CYCLE NINETEEN: THE POSITION OF VALUES

1. Beauty stands in between the metachemical self and the metachemical not-self as a reflection of the commitment of the former to the latter, while love comes in between metachemical selflessness and the metachemical unself as a reaction of the latter to the former.

2. Strength stands in between the chemical self and the chemical not-self as a reflection of the commitment of the former to the latter, while pride comes in between chemical selflessness and the chemical unself as a reaction of the latter to the former.

3. Knowledge stands in between the physical self and the physical not-self as a reflection of the commitment of the former to the latter, while pleasure comes in between physical selflessness and the physical unself as a reaction of the latter to the former.

4. Truth stands in between the metaphysical self and the metaphysical not-self as a reflection of the commitment of the former to the latter, while joy comes in between metaphysical selflessness and the metaphysical unself as a reaction of the latter to the former.

5. Hence beauty, strength, knowledge, and truth do not exist except in relation to the commitment of self to not-self on any given plane, in outer as well as inner contexts.

6. Likewise, love, pride, pleasure, and joy do not exist except in relation to the reaction of unself to selflessness on any given plane, in outer as well as inner contexts.

7. What applies to these positive psychological values and their psychical attributes ... applies equally well to their negative counterparts in both sensuality and sensibility.

8. Hence ugliness, weakness, ignorance, and falsity do not exist except in relation to the commitment of antiself to negative not-self on any given plane, in outer as well as inner contexts.

9. Likewise, hatred, humility, pain, and woe do not exist except in relation to the reaction of anti-unself to negative selflessness on any given plane, in outer as well as inner contexts.

10. Returning to the positive, beauty stands in-between the metachemical self and the metachemical not-self as the Devil (of perfect power) in-between the metachemical id and metachemical barbarity, while love comes in-between metachemical selflessness and the metachemical unself as Hell (in imperfect glory) in-between metachemical civility and the metachemical soul.

11. Strength stands in-between the chemical self and the chemical not-self as the woman (of imperfect power) in-between the chemical id and chemical barbarity, while pride comes in-between chemical selflessness and the chemical unself as purgatory (in perfect glory) in-between chemical civility and the chemical soul.

12. Knowledge stands in-between the physical self and the physical not-self as the man (of perfect form) in-between the physical ego and physical nature, while pleasure comes in-between physical selflessness and the physical unself as the earth (in imperfect content[ment]) in-between physical culture and the physical mind.

13. Truth stands in-between the metaphysical self and the metaphysical not-self as God (in imperfect form) in-between the metaphysical ego and metaphysical nature, while joy comes in-between metaphysical selflessness and the metaphysical unself as Heaven (in perfect content[ment]) in-between metaphysical culture and the metaphysical mind.

14. In all cases, there is id before soul (unego before unconscious) and ego before mind (self before conscious), as objective and/or subjective self precedes unself in relation to the utilization by the former of the not-self to achieve the unself via selflessness, and to achieve it, moreover, to a deeper extent than would otherwise be possible.

15. Hence before there can be unconscious (soul) or conscious (mind), there must first of all be unego (id) or ego (self), depending on the context.

16. Yet we constantly read in psychology and the like of 'the unconscious' as if it were the basis of life from which other factors, including the ego, duly emerge! Nothing, however, could be further from the case.

17. All that British and, in particular, American obsessions with 'the unconscious' prove ... is the regrettable extent to which both countries are effectively female, and hence biased towards or rooted in objective criteria, in which, inevitably, both the soul (unconscious) and the id (unego) take ideological precedence over the ego and the mind.

18. We also have to allow for the fact that psychologists are reluctant to adopt the word 'soul' (the direct approach to describing the unconscious) because of its historical and religious associations, and prefer, in consequence, to use the term 'unconscious' for its more contemporary cachet.

19. Yet, in actuality, the soul and the unconscious are one and the same, except that whereas the former describes the unself directly, the other does so from the indirect standpoint of a male bias towards the 'conscious mind'.

20. However, the fact that 'the unconscious', effectively subverted as 'self', is referred to independently of its selfish precondition in the unego, or id (to revert to direct terminological usage), does little to explain it, but, rather, obfuscates and bedevils any attempt to come properly to terms with the distinction between self and unself, unego and unconscious, id and soul, psychology and psyche, such as would enhance our understanding of the relationship between the two, and of how they stand, more importantly, in relation to both the not-self and selflessness within the necessarily restricted parameters of objective actuality.