on a personal, individual basis but officially, as though by society in general following what I would advocate as the utilization of the democratic process in certain countries (especially those with church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axial traditions) to a religiously sovereign end, an end commensurate with liberation from traditional religious adherence to metachemistry/pseudo-metaphysics, and with a repudiation, in consequence, of all things Christian, including, not least, the Church itself for historically having had to go along with the best-of-a-bad-jobism, so to speak, of Devil the Mother hyped as God the Father and accordingly precluded, in Judeo-Christian vein, the possibility of metaphysical, coupled to pseudo-metachemical, independence such that, at a broadly humanistic stage of religious evolution above but not beyond Catholicism, takes or can take the form of transcendental meditation and/or yoga, but at the superhumanistic and even cyborgistic stage to which we are alluding would require synthetically artificial means for achieving a fully metaphysical/pseudo-metachemical end. For as long as conventional religion, state religion in the profoundest and most obvious sense, persists in existing, metaphysics will continue, in merely straining on a kind of church-hegemonic leash, to be short-changed, as it were, and the power of metachemistry above and the glory of chemistry below will, in alpha-stemming fashion, continue to hog the religious limelight at the expense not just of the form of physics, which does and can still exist to a certain extent, if in axial polarity to metachemical power, but, most especially, of the contentment of metaphysics, as of that which, lying beyond the bound somatic limitations of the crucifixional paradigm, is truly heavenly and godly in the super-emotionality and super-intellectuality of metaphysical free psyche, since beyond the pale of a world dominated by the super-intentionality and super-instinctuality of metachemical free soma or, in my religious terminology, Devil the Mother and Hell the Clear Spirit, corresponding to beauty and love, with no place, in consequence, for Heaven the Holy Soul and God the Father proper, corresponding to the aforementioned joy and truth of metaphysical free psyche. Now how religiously false is that?


There is a sense in which painters are the Devil's artists, and never more so than when portraying metachemical power via the aesthetics of beauty. Traditionally, the Arts have been dominated, certainly in the West, by art (from which the term derives), as society has been dominated by the powerful, whose 'God', having to do with a Creator-esque 'First Mover', is omnipotent and, hence, 'almighty', in stark contrast to the powerless 'God' (which some, deferring to the Father, would only regard as the 'Son of God') nailed to the Cross, whom artists have often depicted from a bovaryized artistic standpoint likely closer to pseudo-metachemistry than to metachemistry, and hence, fittingly I believe, with a degree of ugliness eclipsing the beauty proper to art as the Devil's art form par excellence. But if art, not least in relation to Western painting, approximates, when metachemically genuine, to beauty, as to 'the Beautiful', then it must be said that sculpture approximates, when chemically genuine, to strength, if not to the chemical fulcrum of pride, and is therefore less superfeminine than feminine in character, since the art form of woman as opposed to the Devil, and therefore at axial variance, even to an antithetical extent, with literature as the art form par excellence of man, given less, especially in prose (its representative manifestation), to the glory of strength than to the form of knowledge, in which the ego is granted free rein to massively prevail, by taking cognizance of rightful man's place in the world. But much as I prefer literature to sculpture, it does not and cannot achieve the contentment of truth, which is joy, and which only the finest, most representative music can conjure, as if from the air, and in the right compositional hands bring us closer to the composure of heaven. For if painters tend to be the Devil's artists, expressing spatial light, then composers and musicians, when true, are surely God's artists, to utilize parallel if antithetical terms, with a commitment, one might say, to repetitive heat. Now although, like art, music can be bovaryized, even to a quasi-metachemical extent, the best of it, by which I mean that which most closely approximates to metaphysics, and hence to an impression of repetitive heat, will stand closest to truth and thus provide the only convincingly reliable guide, notwithstanding the role of philosophy as a mode of literary bovaryization, to what is true and exactly why it is so. Not simply because it reflects godliness, but because godliness is itself a reflection of Heaven, and there is no Heaven outside the joy of metaphysical soul, of soul per se, which music has the ability to conjure, on occasion, from the depths, the centre, of the Self.