1. The power, or force, of the will in relation, primarily, to appearances; the glory, or motion, of the spirit in relation, primarily, to quantities; the form, or heat, of the ego in relation, primarily, to qualities; the contentment, or light, of the soul in relation, primarily, to essences.

2. Therein lie the fourfold principles of life as they divide between not-self and self, soma and psyche, on the basis of power and glory, force and motion, in the one, and form and contentment, heat and light, in the other - life a struggle, as it were, between force and motion, will and spirit, in relation to female criteria primarily, and between heat and light, ego and soul, in relation to male criteria primarily, neither of which can abide the other, least of all in regard to what pertains, on a similar class basis, to the opposite side of the gender fence, the soul from the standpoint of the will or vice versa, the ego from the standpoint of the spirit or vice versa, since the one can only prevail at the other's expense.

3. Thus force can only prevail at the expense of light and vice versa, while motion can only prevail at the expense of heat and vice versa.

4. Wherever one finds force over light, power over contentment, will over soul, Devil the Mother is very much to the fore, as in metachemical sensuality, the per se context of force.

5. Wherever one finds motion over heat, glory over form, spirit over ego, Woman the Mother or, rather, the Clear Spirit of Purgatory is very much to the fore, as in chemical sensuality, the per se context of motion.

6. Wherever, by contrast, one finds heat over force, form over power, ego over will, Man the Father is very much to the fore, as in physical sensibility, the per se context of heat.

7. Wherever one finds light over motion, contentment over glory, soul over spirit, God the Father or, rather, the Holy Soul of Heaven is very much to the fore, as in metaphysical sensibility, the per se context of light.

8. Subatomically, things proceed from elemental particles to wavicles via molecular particles and wavicles, so that we can distinguish between four main devolutionary contexts, viz. most particle/least wavicle, more (relative to most) particle/less (relative to least) wavicle, less (relative to least) particle/more (relative to most) wavicle and least particle/most wavicle, and four main evolutionary contexts, viz. least wavicle/most particle, less (relative to least) wavicle/more (relative to most) particle, more (relative to most) wavicle/less (relative to least) particle, and most wavicle/least particle.

9. Strictly speaking, the primary female contexts are characterized by most particles/least wavicles and by more (relative to most) particles/less (relative to least) wavicles, whereas the secondary male contexts, which require a female hegemony in sensuality, are characterized by less (relative to least) particles/more (relative to most) wavicles and by least particles/most wavicles, the former physically subordinate to the chemical female context of more (relative to most) particles/less (relative to least) wavicles, the latter metaphysically subordinate to the metachemical female context of most particles/least wavicles.

10. Contrariwise, the primary male contexts are characterized by more (relative to most) wavicles/less (relative to least) particles and by most wavicles/least particles, whereas the secondary female contexts, which require a male hegemony in sensibility, are characterized by less (relative to least) wavicles/more (relative to most) particles and by least wavicles/most particles, the former chemically subordinate to the physical male context of more (relative to most) wavicles/less (relative to least) particles, the latter metachemically subordinate to the metaphysical male context of most wavicles/least particles.

11. The photon is the element par excellence in which the subatomic ratio of most particles/least wavicles obtains, whereas the proton tends to be the element in which least particles/most wavicles obtains.

12. The electron is the element par excellence in which the subatomic ratio of more (relative to most) particles/less (relative to least) wavicles obtains, whereas the deuteron - if we exclude from this context the neutron - tends to be the element in which less (relative to least) particles/more (relative to most) wavicles obtains.

13. Contrariwise, the deuterino - if we exclude from this context the neutrino - is the element or, rather, elementino par excellence in which the subatomic ratio of more (relative to most) wavicles/less (relative to least) particles obtains, whereas the electrino tends to be the elementino in which less (relative to least) wavicles/more (relative to most) particles obtains.

14. The protino is the elementino par excellence in which the subatomic ratio of most wavicles/least particles obtains, whereas the photino tends to be the elementino in which least wavicles/most particles obtains.

15. Elements appertain to sensuality, elementinos to sensibility, with the former tending to signify a larger particle, when compared with the latter, but a smaller wavicle. Therefore the predominance of the particle appertains to the metachemical and chemical elements par excellence of photons and electrons, both of which are negative, whereas the predominance or, better, preponderance of the wavicle appertains to the physical and metaphysical elementinos par excellence of deuterinos and protinos, both of which are positive.

16. It is my view that while photons and electrons are the elements of primary free soma par excellence, protons and deuterons are the elements of secondary free soma par excellence, the former accordingly affiliated to the female sex, the latter to the male sex.

17. Likewise I hold that while deuterinos and protinos are the elementinos of primary free psyche par excellence, electrinos and photinos are the elementinos of secondary free psyche par excellence, the former accordingly affiliated to the male sex, the latter to the female sex.

18. Photons are never more sensually negative than in the elemental particle context of metachemical will and never less sensually negative than in the elemental wavicle context of metachemical soul, the molecular particle and wavicle contexts of metachemical spirit and ego lying sensually in between.

19. Protons are never less sensually positive than in the elemental particle context of metaphysical will and never more sensually positive than in the elemental wavicle context of metaphysical soul, the molecular particle and wavicle contexts of metaphysical spirit and ego lying sensually in between.

20. Electrons are never more sensually negative than in the molecular particle context of chemical spirit and never less sensually negative than in the molecular wavicle context of chemical ego, the elemental particle and wavicle contexts of chemical will and soul lying sensually in between.

21. Deuterons are never less sensually positive than in the molecular particle context of physical spirit and never more sensually positive than in the molecular wavicle context of physical ego, the elemental particle and wavicle contexts of physical will and soul lying sensually in between.

22. Deuterinos are never more sensibly positive than in the molecular wavicle context of physical ego and never less sensibly positive than in the molecular particle context of physical spirit, the elemental particle and wavicle contexts of physical will and soul lying sensibly in between.

23. Electrinos are never less sensibly negative than in the molecular wavicle context of chemical ego and never more sensibly negative than in the molecular particle context of chemical spirit, the elemental particle and wavicle contexts of chemical will and soul lying sensibly in between.

24. Protinos are never more sensibly positive than in the elemental wavicle context of metaphysical soul and never less sensibly positive than in the elemental particle context of metaphysical will, the molecular particle and wavicle contexts of metaphysical spirit and ego lying sensibly in between.

25. Photinos are never less sensibly negative than in the elemental wavicle context of metachemical soul and never more sensibly negative than in the elemental particle context of metachemical will, the molecular particle and wavicle contexts of metachemical spirit and ego lying sensibly in between.

26. Since there is a straight correlation between elemental particles and appearances, molecular particles and quantities, molecular wavicles and qualities, and elemental wavicles and essences, it follows that the apparent element of sensual metachemistry will always be the focus of the per se order of will in photon elemental particles; that the quantitative element of sensual chemistry will always be the focus of the per se order of spirit in electron molecular particles; that the qualitative element or, rather, elementino of sensible physics will always be the focus of the per se order of ego in deuterino molecular wavicles; and that the essential element of sensible metaphysics will always be the focus of the per se order of soul in protino elemental wavicles.

27. By contrast, the apparent elementino of sensible metachemistry will always be the focus of the per se disorder of will in photino elemental particles; the quantitative elementino of sensible chemistry will always be the focus of the per se disorder of spirit in electrino molecular particles; the qualitative elementino or, rather, element of sensual physics will always be the focus of the per se disorder of ego in deuteron molecular wavicles; and that the essential element of sensual metaphysics will always be the focus of the per se disorder of soul in proton elemental wavicles.

28. The primary sex, which is female, is characterized, when free, by photon will and by electron spirit, which is to say, by somatic force and motion, neither of which are psychically conducive to anything other than force-subverted soul and motion-subverted ego, the former appertaining to what is called the id, or instinctual manifestation (unconscious) of soul, the latter to what is called the superego, or impulsive manifestation (superconscious) of ego.

29. The secondary sex, which is male, is characterized, when free, by deuterino ego and by protino soul, which is to say, by psychic heat and light, neither of which are somatically conducive to anything other than heat-subverted will and light-subverted spirit, the former appertaining to what has been called natwill, or the intellectual manifestation (natural) of will, the latter to what has been called subspirit, or the emotional manifestation (subnatural) of spirit.

30. Thus what obtains in sensuality in the subversion of light by force, of soul by will, and of heat by motion, of ego by spirit, is not repeated in sensibility; for light can no more defeat force than heat defeat motion but, rather, replaced by a situation in which force is subverted by heat, as will by ego, and motion subverted by light, as spirit by soul, making for the respective isolation of motion in the one context and of force in the other, neither of which can escape disorder, or disorientation, in consequence of the psychic aspects being brought to bear on their somatic counterparts of force and motion from the contrary standpoints of heat and light.

31. Consequently the male contexts of sensible freedom differ from the female contexts of sensual freedom, as psyche from soma, precisely in terms of the hegemony of either ego or soul as opposed to either will or spirit, heat or light as opposed to force or motion, with force subordinated to heat in the masculine, or physical, context of sensible freedom, and motion subordinated to light in the divine, or metaphysical, context of sensible freedom - males being either a combination, when sensibly free, of heat and force (masculine) or of light and motion (divine).

32. Certainly there is a correlation between heat and force on the one hand, and between light and motion on the other, the former pair combining a primary ego with a secondary will, the latter pair combining a primary soul with a secondary spirit - the emphasis in the one being on Man, in the other on Heaven, as befitting a distinction between physics and metaphysics.

33. In the female contexts of sensual freedom, by contrast, light is subordinated to force in the diabolic, or metachemical, context thereof, while heat is subordinated to motion in the feminine, or chemical, context thereof - females accordingly being either a combination, when sensually free, of force and light (diabolic) or of motion and heat (feminine).

34. One could say that, in contrast to males, the female context of freedom results in light being 'freaked out' by force and in heat being 'freaked out' by motion, the result being the domination of psyche by soma in terms of the instinctual subversion of soul as id and the impulsive subversion of ego as superego, with unconscious and superconscious corollaries to the prevalence of unnatural and supernatural factors appertaining to a primary will and a primary spirit, both the modified soul and ego of bound psyche being proportionately secondary.

35. In the male contexts of freedom, by contrast, force is, as it were, 'reined in' by heat and motion 'reined in' by light, the result being the dominion of psyche over soma in terms of the intellectual subversion of will as natwill and the emotional subversion of spirit as subspirit, with natural and subnatural corollaries to the prevalence of conscious and subconscious factors appertaining to a primary ego and a primary soul, both the modified will and spirit of bound soma being proportionately secondary.

36. The domination of sensual metaphysics by sensual metachemistry entails a situation in which most photon particles/least photon wavicles are hegemonic over least proton particles/most proton wavicles, whereas the domination of sensual physics by sensual chemistry entails a situation in which more (relative to most) electron particles/less (relative to least) electron wavicles are hegemonic over less (relative to least) deuteron particles/more (relative to most) deuteron wavicles.

37. The dominion of sensible physics over sensual chemistry entails a situation in which more (relative to most) deuterino wavicles/less (relative to least) deuterino particles are hegemonic over less (relative to least) electrino wavicles/more (relative to most) electrino particles, whereas the dominion of sensible metaphysics over sensible metachemistry entails a situation in which most protino wavicles/least protino particles are hegemonic over least photino wavicles/most photino particles.

38. Since the female hegemonies of metachemistry and chemistry, fire and water, are rooted in elements as opposed to elementinos, one would think that female domination of males, as of society, was the norm and male dominion over females the exception, since elements correspond primarily to soma and secondarily to psyche, making for a situation in which matter takes precedence over mind, and force and motion, power and glory, will and spirit, are accordingly the primary factors, relegating ego and soul, form and contentment, heat and light to a secondary status of mere acquiescence in the particle-based status quo.

39. Yet this is not invariably the case, for we need not only to distinguish within any given civilization between its alpha and its omega, its sensuality and its sensibility, but between stages or types of civilization and the gradual emancipation of humanity precisely from situations in which sensuality predominates over sensibility and females are accordingly hegemonic.

40. If we take an overview of life, it could be argued that life devolves, on the female side, from metachemistry to chemistry, fire to water, and evolves, on the male side, from physics to metaphysics, vegetation (earth) to air, so that one can plot an overall sequence in which a devolutionary regression from appearances to quantities is juxtaposed with, and even overhauled by, an evolutionary progression from qualities to essences, as from will and spirit to ego and soul, or force and motion to heat and light.

41. Certainly such a sequence does not happen without an immense historical struggle between peoples and individuals, not least in respect of a gender struggle between objectivity and subjectivity, soma and psyche, matter and mind, primacy and supremacy, darkness and light, in which either the female side of life is triumphant in power and glory, force and motion, or the male side of life triumphs in form and contentment, heat and light, each triumph entailing the subordination of the vanquished gender to a position which, while for the most part distinct from that obtaining hegemonically with the victorious gender, is nevertheless complementary to it and not at loggerheads with it in terms of a revolt aimed at a contrary hegemony - something which does occur, though rather more as the exception than the rule, bearing in mind the need of societal stability and a certain sense of civilized continuity and ideological consistency.

42. Some civilizations go one way, others in the opposite direction, while yet others seek some compromise between the two, but all are caught up, without fail, in a gender war the outcome of which will entail the subordination of the opposite gender - whichever gender that may happen to be - to the more prevalent criteria in respect of freedom, sanity, justice, rights, etc., typifying the hegemonic gender.

43. One could argue, as I have in the recent past, that life devolves from a cosmic to a mundane level before evolving, in Man, from a human to a universal level, as from fire to water on the one hand, that of appearances and quantities, and from vegetation to air on the other hand, that of qualities and essences, but this is not simply from sensuality to sensibility, nature to nurture, but encompasses nature and nurture, sensuality and sensibility, in each of the broad categories of devolution and evolution, if with different ratios.

44. Therefore one might argue, on a particle/wavicle basis, that cosmic devolution would broadly reflect a situation of most nature/least nurture, mundane devolution a situation of more (relative to most) nature/less (relative to least) nurture; human evolution, by contrast, a situation of more (relative to most) nurture/less (relative to least) nature, and universal evolution a situation of most nurture/least nature, with the sensual prevailing over the sensible in the devolutionary contexts par excellence of the cosmic and the mundane, but the sensible prevailing over the sensual in the evolutionary contexts par excellence of the human and the universal.

45. Better than that, I shall argue in terms of devility and animality on the one hand, and of humanity and divinity on the other hand, the hand of an evolutionary progression in the face of, or contrary to, a devolutionary regression, and thus of positivity as against negativity, psyche as against soma.

46. Equally one could argue, selecting comparable terminology, for a devolution, on the female side of life, from tragic polyversality to comic impersonality, and for an evolution, on the male side of life, from logic(al) personality to beatific universality. But since that may seem somewhat abstract, I shall revert to a general distinction between the four main elements, viz. fire, water, vegetation, and air, and allow the aforementioned categories of devility, animality, humanity, and divinity to correlate with each of them on a basis analogous to that of the cosmic, the mundane, the human, and the universal, in which the ratio of sensuality to sensibility or vice versa differs according to whether devolutionary or evolutionary criteria are uppermost on either absolute or relative, noumenal or phenomenal, upper- or lower-class terms.

47. Therefore, contrary to the devolutionary regressions from devility to animality, polyversality to impersonality, in which nature predominates over nurture on either absolute or relative terms, the evolutionary progressions from humanity to divinity, personality to universality, are symptomatic of the preponderance of nurture over nature, and thus of mind over matter, of psyche over soma, on either relative or absolute terms, and one can reasonably infer that humanity differs from both devility and animality, the Cosmos and Nature, in that it is the starting point, though by no means ending point, of the triumph of nurture over nature, of mind over matter, and therefore of a sensible preponderance over sensuality.

48. In short, there is no humanity, properly so considered, until a sensible preponderance over sensuality has been established and is recognized to be its chief characteristic, the absence or want of which would suggest either animality or devility, and thus not Man, properly so considered, but some predecessor or forerunner of Man whose principal commitment was not to Man, still less to God, but either to Woman or to the Devil, viz. impersonality or polyversality (I shall not repeat the error of the ages of identifying universality with the Cosmos, so that God is erroneously conceived as appertaining to the cosmic First Mover!), and whose civilization, if one may use such a term, was accordingly more sensual than sensible.

49. Certainly the Old Testament provides us with evidence of a people who were both pre-human and sub-human in terms of their identification, on noumenal or absolute terms, with both the Cosmos and Nature rather than with Man, the focus, in effect, of the New Testament, in that Jehovah over Satan accords with cosmic nature in respect of the precedence of solar by stellar and the effective reign of stellar over solar, while Saul over David, as a convenient paradigm of the next stage of devolution, accords with mundane nature in respect of the precedence of fruit by blossom on trees and the effective reign of blossom over fruit, to the exclusion, in both cases, of human nature, whether in terms of eyes or ears, the so-called Risen Virgin or the so-called Father, neither of which would be intelligible, nor indeed feasible, without prior reference, in human nurture, to the reign of brain over womb, of the Son of Man over the Virgin Mary, contrasted to which they must signify a decadence or, at the very least, concession to sensuality as the exception to the human rule which, being sensible, must ever emphasize the Christian at the expense of the Heathen - in short, at the expense of the more Judaic Old Testament and everything that falls short, in pre- or sub-human, cosmic or mundane, terms of what properly appertains to humanity.

50. For humanity, to repeat, is characterized by the prevalence of sensibility, and only in humanity, albeit a God-sensitive humanity, can there be any hope for evolutionary progress beyond the world to the otherworldly divinity of 'Kingdom Come', and thus to a situation which is post-human in its resolve to achieve the utmost universality on the basis of most nurture/least nature, most wavicles/least particles, most church/least state, most psyche/least soma, most mind/least matter.