Defining Opposition in relation to Polar and Antithetical Alternatives. Today I wish to clarify the distinction between polarities and antitheses in relation to church-hegemonic/state-subordinate and state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axial integrities within the intercardinal axial compass, and to describe polarities as inclusive modes of opposition and antitheses as exclusive modes of opposition, since the former appertain to the same axis and the latter would be as between different axes.  But besides this fundamental distinction of oppositional type, so to speak, there exists a further distinction between direct and indirect modes of opposition on both polar and antithetical terms, which have to do with either same gender (in general terms) or opposite gender positions in relation to those polar or antithetical points of the intercardinal axial compass described above.  Hence, to start with the church-hegemonic axis, there is a polar opposition (inclusive) between antiphysics and metaphysics (direct) on the one hand (male) and chemistry and antimetachemistry (direct) on the other hand (female), with antiphysics and antimetachemistry in the one case and chemistry and metaphysics in the other case indicative of indirect modes of opposition (male/female and female/male), as we proceed, in each case, from the southwest to the northeast points of the axis in question.  Similarly, for the state-hegemonic axis, there is a polar opposition (inclusive) between metachemistry and antichemistry (direct) on the one hand (female) and antimetaphysics and physics (direct) on the other hand (male), with metachemistry and physics in the one case and antimetaphysics and antichemistry in the other case indicative of indirect modes of opposition (female/male and male/female), as we proceed from northwest to southeast on the axis in question.  That just about takes care of polar, or inclusive, modes of opposition.  As for the exclusive, or antithetical, modes of opposition alluded to above, we shall have direct manifestations of such an opposition between chemistry and antichemistry (female) and antiphysics and physics (male) across the phenomenal axial divide separating the southwest from the southeast points of the intercardinal axial compass, but indirect manifestations of antithetical opposition between chemistry (female) and physics (male) on the one hand and antiphysics (male) and antichemistry (female) on the other hand.  Likewise, we shall have direct manifestations of antithetical opposition between metachemistry and antimetachemistry (female) and antimetaphysics and metaphysics (male) across the noumenal axial divide contrasting the northwest with the northeast points of the intercardinal axial compass, but indirect manifestations of such opposition between metachemistry (female) and metaphysics (male) on the one hand, and antimetaphysics (male) and antimetachemistry (female) on the other hand.  Hence the intercardinal axis affords us both inclusive and exclusive modes of opposition, whether directly (same sex) or indirectly (opposite sex), which we have described as polar in the one case and antithetical in the other.