1.   'Doing for others' stems from the diabolic principle of proton-proton reaction and is the antithesis of 'being for self', which, in aspiring heavenwards, conforms to the divine principle of electron-electron attraction.


2.   'Being for others' is passive diabolism and contrasts with 'doing for self' as the active, or indirect, manifestation of a divine orientation.


3.   To 'do for others' is to directly affect others and impose one's activity, or the results of it, upon them.  'Being for others' is the receiving context of the doer's action.


4.   To 'do for self' is to indirectly develop the spirit through some form of conscious intellectual activity, and contrasts with 'being for self' as the direct form of spiritual development employing conscious non-verbal passivity.


5.   The man who 'does for self' is morally superior to the man who 'does for others', just as the man who is 'being for self' is morally superior to the man who is 'being for others'.


6.   The man who is 'being for others' is less immoral than the man who is 'doing for others', whereas the man who is 'doing for self' is less moral than the man who is 'being for self'.


7.   To sleep is effectively to 'be for others'.  We sleep to dream, which is 'the other' acting upon one's self, the passive spirit.


8.   The Supermen of the first phase of the post-Human Millennium will imbibe synthetic hallucinogens in order to 'be for their selves'; they will drug to trip, which is the self made manifest to the self through visionary experience.  Trip and drugger are one.  Dream and sleeper, on the other hand, are two.


9.   Subhuman, human, superhuman; which is to say, pre-human, human, and post-human.  Human is never more so than when the psyche is balanced between subconscious and superconscious in conscious egocentricity.  But an imbalance either side of egocentricity is still human, provided the ratio of subconscious to superconscious is not more than 3:1 either side.


10.  Thus pagan man and transcendental man are still human, not subhuman or superhuman respectively.  We don't consider the ancient Greeks or Romans subhuman, and neither need we consider the coming transcendental men superhuman.


11.  Supermen will be post-human, and to a no-less significant extent than apes are (or were) pre-human.  An ape in the branches of a tree and a human brain artificially supported and sustained are, to my mind, antithetical equivalents either side of human evolution.


12.  A tree, as a subconscious life-form preceding apes, and a Superbeing, as a superconscious life-form succeeding Supermen, are also antithetical equivalents either side of (immediate) pre- and post-human life forms.


13.  An alternative name for ape could be subman, a creature pre-dating the human phases of evolution and embracing everything from apes to subhuman primitives, but particularly apes that were destined to evolve towards man.


14.  Thus the subman is a particular kind of ape, viz. an evolutionary ape, who gradually abandoned the tree in order to develop a primitive form of bipedal society between the animal and the human.


15.  The subman became human at that point in time when civilization was first established ... in the guise of paganism.  Civilization, which embraces some form of institutionalized religious commitment, is inseparable from the human.


16.  Just as the subman was beneath civilization, so the Superman will be beyond it - no longer subject to a compromise between politics and religion, and not a periodic visitor to a religious building (in the highest phase of human evolution, the meditation centre of transcendentalists), but permanently spiritual.


17.  Trees were (and are) even more deeply sensual than submen and apes.  The Superbeings will be even more deeply spiritual than the Supermen.  Not drugging for trips, but hypermeditating for transcendence!


18.  Any attempt to 'gate-crash' the highest phase of the post-Human Millennium by prematurely removing the old brain and re-collectivizing new brains would, even if technically feasible, be doomed to failure, because hypermeditation could not be endured, let alone properly experienced, before the superconscious had been both explored and expanded on visionary terms with the assistance of mind-expanding drugs like LSD.


19.  By neutralizing the subconscious, a synthetic hallucinogen like LSD would allow the superconscious to become more conscious of itself and if not to come fully awake then at least tend in the direction, via visionary experience, of complete wakefulness in the subsequent exclusively spiritual context of the Superbeing.


20.  Perhaps, in comparison to that hyperwakefulness of the Superbeing, the tripping of the Supermen would constitute the highest form of 'doing for self', in complete contrast to the 'being for others' of the sleeper, whether human or pre-human.  An internal 'doing', static and yet apparent, because visionary.


21.  And so from this superhuman 'doing for self' to the superbeingful 'being for self' in the second, or 'classical', phase of the post-Human Millennium.  Is not ape life predominantly a 'being for others' ... of eating and sleeping and resting in the branches of trees?  And does not the life of a tree on which apes exist conform to a 'doing-for-others' principle both in terms of supporting the apes and producing oxygen without which autonomous life on earth would be impossible?


22.  Stemming from the Diabolic Alpha, no tree exists for itself on a 'being-for-self' principle (not possessing a self) but only in relation to others, i.e. to animals and humans, who are dependent on the oxygen it produces for survival, and this contrary to superficial appearances.


23.  By contrast to the 'being-for-self' meditating religion of future transcendental men, the sacrificing and dancing religion of pagans was an extreme manifestation of 'doing for others' - 'the others' being either invisible powers or gods made manifest in the idol.


24.  The Christian and similar atomic phases of religious evolution signified a compromise between 'doing for others' and 'being for self', as appropriate to a middle phase of religious evolution in between pagan and transcendental extremes.


25.  But the Transcendentalists' 'being for self' will constitute but a mild foretaste of things to come, once evolution attains to the stage of transcending all doing and facing directly towards the ultimate 'being for self' of transcendent spirit in the supra-atomic absolute.