ARTISTS AND PHILOSOPHERS
Expression and impression - the alpha and omega
of human creativity, as between artists and philosophers - the former
expressing their feelings emotionally and the latter impressing their thoughts
intellectually.
The philosopher-artist (philosophical artist)
and the artist-philosopher (artistic philosopher) signify a paradoxical amalgam
of artist and philosopher, and might be described less in terms of Left or
Right, like their more absolutist counterparts, than of liberal left (the
philosopher-artist) and liberal right (the artist-philosopher), since they
tend, in their synthetic relativity, to be of the world and, hence, worldly as
opposed to either netherworldly (artists) or otherworldly (philosophers), the
former with an aesthetic emphasis upon beauty, as of the Beautiful, and the
latter with an ethnic emphasis upon truth, as of the Truth, which, unlike
beauty, is highly metaphysical and therefore a product, through and through, of
the Ideal conceived from a transcendentalist as opposed to fundamentalist or,
more correctly, materialist standpoint, which is also equivalent to a
distinction between autocracy and theocracy or, in contemporary usage,
authoritarianism and totalitarianism.
Both artists and philosophers, when genuine,
attain to a superhuman status, the one in terms of a superfeminine predilection
towards the Beautiful, the other in terms of a supermasculine predilection
towards the Truth. Neither extremes, corresponding to left- and
right-wing antitheses, have much in common. In fact, they are as far
apart as science and religion, metachemistry and metaphysics, in contrast to
the more mundane antithesis between the philosopher-artist and the
artist-philosopher, which only amounts to a distinction between politics and
economics, chemistry and physics.
One might contrast, in relation to the above,
the love of feelings with the pleasure of thought, or emotionality with
intellectuality, whether on an absolute (noumenal and/or ethereal) or a
relative (phenomenal and/or corporeal) basis, as between artists and
philosopher-artists on the one hand, that of the Left (both extreme and
moderate), and artist-philosophers and philosophers on the other hand, that of
the Right (whether moderate or extreme). The former options operate, on a
female basis, within the realms of will and spirit or, more correctly, Will and
spirit, whereas the latter options operate, on a male basis, within the realms
of ego and soul or, more correctly, ego and Soul.
Will is hegemonically polar to ego on
state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axial terms, as between the Artist and the
artist-philosopher, the Extreme Left and the moderate right (right liberal),
whereas spirit is hegemonically polar to Soul on
church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axial terms, as between the
philosopher-artist and the Philosopher, the moderate left (left liberal) and
the Extreme Right.
The true Philosopher, being a man or, rather,
superman of the Extreme Right, will always champion the Truth metaphysically
and stand-up for that which is the Ideal from a transcendentalist
point-of-view, a male point-of-view centred in the Soul and having as its
objective, if I can speak in seemingly contradictory terms, the 'Kingdom of
Heaven', which of course abides within the male Self, or Soul, as its
metaphysical fulcrum, or kernel. In his own day Schopenhauer was such a
philosopher, as, in our own time, I would like to think I am, if only on the
basis of several decades' consistently metaphysical or pro-metaphysical
writings that have taken philosophy way beyond the academic perimeters of the
intellectual establishment into realms which, frankly, are revolutionary in
their implications for a future re-ordering of society in certain countries
along Social Theocratic and/or Transcendentalist lines in the interests of
otherworldly progress, the only kind of progress which is sensibly inner (of
the psyche) and capable of delivering to the male that peace of mind which is
the product, or consequence, of supreme being.
