Op. 73

THE CORE OF THE SELF

Cyclic Philosophy

Copyright © 2013 John O'Loughlin

_______________

CONTENTS

1. Seasonal Arts

2. Printing vis-à-vis Writing

3. Self vis-à-vis Brain

4. Subdivisions of the Self

5. The Lie of Equality

6. The Lie of the Heart

7. A Brotherhood of Man

8. The Brotherhood of Supermen

9. Profane and Sacred

10. From Appearance to Essence

11. Life after Death

12. 'Giving Up the Ghost'

13. Profanity and Sanctity Revisited

14. Various Trinities

15. Atomic and Subatomic Means

16. Extremes of the Self

17. Of Idiots and Egoists

18. Self and Antiself, Etc.

19. Comparisons and Contrasts in Class and Gender

20. Sexuality and the Id

21. Towards a Gaelic Federation

22. Voice of the Self

23. The Core of the Self

_____________

SEASONAL ARTS

1. Just as one might think, on a noumenal/phenomenal basis, of summer as the season of fire, winter as the season of water, spring as the season of vegetation (earth), and autumn as the season of air, so one could think of art as the art form of fire (paint), literature as the art form of water (ink), sculpture as the art form of vegetation (clay), and music as the art form of air (airwaves).

2. On such a noumenal/phenomenal basis, it should be possible to conceive of summer as the season of art, and hence of painters par excellence; winter as the season of literature, and hence of writers par excellence; spring as the season of sculpture, and hence of sculptors par excellence; and autumn as the season of music, and hence of musicians par excellence.

3. For an elemental correspondence surely exists between summer and art in relation to fire; winter and literature in relation to water; spring and sculpture in relation to vegetation; and autumn and music in relation to air.

4. Considering that fire is diabolic (superfeminine to subfeminine in space-time devolution), water feminine, vegetation masculine, and air divine (submasculine to supermasculine in time-space evolution), I hold art to be the diabolic art form par excellence, literature to be the feminine art form par excellence, sculpture the masculine art form par excellence, and music the divine art form par excellence.

5. This is equivalent to saying that, like summer and art, fire is apparent; that, like winter and literature, water is quantitative; that, like spring and sculpture, vegetation is qualitative; and that, like autumn and music, air is essential.

6. For the apparent is diabolic, the quantitative feminine, the qualitative masculine, and the essential divine, which is to say, male in a noumenal as opposed to a phenomenal way, as applicable to time and space rather than to mass and volume.

7. Likewise, that which is diabolic is female in a noumenal as opposed to a phenomenal way, which is to say, as applicable to space and time rather than to volume and mass.

8. There is consequently a sense in which summer is noumenal in a female way (diabolic), winter phenomenal in a female way (feminine), spring phenomenal in a male way (masculine), and autumn noumenal in a male way (divine).

9. Likewise art will be noumenal in a female way (diabolic), literature phenomenal in a female way (feminine), sculpture phenomenal in a male way (masculine), and music noumenal in a male way (divine).

10. Now whereas that which is female will be objective, whether noumenal (in space and time) or phenomenal (in volume and mass), that which is male, by contrast, will be subjective, whether phenomenal (in mass and volume) or noumenal (in time and space).

11. As a rule, objectivity corresponds to that which is straight or rectilinear, whereas subjectivity corresponds to whatever is round or curvilinear.

12. Hence there is about objectivity a certain straightness, which contrasts with the roundness of subjectivity pretty much as the rectilinear straightness of the majority of paintings and books contrasts with the curvilinear roundness of the majority of sculptures and records (including compact discs), the majority of which are used for the storage of recorded sound, especially music.

13. Thus to contrast the objective nature of art and literature, viz. paintings and books, with the subjective nature of sculpture and music, viz. figure sculptures and records, as one could contrast summer and winter with spring and autumn, the former seasons female, the latter ones male.

14. For this is equivalent to contrasting fire and water, the objective elements par excellence, with vegetation and air, the latter of which are not only subjective, but male as opposed to female on both phenomenal and noumenal terms.

PRINTING VIS-À-VIS WRITING

1. There is likewise an objective/subjective distinction, it seems to me, between printing and writing, since that which is objective remains free or separate, whereas the subjective reflects a tendency towards binding and, hence, unity.

2. Hence it could be argued that printing corresponds to the female side of life in what amounts to an objective tendency of characters to remain separate, or disjunctive, whereas writing corresponds to the male side of life in what amounts to the subjective bias of joined characters, which thereby bind into a writerly whole.

3. It would also follow that whereas printing is largely public, or suited to literary products in the public domain, writing, by contrast, is largely private, and therefore more suited to literary exchanges, or whatever, of a private or secretive nature.

4. I happen to think that the deepest and truest writings, which are more likely to be philosophical than, say, fictional, require to be written rather than printed, and that only on such a subjective basis could justice be done to them, insofar as the profoundest writings will be those which are the most subjective, and hence male-orientated.

5. Doubtless fiction and philosophy are the two kinds of literature which most conform to a subjective bias, with fiction arguably more masculine and phenomenal than - at any rate, comparatively - divine and noumenal, given its vegetative bias within the broadly feminine, or fluidal, parameters of literature generally.

6. This would contrast with poetry and drama as the two kinds of literary production which most conform to an objective bias, with poetry arguably more diabolic and noumenal, comparatively speaking, than feminine or phenomenal, given its fiery bias within the broadly feminine, or fluidal, parameters of literature generally.

7. Yet, paradoxes of this sort notwithstanding, it does seem that the more subjective literature becomes, as in the best philosophy, the less applicability does it have to the public domain, and the more irrelevant printing accordingly becomes to it.

8. In fact, one might be forgiven for wondering whether print could ever do justice to works of a deeply subjective and hence truth-oriented order, insofar as printed matter betrays what is, after all, an objective tendency in which separateness rather than joinedness is the (female) norm.

9. And such a norm, being demonstrably superficial, can hardly be expected to do justice to works of literary profundity, least of all those which advocate, through philosophical wisdom, greater binding to self as the solution, for males, to life's manifold perplexities.

10. There is definitely no basis for supposing that printed works will give any great encouragement to males to cultivate subjectivity at the expense of objectivity, particularly in view of the fact that printing reflects an objective disposition such that 'flies in the face' of subjective binding.

11. On the contrary, printed material is a reflection of freedom, and the growth of printing at the expense of writing in the modern world was not achieved without the correlative shrinkage of binding, and thus of male-oriented moral values.

12. For there would seem to be a connection between printing and secular freedom on the one hand, and between writing and ecclesiastic binding on the other hand, with the former very much the prevailing norm not only in so-called 'free societies', but in the public domain generally.

13. So much so that one cannot conceive of a deeply subjective or moralistic text being published in book form, since books send out the wrong signals, in their printed-character formats, as far as any possibility of religious binding is concerned.

14. Not only would it be a contradiction in terms for deeply subjective work to be published in book form, but it is almost inconceivable that publishers would encourage the dissemination of such writings anyway, bearing in mind their irrelevance to the printed norms to which books invariably subscribe.

15. The only medium likely to do justice to highly philosophical texts of a deeply subjective nature, such that go beyond even Christian binding in their transcendentalist aspirations, would be compact discs, specifically with the use of a writerly, or joined-character, typeface ... such that could only prove more technically suited to the theoretical exemplification of what may well amount to a Superchristian binding, the binding-of-bindings and truth-of-truths.

16. For binding is not only beyond freedom, as wavicles lie beyond particles, but is that which comes to pass when the male of the species takes responsibility for his own destiny and rejects secular objectivity as a matter of principle.

17. Thus it is theoretically possible to restore, on suitably artificial terms, writing to its moral pre-eminence in the vanguard of binding to subjective values, and anyone who does so will have passed beyond the secular freedoms of the world and the dominion, in consequence, of female objectivity.

18. Anyone who seeks for truth not in himself or, rather, his self, but in the print-based publications of secular modernity ... is searching in the wrong place and effectively wasting his time!

SELF VIS-À-VIS BRAIN

1. It is easy to confound the self with the brain, for the brain is the arena in which the ego strives for symbolic definition as 'I' or 'me'. In actuality, however, the brain is merely a tool of the self.

2. That which thinks is not the brain as such, though the brain is certainly capable of spontaneously generating thoughts from time to time, but the self which uses the brain for purposes of thinking either about itself or others, not to mention about things or situations in general. I call this self the central nervous system, for it is that which, composed of innumerable nerve fibres, locks into the base of the brain and stretches down the length of the spine.

3. Thus when the brain thinks or, more usually, is encouraged to think, it is the self, the central nervous system, which is responsible, and it is in response to a variety of sensual and sensible stimuli that the self utilizes the verbal capacity of the brain for purposes of thinking.

4. Yet it is less the brain thinking ... than the self thinking through the brain; for the central nervous system has the capacity to formulate thoughts according to its requirements, and what is thought follows from its manipulation of verbal and even non-verbal concepts, including images.

5. Now although the brain occasionally seems to think by itself, it is by and large under the control of the self, and therefore only thinks or, rather, is used for thinking when the self ordains it. A brain, on the other hand, that was not under the self's control would be deranged, whether because of damage to the brain or damage to the central nervous system, or both.

6. For most people most of the time, however, thought happens when one wants it to happen, because it is oneself or, rather, one's self, the central nervous system, which is responsible for making it happen, since the brain is simply a tool and verbal storehouse of the self, which manifests itself to it as ego, the fulcrum of thought.

7. Therefore the 'I' that thinks these thoughts is not the brain but the egocentric manifestation of the self which uses the symbol 'I' to define itself in relation to thought, and which only thinks when it wants to think.

8. Hence that which pertains to the brain, viz. verbal concepts, and that which actually thinks by manipulating those concepts in a rational and meaningful way, viz. the ego, are two quite separate entities, as separate or distinctive, in fact, as the phenomenally sensible not-self, or brain, and the transpersonal self, or central nervous system.

9. For the brain is merely one of a number of not-selves, or organic foci of willpower, which range from sensuality to sensibility on both phenomenal and noumenal planes, whereas the central nervous system is transpersonal in its ability to manipulate all organs of sensuality and sensibility, whether directly or via the brain, and yet remain distinct from them at the same time.

10. In this respect, the transpersonal self, or central nervous system, contrasts with the personal self, or bodily form in general, which is simply the outer manifestation, or concretization, of the inner self ... to the extent that it reflects, in greater or lesser degrees, either an objective or a subjective disposition - the former female and the latter male.

11. Hence whereas the personal self, or bodily form, is what is apparent to perception, the transpersonal self, or central nervous system, is hidden from view as that which is behind or central to the body generally, and compared to which the latter is simply a concrete manifestation.

12. Now whether the body is an objective concretization of the self or a subjective concretization of it ... will depend on the gender of the central nervous system, since the outer distinctions between female and male derive from the inner distinctions between what are fundamentally two different kinds of nervous system - the objective, or selfless, kind of the female self, and the subjective, or selfish, kind of the male self.

13. Hence there is a basic conflict of the seeds, or selves, long before they achieve concretization in one of two principal ways - either objectively in the case of the female body, with its salient protuberances, or subjectively in the case of the male body, which is more classically reflective, in its vegetative subjectivity, of perfect form.

14. This conflict of the seeds may be traced back to the cosmic distinction, at the roots of life, between the stellar plane and the solar plane, the latter having emerged from the former in the course of evolutionary progress from objectivity to subjectivity, superfeminine to submasculine, vacuum to plenum, spatial space to sequential time.

15. In the Bible, this emergence is of course interpreted as a 'fall', the 'fall' of Satan from 'Heaven', which is identified with the Creatoresque 'First Mover' (Jehovah). But, in truth, such a 'fall' is commensurate with evolutionary progress from female objectivity to male subjectivity, and thus from selflessness to selfishness, the precondition, on any plane, not only of egocentric but, more importantly, of psychocentric, and hence soulful, self-realization.

16. For the self is divisible, after all, into egocentric and psychocentric manifestations, the former appertaining to form and the latter, subdivisible into spiritual and emotional aspects, respectively appertaining to content and to contentment, and only that self which, being subjective to begin with, is sufficiently selfish ... will be able to cultivate the soul to any appreciable extent, an extent commensurate, I mean, with soul per se, rather than with some 'bovaryization' of soul more germane to a hegemonic will and/or spirit.

17. Hence it takes a male self to develop selfness, or selfhood, to any appreciable extent; for the self cannot be developed where there is no genetic predisposition to subjectivity but, rather, a predisposition to objectivity on the basis of a secondary order of self such that, being selfless, defers to power and glory, will and spirit, at the expense of form and content(ment), ego and soul.

18. It is this capacity for enhanced selfhood which sets males apart from females, and guarantees that the development of ego and soul to their logical conclusions will only be possible on the basis of an intensely subjective orientation ... such that requires a more evolved central nervous system than that to which the generality of females are heir.

SUBDIVISIONS OF THE SELF

1. Besides having a physiological correlation with the central nervous system, the self can be psychologically and psychically divided, as I hinted above, into ego on the one hand, and mind and soul on the other hand, so that there is, over and above its physiological basis (in the central nervous system), a three-way subdivision between ego, mind, and soul, as, in other words, between conscious, superconscious, and subconscious, the latter being the emotional core of the self.

2. Thus the self, considered psychologically and psychically, is divisible between a conscious ego, a superconscious mind, and a subconscious soul, with the ego situated in-between what are in effect the psychocentric extremes of the self - namely, the superconscious mind and the subconscious soul.

3. Unlike the mind and soul, the ego has intellectual connotations by dint of its ability, in consciousness, to manipulate thoughts, as already discussed, whereas the mind should only be associated with the spirit (while still remaining distinct from what is, after all, a manifestation of what I am apt to think of as psychesomatic selflessness) and the soul, by contrast, only be associated with the emotional core of the self.

4. In fact, it is the soul which is truly of the self psychocentrically, because it strictly pertains to the self and not to either the self involved with the not-self intellectually, viz. thoughts, or the self conditioned by selflessness as spirituality, viz. sensational awareness.

5. Thus while the ego utilizes the not-self and is transmuted into mind by selflessness, the self can only tolerate so much selflessness before it opts to rebound from it and psycho-concentrically gravitate to what we call the soul, or kernel of the self, which is its emotional resolution.

6. Thus the self progresses, in overall terms, from its physiological mean in the central nervous system to its psycho-concentric core in the soul via its egocentric and psycho-eccentric compromises with the will of the not-self on the one hand and with the spirit of selflessness on the other hand - the former appertaining to power and the latter to glory.

7. It progresses, if you prefer, from id to soul via ego and mind, as from its instinctual basis in the central nervous system to its emotional core in the soul via intellectual and spiritual intermediate positions in conjunction with the will and the spirit, neither of which directly appertain to the self but, rather, to that which stands apart from it as not-self and selflessness.

8. For whereas the not-self is an illustration of somatic power, selflessness is an illustration of psychesomatic glory, neither of which should be confused with the physiological structure of the self as central nervous system, the psychological form of the self as ego, the psycho-eccentric content of the self as mind, or the psycho-concentric contentment of the self as soul.

9. But if the not-self and selflessness come in a variety of different guises, from metachemical and chemical with the objective elements of fire and water ... to physical and metaphysical with the subjective elements of vegetation and air, so too, I contend, does the self, since not only is there a gender divide between the objective and subjective manifestations of the central nervous system, but the nervous system, corresponding to the transpersonal self, can be phenomenal or noumenal, lower class or upper class, depending on whether it is of volume and mass or of time and space.

THE LIE OF EQUALITY

1. It would be as foolish to imagine that there is only one kind of self, one kind of central nervous system, as to imagine that there was only one kind of not-self, say phenomenally subjective, like the brain or even, in sensual terms, the phallus.

2. There is certainly only one self per person, one central nervous system to each body, but that self can be primarily objective (and secondarily subjective) or primarily subjective (and secondarily objective), depending on one's gender, as well as either phenomenal or noumenal in the overall composition of its elements.

3. Thus not only should we distinguish the female self, or central nervous system, from the male self, but one should also allow, on a planar basis (the basis of elemental planes considered individually), for distinctions between nervous systems which, depending on the gender, are predominantly or preponderantly phenomenal, and those, up above, which are predominantly or preponderantly noumenal.

4. Hence we should distinguish between the phenomenal objectivity of chemical nervous systems in relation to volume-mass femininity, and the phenomenal subjectivity of physical nervous systems in relation to mass-volume masculinity - the former affiliated to the phenomenal element of water, the latter to the phenomenal element of vegetation.

5. Likewise, we should distinguish between the noumenal objectivity of metachemical nervous systems in relation to space-time devility, and the noumenal subjectivity of metaphysical nervous systems in relation to time-space divinity - the former affiliated to the noumenal element of fire, the latter to the noumenal element of air.

6. Now if the transpersonal self, or central nervous system, comes in a variety of guises ... from noumenal objectivity in space-time devility to noumenal subjectivity in time-space divinity via phenomenal objectivity in volume-mass femininity and phenomenal subjectivity in mass-volume masculinity, then so do its psychological and psychical extrapolations, which accrue to it as ego, mind and soul.

7. Thus no more than we can limit life to one kind of central nervous system, and hence id, can it be limited to only one kind of ego or mind or soul, since there are as many egos, minds, and souls as there are different kinds of id, or nervous systems in general.

8. Hence to speak of an 'equality of all souls', as Christianity does, is not only untrue, it is a religious lie that 'flies in the face' of actuality on both gender and, for want of a better word, class terms.

9. Unfortunately the consequences of the adoption of this untruth by the Christian Church have been not only contrary to the will of Christ, who effectively taught the segregation of men from women on the basis of the Cross, but contrary to the truth of the 'friction of the seeds', as understood by the Jews and documented in the Old Testament.

10. For once you go down the road of upholding a doctrine like the 'equality of all souls', you part company with gender segregation through what amounts to a liberal equalitarianism which has the effect of creating mud where there might otherwise, in phenomenal actuality, have been water on the one hand, and earth on the other.

11. Thus instead of a harder or firmer earth in relation to the salvation of men to the Cross, i.e. to Christ, the Church produces, through equalitarian delusion, a bog of mud for 'the faithful', women as well as men, to bog down in, thereby perpetuating the world.

12. Now such a 'bog' may call itself Christian, but, in actuality, it is a liberal rejection of Christ and the notion that, to follow him, one should (as a man) leave women behind and 'take up the cross' of 'earthly rebirth', the 'rebirth' that has less to do with perfect contentment (in metaphysical joy) than with perfect form (in physical knowledge), to which, due to subjective factors, the male of the species more perfectly corresponds.

13. Of course, here we enter into another criticism of the Church, and hence of institutional Christianity; for 'earthly rebirth', even were it properly to occur on the basis of gender segregation, is a couple of planes short, in voluminous volume, of 'heavenly rebirth', the 'rebirth' not merely of the brain in relation to the phallus, but of the lungs in relation to the ears - in short, of respiratory sensibility in spaced space.

14. For Christianity, despite its professed zeal for salvation, doesn't really extend beyond Christ except to the extent that cerebral sensibility diagonally 'backs on' to aural sensuality in the metaphysical 'kingdom without' of the Father. There is no prospect of metaphysical salvation, the salvation-of-salvations, with Christianity, but only a physical salvation, through the word of Christ, which brings men of a certain phenomenal and effectively lower-class stamp to physical sensibility in the brain, a sensibility which then finds itself vulnerable to Subchristian pressures from the metaphysical sensuality of the Father in the properly theocratic realm beyond.

15. Yet Christianity, for all its deference to aural sensuality in the theocratic transcendentalism of the Subchristian Father, remains centred, by and large, in Christ, even when, through gender equalitarianism, it manifestly fails to 'come up to' his relative level of salvation. For it believes, remember, in the 'equality of all souls', and such an equality takes rather more of a phenomenal turn than a noumenal one, even with a peripheral noumenal deference, as it were, to theocracy.

16. Hence not only is it difficult, if not impossible, to achieve a genuinely Christian 'rebirth', through Christ's doctrine of the Cross, when gender equalitarianism creates mud out of water and earth, feminine and masculine elements, but it is impossible to the point of inconceivable to imagine people going beyond Christianity, and hence the phenomenal realm of cerebral sensibility, other than through a peripheral deference to the Father, in due Subchristian vein.

17. For if there is one thing that Christianity is against, in its equalitarianism of the souls, it is the prospect of a Superchristian soul such that transcends the phenomenal parameters of the Christian Church by upholding a metaphysical 'kingdom within' and the need, in consequence, for noumenal salvation from aural sensuality to respiratory sensibility, as from theocracy to meritocracy or, in conventional Christian terminology, the Father to the Holy Spirit (of Heaven).

18. The Church has always opposed that which goes sensibly beyond the phenomenal parameters of Christ; for the Church is rooted in the lie of the 'equality of all souls', and those souls, or selves, must needs be phenomenal, and hence lower class, in their relationship to volume and mass.

19. Thus the Church has denied religious fulfilment to the higher man, call him superman or Superchristian or Messianic Leader, whose soul, far from being equal to that of the phenomenal masses, is as superior to it as joy to pleasure or, in egocentrically formal terms, truth to knowledge.

20. That man for whom transcendental meditation rather than prayer is the mode of sensibility to which he relates in his rejection of phenomenal limitations ... has never been given any encouragement by the Church, but is one for whom the Christian notion of the 'equality of all souls' is, at best, a sick joke, at worst ... a brazen lie!

THE LIE OF THE HEART

1. If the reduction of life to phenomenal terms fails to do anything like adequate justice to its noumenal dimensions, particularly to those dimensions in time and space which, being metaphysical, owe more to air than to fire, then the reduction of the soul to the heart, or the notion, in other words, that the heart is the 'seat of the soul', which is always widely prevalent in the West, does a grave injustice to the soul.

2. For the heart is not the self, neither in physiological nor in psychological and/or psychical terms, but one of the principal not-selves which the self, and the metachemically-biased self in particular, uses for purposes of expressing metachemical will.

3. The heart is, in fact, that not-self which corresponds to repetitive time on the space-time axis of noumenal objectivity, and is thus the sensible mode of metachemical not-self, the mode at the opposite extreme from its sensual manifestation in the eyes.

4. Thus if the heart and the self, conceived as the central nervous system, are not one and the same thing but really quite distinct entities, how has the soul, which psychically pertains to the self, come to be identified with the heart?

5. Surely the short answer to this seemingly impossible question is that people have treated the heart as a metaphor for the soul, as when the soul is understood to lie 'at the heart of', i.e. the core, of the self, and have then taken the metaphor too literally, so that the core of the self was thought to be the heart.

6. Hence they have substituted the heart for the metaphorical reference which the word 'heart' was intended to convey, and have then accepted the false conclusion that the heart and the 'heart of the self', viz. the soul, are one and the same.

7. Frankly, it is better to refer to the soul as the 'core of the self', if one is not to risk following in the fallible footsteps of those who have substituted the heart for the metaphor it was intended to convey. For the 'core of the self', the soul, is most certainly not the heart, even if the soul 'lies at the heart', so to speak, of the self.

8. Now the core of the self can be an expression of soul, a compression of soul, a depression of soul, or an impression of soul, depending on the self to which it is affiliated as its psychical extrapolation.

9. That is to say, the soul can be emotional on either a loving, a proud, a pleasurable, or a joyful basis, depending whether the self to which it is affiliated has a metachemical, and hence fiery, temperament; a chemical, and hence watery, temperament; a physical, and hence earthy, temperament; or a metaphysical, and hence airy, temperament - at any rate, predominantly and/or preponderantly, according to both the gender of the person concerned and his/her prevailing class in relation to either the phenomenal, and lower, planes or to the noumenal, and upper, planes.

10. Thus not all people are equally disposed to love, pride, pleasure, or joy, any more than to the negative converse of those emotions, and this is because, despite contingencies and fluctuating circumstances, people differ from one another on the basis of the four main categories of self, as outlined above.

11. Even to look at people, and thus perceive the outer manifestation, the concretization, of their inner self, is to know that they differ from one another not only on a gender basis, but in terms of their builds and heights, which, genetically speaking, are a rough guide to their prevailing class, be it phenomenal, and lower, or noumenal, and upper.

12. Thus we can distinguish 'the tall' from 'the short', with those in the noumenal categories (of space and time) generally tall, and those in the phenomenal categories (of volume and mass) generally short, whether or not we then proceed to differentiate 'the thick' from 'the thin' in each category, as between fire and air 'up above', and water and vegetation 'down below'.

13. Certainly build owes not a little to genetic factors, which can be traced back to the transpersonal self, or central nervous system, and it would indeed be strange if ruling types, governing types, representing types, and leading types, to take a politically-biased paradigm, differed not at all in their physiological profiles.

14. For it generally transpires that the most suitable height and build for a ruling disposition is tall and thick, or muscular, whereas the most suitable height and build for a leading disposition, at the other extreme of the noumenal spectrum, will more usually be tall and thin, i.e. gangular (of ganglia and/or gangly).

15. Likewise it generally transpires that the most suitable height and build for a governing disposition is short and thick, i.e. glandular, whereas the most suitable height and build for a representing disposition, at the other extreme of the phenomenal spectrum, will more usually be short and thin, i.e. vascular.

16. Whatever the exact case, people differ just as much in their emotional experiences as in their physiologies, and while some will be especially capable of and disposed to the emotional per se of joy in relation to a metaphysical disposition, others will be further removed from airy soul in what amount to pleasurable, proud, and loving 'bovaryizations' of soul in relation to physical, chemical, and metachemical dispositions respectively, so that one might be forgiven for describing their prevailing emotional experiences as second-, third-, and fourth-rate, as the case may be, compared to and/or contrasted with what is, by any logical reckoning, the first-rate emotional experience of joy in the soul-of-souls.

17. For the soul is only in its per se manifestation in association with the noumenal element of air, not in association with the phenomenal element of earth (vegetation), the phenomenal element of water, or the noumenal element of fire, which are respectively egocentric, spiritual, and instinctual elements in which soul is accordingly 'bovaryized', or exemplified, in other words, on terms which fall short, in retrogressive degrees, of its per se manifestation in joy.

18. Thus the self which is into the heart will be at the furthest possible remove from joyful sensibility in the loving sensibility which tends to characterize the emotional experience of a metachemical disposition, a disposition in which only a fourth-rate order of soul can exist.

19. For the heart is a metachemical type of not-self that tends to exemplify a first-rate, or expressive, order of power, affiliated to which will be found a second-rate, or fiery, order of glory, a third-rate, or repetitive, order of form, and a fourth-rate, or photonic, order of contentment - the contentment, as has been argued, of emotional love.

20. Emotional love correlates with fundamentalism, whether in scientific, political, economic, or religious terms, and it tends to be the case that societies rooted in fundamentalism identify the soul with love, and hence the heart, to the detriment if not exclusion of pride, pleasure, and, most especially, joy.

A BROTHERHOOD OF MAN

1. Christ not only taught his disciples that the 'Kingdom of Heaven' lay within, but that it would only come to pass when there was a 'brotherhood of man' on earth, and that to achieve such a 'brotherhood' one would have to follow him, thereby abandoning mothers, sisters, wives, girlfriends, etc. in loyalty to the Cross.

2. Thus the concept of a 'brotherhood of man' conveys a deeply Christian notion, insofar as one imagines men existing, in Christ-like vein, independently of women, not as their husbands or boyfriends or lovers or toadies or dupes or whatever, but as men who have opted, disdaining the heathenistic norms of female dominion, to reject the world ... of heterosexual relationships ... in the interests of their souls or, at any rate, the salvation of the self from the domination of the not-self and selflessness, such that would otherwise be the prevailing norm.

3. For women, with their more objective central nervous systems, are not, like men, creatures in whom the self comes first but, on the contrary, creatures who are primarily disposed to the not-self and to selflessness, and only secondarily disposed to the self, whether in terms of ego or of soul.

4. Thus any compromise by men with women invariably leads to a situation, necessarily Heathen, in which the self is confronted, at every turn, by the domination of the not-self and selflessness, if not directly, as in the case of women themselves, then at any rate indirectly, via association with them.

5. Therefore the self cannot be saved from such a domination unless one opts to live independently of women in Christ-like vein, which is the way of the Cross and path to the 'Kingdom of Heaven', viz. the saved soul.

6. Thus not only is a 'brotherhood of man' (or of men) a precondition of salvation, but one cannot even envisage the 'Kingdom of Heaven' except in relation to such a 'brotherhood', that is to say, to men who have opted to 'turn their back' on that which divides them from one another - namely women.

7. For so long as they continue to enter into sexual relations with women, they will not only be vulnerable to the domination of the self by the not-self and selflessness, of form by power and glory, but will be divided from one another by women, who thereby preclude the possibility of a 'brotherhood of man' from coming to pass.

8. Thus the 'Kingdom of Heaven' is prevented from coming to pass, since there can only be a 'brotherhood of man' if the world (of heterosexual relationships) has been overcome, and such a 'brotherhood' is a precondition of Heaven.

9. One could substitute Superman, Supercross, Superchristian, and Superchurch for all the Christian references made above, but that would simply be to take a phenomenal premise to its noumenal conclusion, and thereby improve upon the Christian tradition.

10. For the Christian tradition is one thing in theory but quite another in practice, and few if any churches inspire confidence in the notion that a 'brotherhood of man' is close at hand, not least of all on account of their manifest refusal to entertain gender segregation.

11. For churches are, after all, institutional frameworks in which people congregate together to worship Christ, and it is evident, to judge by the composition of their congregations, that women are as entitled to congregate in them as men, thereby precluding the possibility of a 'brotherhood of man'.

12. In fact, considerations as to the composition of church congregations return us, once again, to that metaphorical analogue wherein the indiscriminate mixing of feminine and masculine, of water and earth, creates mud, and mud it is in which these so-called Christians 'bog down', to the detriment of their souls or, at any rate, to the disadvantage of men, who are thereby precluded from attaining to that firmer earth upon which the authentic Cross stands as a symbol of worldly rejection and Christ-like resolve, the resolve of men to depart the company of women and aspire to living in the Saviour's footsteps.

13. Unfortunately, while it may symbolize Christian salvation, the Cross does little to inspire confidence in the metaphysical salvation, to which I alluded some pages ago, because it is phenomenal, and if one rejects the bodily, or phallic, mode of earthiness, as illustrated by the Crucifixion, it is only in order to affirm, via the word of Christ, its cerebral mode, the 'reborn' earthiness, so to speak, of vegetative sensibility.

14. Thus the Cross always stands as a symbol for the substitution of one mode of earthly phenomenality for another, the sensible for the sensual, which is nothing more than the salvation of man conceived in masculine, or phenomenal, terms ... from the phallus to the brain within the necessarily restricted parameters of mass-volume evolution.

15. In fact, compared to time-space evolution, the noumenal axis of metaphysics in which there is the possibility of salvation from the aural sensuality of the ears to the respiratory sensibility of the lungs, this phenomenal salvation of Christianity within mass-volume evolution, exemplified by the written-off body on the Cross, is merely lower class, since obtaining within the phenomenal planes of mass and volume, specifically with reference to their masculine, or vegetative, manifestations.

16. Thus the Cross does nothing for the man capable, in his noumenal bias, of both achieving and proclaiming metaphysical salvation, and has accordingly always failed to inspire or appeal to such a man, necessarily upper class and supermasculine, in consequence.

17. Rather has he been obliged to admit to himself of the lower-class nature of Christianity which, because it is incapable of rising above earthly sensibility, has always fallen short of heavenly sensibility (though not, be it said again, of heavenly sensuality), and hence of that which is more genuinely religious.

18. It may have been that in the far-off days of authoritarian monarchy, Christianity was correspondingly less lower class than it has subsequently become, but it would still have been far from genuinely upper class in its adherence to that perennial symbol of Christianity, the Cross.

19. In fact, such enhanced affiliations with time and space as Christianity would then have had ... could only have made it more biased towards the Father than the Holy Spirit, in view of the autocratic pressures, including authoritarian monarchy, that would have been brought to bear on it, whether for better (the Father) or for worse (Jehovah).

20. For autocratic pressures are not commensurate with or identical to theocracy, since owing more to space-time devolution than to time-space evolution, and thus they would have engendered or necessitated constant interchanges between the Father and Christ of the New Testament, and Jehovah and Satan of the Old Testament, as Church was reconciled to Kingdom, and Kingdom to Church.

21. Be that as it may, the development of authoritarian accountability, leading up to and following the Reformation, undoubtedly paved the way for representative government and, as a corollary of this, the further lowering of Christianity to the more familiar parameters, from a modernist standpoint, of volume and mass, whether as volume-mass devolution (Protestantism) or as mass-volume evolution (Catholicism), and has thus brought the Church firmly down to water and/or earth (though also to both water and earth) on a bedrock owing less to the Father and the Holy Spirit than to the Mother and the Son of Marianism and Christism.

22. Thus the Church became even more accountable to lower-class wishes and limitations than before, when such things were still hindered, if not stifled, by upper-class control of society, and it inevitably followed that lower-class politics would emerge from under the reformed Church in the guise of democracy, to replace the autocratic politics of authoritarian tradition.

23. Thus democracy arose as an expression or manifestation of lower-class politics in the Western world, with a secular extrapolation from the 'equality of all souls' of ecclesiastical precedent which took the form of the equality of all men (and subsequently women), regardless of their background, perceived class, genetic disposition, heights and/or builds, etc.

24. And just as the reformed Church had 'bogged down' in the ecclesiastical mud of volume and mass, so the democratic State would 'bog down' in the secular mud of volume and mass, with due pluralistic relativity between water and earth, whether as water and earth or as a muddy (and centrist) combination of each.

25. And that is where the Western world still finds itself after several decades, and even centuries in some countries, of lower-class politics, of politics that, though it may have put a stop to the autocratic excesses of authoritarianism, did as little to further the cause of a 'brotherhood of man' as the Church, and all because the 'liberty, equality, and fraternity' to which it generally subscribed, whether informally or formally, inevitably played into the hands of women, and duly gave them political encouragement to 'turn the tables' on men through Feminism.

26. Thus the same equalitarian delusion that tripped up the Church, and upon which it subsequently foundered, has since proved to the detriment of the State, insofar as the latter's secular delusions have paved the way, in virtually every Western country, for the dominance of Feminism under cover of 'political correctness'.

27. For people are not equal, neither class-wise nor gender-wise, and even when you treat them as though they were, the inequalities still persist and condition society accordingly.

28. Thus men end-up being dominated by women both on phenomenal and noumenal planes, since the genders are not equal but as distinct as subjectivity and objectivity.

29. In such a heathenistic situation, the actuality of all 'free societies', the prospect of a 'brotherhood of man' is further removed than ever before, because men find themselves divided between themselves and dominated by a 'sisterhood of woman'.

30. This 'sisterhood of woman' is presided over by Feminism, and Feminism it is that, whether in the phenomenal guise of 'Britannia' or in the noumenal guise of 'the Liberty Belle', ensures that the interests of women or, at any rate, females take precedence over those of men, irrespective of any pretence at equality.

THE BROTHERHOOD OF SUPERMEN

1. Unlike Christ - but not as a heathenistic Antichrist - I teach a 'brotherhood of supermen', for I believe that such a 'brotherhood' can be brought about, and that it is the only basis upon which the 'Kingdom of Heaven' can truly come to pass.

2. Yet a 'brotherhood of supermen' would not exclude the possibility of a 'brotherhood of men' for those males who were not 'up to' a properly metaphysical sensibility, nor, for that matter, would it exclude the possibility of a sort of 'sisterhood of women' for those females whose rightful gender entitlement, in 'Kingdom Come', was more chemical than either physical or metaphysical.

3. In fact, such a 'brotherhood of supermen' would only be possible in relation to what, in previous texts, I have called a triadic Beyond, the triadic Beyond, more specifically, of the Centre in the 'Kingdom Come' of a Gaelic federation (prospectively) of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales, wherein the Gaels would be united under what has been termed religious sovereignty.

4. For only in such a triadic Beyond would it be possible to have a 'brotherhood of supermen', and thus do proper justice to metaphysical sensibility in what would amount to the top tier of the Centre, a tier dedicated, despite subdivisions characteristic of all tiers of the triadic Beyond, to transcendental meditation, wherein the soul would experience that inner joy which is its ultimate fulfilment.

5. But the triadic Beyond presupposes Social Transcendentalism, and thus an end to Christianity, whether Catholic or Protestant, sensible or sensual. Yet Social Transcendentalism is only possible on the basis that the People, as electorate, are granted the opportunity to vote for religious sovereignty, the ultimate sovereignty, so far as I am concerned, and thus elect to abandon what I have elsewhere called 'sins and/or punishments of the world' for salvation from it to the Other World of 'Kingdom Come' in which, under Social Transcendental Centrism, the triadic Beyond would have its institutional place.

6. For unless the People do vote for religious sovereignty, they will continue to be the playthings and victims of secular sovereignties which bind them to the world and prevent not only the possibility of a 'brotherhood of men' coupled, down below, to a 'sisterhood of women', but, more importantly, the possibility of a 'brotherhood of supermen', such that would encourage the best and highest elements of the People to cultivate metaphysical salvation on the basis of respiratory sensibility, and thus achieve the ultimate 'kingdom within', a 'kingdom' of Superchristian deliverance from both Subchristian sensuality and Christian sensibility alike.

7. For only in respiratory sensibility does religion achieve metaphysical resolution, the resolution of salvation from aural sensuality, and the maximization, in consequence, of soulful, or psychocentric, fulfilment.

8. Cerebral sensibility, on the other hand, only maximizes egocentric fulfilment, thereby keeping men pegged down, in phenomenal vein, to the sinful fulcrum of perfect form, wherein contentment, manifesting in sensible pleasure, is decidedly second-rate and no more, in consequence, than a 'bovaryization' of soul, the soul not of superman but of man, not of (spaced) space but of (voluminous) volume.

9. Better than the first-rate form of sensible knowledge is the first-rate contentment of sensible joy, the contentment of the soul per se, which is only possible on the basis of a second-rate order of form - namely, the graceful form of metaphysical truth.

10. For metaphysical truth it is that paves the way for metaphysical joy, and such truth must be in harmony with the impressive power of God and the Holy Spirit of Heaven, if the egocentric self is to plunge into the somatic not-self of the lungs and be borne on the wings of selfless out-breath towards its psycho-eccentric transmutation in superconscious mind, before opting, in a split second, to psychoconcentrically rebound to its psychocentric core in the soul of subconscious mind, whose being, being essential, is joy.

11. Only in metaphysical truth can the egocentric self enter into direct relations with the impressive power of God-as-Lungs and the Holy Spirit of Heaven-as-(Out)Breath, thereby achieving psychocentric transmutation for itself on both a spiritual and, more importantly, an emotional basis.

12. For the soul is the ultimate redemption of the ego, as the profane is superseded by the sacred, and one achieves joyful enlightenment in the most blessed contentment known to man, the contentment, more specifically, of the superman, who is or would be as Superchristian as man is Christian and, hence, a phenomenal shortfall from noumenal salvation.

13. That which embraces physical knowledge in a phenomenal shortfall from metaphysical truth ... does not lead to joy but entails, almost as an emotional aside to itself, the acquirement of pleasure, which is only made possible via the unholy spirit of the earth, the spirit that issues from the phenomenal not-self of the brain, as its thought.

14. For thought is to the brain what breath is to the lungs, only it is an unholy spirit by dint of its vegetative associations in connection with cerebral sensibility, the sensibility of 'reborn' man as opposed to the sensibility of superman, who is the 'reborn' noumenal man, the higher man, who towers above the sensible earth and the meaning thereof as sensible joy above sensible pleasure, or as sensible truth above sensible knowledge.

15. Even the subman, the 'once-born' noumenal man of aural sensuality, towers above the earth, albeit the sensual earth and the meaning thereof ... as sensual joy above sensual pleasure or as sensual truth above sensual knowledge, the carnal knowledge that owes as much to the phallus as sensual truth owes to the ears which the subman utilizes for purposes of listening, via the holy spirit of the airwaves, to music, and so on.

16. But the superman is the salvation of the subman, the beneficiary of that sensible order of wisdom that owes more to the breath than to the airwaves, and which delivers to the soul its deepest joy, the joy-of-joys in the soul-of-souls. Verily, a 'brotherhood of supermen' would be the best and highest 'brotherhood' one could ever hope to be part of, and it would exist on the top tier of the triadic Beyond within the truth-oriented framework of 'Kingdom Come'.

PROFANE AND SACRED

1. Ordinarily the egocentric self is profane in its dealings with or orientations towards the not-selves which constitute organic manifestations of will, whether in terms of metachemistry, chemistry, physics, or metaphysics - fire, water, vegetation (earth), or air.

2. But the egocentric self can be redeemed in the sacredness of its psychocentric transmutation, as and when the soul ensues upon the ego via the mind, and one is conscious of experiencing one's self emotionally, in and for itself.

3. Thus unlike the profane, or egocentric, aspect of the self, its sacred, or psychocentric, aspect is purely of the self, being the profoundest manifestation of selfhood it is possible to experience.

4. Now, of course, it cannot be maintained with any conviction that the self is always torn between one kind and degree of profanity and a corresponding kind and degree of sanctity, as between one kind and degree of ego or soul.

5. Not only do variations of one kind and degree of profanity and sanctity occur within any given individual, but people differ as to the kind and degree of self to which they primarily or generally relate, as much on a gender basis as on a genetic (class) one.

6. Thus we can differentiate the most profane egocentricity of the metachemical self from the least profane egocentricity of the metaphysical self, and further differentiate each of these noumenal extremes from the intermediate positions of what, in their phenomenality, can be called the more (relative to most) profane egocentricity of the chemical self and the less (relative to least) profane egocentricity of the physical self.

7. Hence egocentricity offers us, in both sensuality and sensibility, 'once-born' and 'reborn' contexts, a descending scale of profanity ... from the most profane ego of metachemical selfhood to the least profane ego of metaphysical selfhood via the more (relative to most) profane ego of chemical selfhood and the less (relative to least) profane ego of physical selfhood.

8. Likewise, if conversely, we can differentiate the least sacred psychocentricity of the metachemical self from the most sacred psychocentricity of the metaphysical self, and further differentiate each of these noumenal extremes from the intermediate positions of what, in their phenomenality, can be called the less (relative to least) sacred psychocentricity of the chemical self and the more (relative to most) sacred psychocentricity of the physical self.

9. Hence psychocentricity offers us, in both sensuality and sensibility, 'once-born' and 'reborn' contexts, an ascending scale of sanctity from the least sacred soul of metachemical selfhood to the most sacred soul of metaphysical selfhood via the less (relative to least) sacred soul of chemical selfhood and the more (relative to most) sacred soul of physical selfhood.

10. Whereas profanity descends from beauty to truth via strength and knowledge as we pass, in form, from fire to air via water and vegetation, sanctity ascends from love to joy via pride and pleasure as we pass, in contentment, from fire to air via water and vegetation.

11. Either way, beauty is redeemed by love, strength is redeemed by pride, knowledge is redeemed by pleasure, and truth is redeemed by joy - the contented proof, so to speak, of a formal pudding.

12. In each case, the redemption is of the profane self, or ego, in the sacred self, or soul, as of form in contentment, and thus of psychology in psyche.

13. Contrary to what may be termed the primary manifestations of profanity and sanctity in relation to the self, both egocentric and psychocentric, come what I shall call the secondary manifestations of profanity and sanctity in relation to the not-self and selflessness, to somatic will and, for want of a better term, psychesomatic spirit, whether the will and spirit be metachemical, chemical, physical, or metaphysical.

14. As with the 'primary' orders of profanity and sanctity, these 'secondary' orders, owing more to power and glory than to form and content(ment), can be graded from the most profane to the least profane via intermediate levels of profanity, and from the least sacred to the most sacred via intermediate levels of sanctity.

15. Hence we can differentiate the most profane will of the metachemical not-self from the least profane will of the metaphysical not-self, and further differentiate each of these noumenal extremes from the intermediate positions of what, in their phenomenality, can be called the more (relative to most) profane will of the chemical not-self and the less (relative to least) profane will of the physical not-self.

16. Thus willpower offers us, in organs of both sensuality and sensibility, 'once-born' and 'reborn' contexts, a descending scale of secondary profanity ... from the most profane will of metachemical not-selfhood to the least profane will of metaphysical not-selfhood via the more (relative to most) profane will of chemical not-selfhood and the less (relative to least) profane will of physical not-selfhood.

17. Likewise, if conversely, we can differentiate the least sacred spirituality of metachemical selflessness from the most sacred spirituality of metaphysical selflessness, and further differentiate each of these noumenal extremes from the intermediate positions of what, in their phenomenality, can be called the less (relative to least) sacred spirituality of chemical selflessness and the more (relative to most) sacred spirituality of physical selflessness.

18. Hence spirituality offers us, in psychesomatic emanations of both sensuality and sensibility, 'once-born' and 'reborn' contexts, an ascending scale of 'secondary' sanctity ... from the least sacred spirit of metachemical selflessness to the most sacred spirit of metaphysical selflessness via the less (relative to least) sacred spirit of chemical selflessness and the more (relative to most) sacred spirit of physical selflessness.

19. Whereas secondary profanity descends from the Devil to God via woman and man as we pass, in power, from fire to air via water and vegetation (earth), secondary sanctity ascends from Hell to Heaven via purgatory and the earth as we pass, in glory, from fire to air via water and vegetation.

20. To descend, in secondary profanity, from the diabolic power (expressive) of noumenal objectivity to the divine power (impressive) of noumenal subjectivity via the feminine power (compressive) of phenomenal objectivity and the masculine power (depressive) of phenomenal subjectivity, as from the eyes and/or heart to the ears and/or lungs via the tongue and/or womb and the phallus and/or brain.

21. To ascend, in secondary sanctity, from the unclear glory (fiery) of metachemical selectivity to the holy glory (airy) of metaphysical electivity via the clear glory (watery) of chemical deflectivity and the unholy glory (earthy) of physical reflectivity, as from sight-light and/or blood to the airwaves and/or breath via saliva and/or amniotic fluid and sperm and/or thought.

22. Corresponding to what have been called 'secondary' and 'primary' orders of profanity and sanctity, the profane has reference to the not-self and to the self in its egocentric mode, whereas the sacred has reference to the selfless and to the self in its psychocentric mode.

23. Sanctity is always a redemption of that which is profane, the will being eclipsed by the spirit in the secondary contexts of the not-self and selflessness, but the ego being eclipsed by the soul in the primary contexts of the self, wherein sanctity attains to its apotheosis.

24. Of all modes of sanctity ... from the metachemical and chemical to the physical and metaphysical ... there is none more sacred than the joyful being that accrues to the soul in its metaphysical mode; for this is the being of essence, the being-of-beings, or supreme being, of the profoundest self.

FROM APPEARANCE TO ESSENCE

1. Whereas the being of metachemistry is apparent, the being of metaphysics is essential, the being of chemistry quantitative, and the being of physics qualitative.

2. Thus we can distinguish love from joy on the noumenal planes of space and time, but pride from pleasure on the phenomenal planes of volume and mass.

3. Love is the apparent manifestation of being, pride the quantitative manifestation of being, pleasure the qualitative manifestation of being, and joy the essential manifestation of being, the being-of-beings and soul-of-souls.

4. To ascend from the fourth-rate being (apparent) of love to the first-rate being (essential) of joy via the third-rate being (quantitative) of pride and the second-rate being (qualitative) of pleasure.

5. Whereas the doing of metachemistry is apparent, the doing of metaphysics is essential, the doing of chemistry quantitative, and the doing of physics qualitative.

6. Thus we can distinguish expression from impression on the noumenal planes of space and time, but compression from depression on the phenomenal planes of volume and mass.

7. Expression is the apparent manifestation of doing, the doing-of-doings and will-of-wills; compression is the quantitative manifestation of doing, depression the qualitative manifestation of doing, and impression the essential manifestation of doing.

8. To descend from the first-rate doing (apparent) of expression to the fourth-rate doing (essential) of impression via the second-rate doing (quantitative) of compression and the third-rate doing (qualitative) of depression.

9. Whereas the taking of metachemistry is apparent, the taking of metaphysics is essential, the taking of chemistry quantitative, and the taking of physics qualitative.

10. Thus we can distinguish beauty from truth on the noumenal planes of space and time, but strength from knowledge on the phenomenal planes of volume and mass.

11. Beauty is the apparent manifestation of taking, strength the quantitative manifestation of taking, knowledge the qualitative manifestation of taking, the taking-of-takings and ego-of-egos; and truth the essential manifestation of taking.

12. To ascend from the fourth-rate taking (quantitative) of strength to the first-rate taking (qualitative) of knowledge via the third-rate taking (apparent) of beauty and the second-rate taking (essential) of truth.

13. Whereas the giving of metachemistry is apparent, the giving of metaphysics is essential, the giving of chemistry quantitative, and the giving of physics qualitative.

14. Thus we can distinguish unclearness from holiness on the noumenal planes of space and time, but clearness from unholiness on the phenomenal planes of volume and mass.

15. Unclearness is the apparent manifestation of giving, clearness the quantitative manifestation of giving, the giving-of-givings and spirit-of-spirits; unholiness is the qualitative manifestation of giving, and holiness the essential manifestation of giving.

16. To descend from the first-rate giving (quantitative) of clearness to the fourth-rate giving (qualitative) of unholiness via the second-rate giving (apparent) of unclearness and the third-rate giving (essential) of holiness.

17. Hence metachemistry affords us evidence of an elemental context (fiery) in which, due to its apparent bias, doing is first-rate, giving second-rate, taking third-rate, and being fourth-rate, as regards expression, unclearness, beauty, and love.

18. Hence chemistry affords us evidence of an elemental context (watery) in which, due to its quantitative bias, giving is first-rate, doing second-rate, being third-rate, and taking fourth-rate, as regards clearness, compression, pride, and strength.

19. Hence physics affords us evidence of an elemental context (earthy) in which, due to its qualitative bias, taking is first-rate, being second-rate, doing third-rate, and giving fourth-rate, as regards knowledge, pleasure, depression, and unholiness.

20. Hence metaphysics affords us evidence of an elemental context (airy) in which, due to its essential bias, being is first-rate, taking second-rate, giving third-rate, and doing fourth-rate, as regards joy, truth, holiness, and impression.

21. In metachemistry the will is in its per se, or apparent, mode and everything else, viz. spirit, ego, and soul, is 'bovaryized', whereas in chemistry the spirit is in its per se, or quantitative, mode and everything else, viz. will, soul, and ego, is 'bovaryized'.

22. In physics the ego is in its per se, or qualitative, mode and everything else, viz. soul, will, and spirit, is 'bovaryized', whereas in metaphysics the soul is in its per se, or essential, mode and everything else, viz. ego, spirit, and will, is 'bovaryized'.

23. Metachemistry signifies the rule of power over glory, form and contentment, whereas chemistry signifies the governance of power, contentment, and form by glory.

24. Physics signifies the representation of contentment, power, and glory to form, whereas metaphysics signifies the lead of form, glory, and power by contentment.

25. The appearances of metachemistry contrast with the essences of metaphysics, as fire with air, while the quantities of chemistry contrast with the qualities of physics, as water with vegetation.

26. Metachemistry, being apparent, is the context par excellence of science, in which science is in its per se mode, while politics, economics, and religion are accordingly scientific.

27. Chemistry, being quantitative, is the context par excellence of politics, in which politics is in its per se mode, while science, religion, and economics are accordingly political.

28. Physics, being qualitative, is the context par excellence of economics, in which economics is in its per se mode, while religion, science, and politics are accordingly economic.

29. Metaphysics, being essential, is the context par excellence of religion, in which religion is in its per se mode, while economics, politics, and science are accordingly religious.

30. The power of science contrasts absolutely, in noumenal terms, with the contentment of religion, while the glory of politics contrasts relatively, in phenomenal terms, with the form of economics.

LIFE AFTER DEATH

1. The 'life' after death is the life of the self as central nervous system brought 'face to face' with itself as soul.

2. For when the self, considered physiologically, has nothing further to do in relation to the not-selves and/or complementary manifestations of selflessness to which, in psychological mode, it is ordinarily committed, it can only turn inwards, as to what is most germane to itself.

3. Thus when there is no need of or cause for the ego to concern itself with the functioning of bodily organs and their psychesomatic extrapolations, the ego ceases to exist, and one is left with the self in and of itself, not so much impulsively, through instinctual physiology, as soulfully, through emotional psyche.

4. For the soul is as far removed from the id, the self as impulsive physiology, as it is possible to be, and thus is that which is omega-most in the self, the centre or core of the self conceived psychocentrically.

5. Ordinarily one only achieves an accommodation with the soul, with emotional psychocentricity, on an intermittent and therefore imperfect basis, since the central nervous system is primarily concerned with the body and its various organs, as already noted.

6. In death, however, the accommodation with the soul is permanent and therefore perfect, insofar as there are no longer any bodily distractions for the self to concern itself with either impulsively, through the self as id, or consciously, through the self as ego.

7. Thus there is a sense in which death brings one 'face to face' with the self-as-soul to such an extent that it is feasible to equate this permanent condition with a sort of Eternity, even though the actual condition of self-absorption only lasts for a specific duration ... commensurate with the absence of extensive and/or intensive decomposition of one's corpse.

8. For extensive and/or intensive decomposition would ultimately effect the central nervous system no less than the bodily organs in general, thereby eroding such self-absorption as death had made possible.

9. Therefore the 'life-in-death' of the grave is not eternal in the sense of lasting for ever, beyond the decay of the corpse, but is perfect only in the somewhat narrower sense of being a permanent condition rather than an intermittent one.

10. Yet even in death there would surely be a gender-based distinction between how the central nervous system is experienced by female corpses and how it is experienced by male corpses, with due objective vis-à-vis subjective implications respectively.

11. Even genetic factors have to be taken into account with death, since it is unlikely that people normally accustomed to metachemical and/or chemical manifestations of the soul in life would experience the self in exactly the same way as those for whom physical and/or metaphysical manifestations of soul were or had been the habitual norm.

12. I fancy that as one had lived in life, so one would 'live again' in death, with positive distinctions, where applicable, between a loving relationship to self (noumenal), a proud relationship to self (phenomenal), a pleasurable relationship to self (phenomenal), and a joyful relationship to self (noumenal).

13. Hence when both gender and genetics have been taken into account, it would seem that the Afterlife is no more reflective of an 'equality of all souls' than life itself, insofar as there are different types of central nervous system with correspondingly different kinds of emotional experience as a prevailing norm.

14. Yet even those kinds of emotional experience which are less than holy, whether because they were earthy or purgatorial or hellish, would be of an altogether purer and finer order in the grave than ever they had been in life, when the soul had to contend with competition from the ego and the ego, in turn, had to contend with competition from the id, which is the self's impulsive approach to bodily management.

15. In fact, I happen to believe that, although both the id and the ego play a part in managing the body, females are more disposed to id-based impulsiveness than males, and accordingly tend to rely on the id to manipulate bodily organs to a greater extent than their male counterparts, who prefer, as a rule, the gentler or more indirect path of ... psychological manipulation through egocentric consciousness.

16. Although I have no doubt that females sometimes use the ego and males the id, I incline to the view that females prefer, when possible, the direct path of manipulation in which nervous physiology is instinctively applied to somatic physiology, with greater emphasis, as a rule, on the objective organs of sensuality and sensibility than on their subjective counterparts.

17. For it is the objective organs which, being female, are more attuned to impulsive manipulation by the id, the physiological instinct of the central nervous system, than their subjective counterparts, and therefore it is feasible for females to by-pass the ego - much less subjective as theirs happens to be anyway - in order to maximize the effectiveness with which they are able to manipulate the, in particular, objective organs of sensuality and sensibility to their powerful and/or glorious advantage.

18. However, even if males are more disposed to consciously rather than impulsively manipulate the various not-selves to which they relate, and all because that which, being subjective and male, tends to work better when consciously manipulated or to require conscious manipulation, as the case may be, they still find themselves in a position whereby the very fact of having to manipulate bodily organs detracts from the calibre of mind and/or soul to which, in superconscious and subconscious terms, all egocentricity ultimately leads, and leads, be it remembered, on an intermittent, as opposed to a permanent, basis.

19. More consciously rational and correspondingly less unconsciously instinctual than females they may be, but even males do not obtain in life the sort of soulful purity which only death can bring to light, and therefore it must be said that, so far as the life of the soul is concerned, it is death which grants to the self its maximum self-realization.

20. All life can do, on the other hand, is enable one, within certain predetermined gender and/or genetic boundaries, to cultivate one kind of soul rather than another, and thereby condition oneself, in advance, for the type of afterlife experience which most corresponds to that particular kind of soul, be it metachemical, chemical, physical, or metaphysical. For as one had lived in life, so shall one live again in death, albeit on a purer and more permanent (eternal) basis.

'GIVING UP THE GHOST'

1. The cessation of cardiac functioning at death causes the lungs to stop breathing, and in breathing one's last breath it could be said that one had 'given up the ghost'.

2. But this 'ghost', one's last breath, is commensurate with the spirit or, more specifically, with the Holy Spirit of Heaven, which is spirit that is affiliated to the air, whether externally, as airwaves, or internally, as breath.

3. Hence, at death, one ceases to breathe, and the breath, or holy order of spirit, returns to the air, the surrounding atmosphere, wherein it is duly absorbed and dissipated.

4. But this 'giving up the ghost' is not commensurate with the soul, since the self is still intact, but only with the departure of metaphysical selflessness, that third-rate order of spirit which has been identified with the breath.

5. Thus although the Holy Spirit ... has departed, the soul remains or, more correctly, the self remains in situ as central nervous system, albeit without three of its principal ingredients, viz. the physiological id, the psychological ego and (in relation to the breath) the psycho-eccentric mind, the quantified self of superconsciousness.

6. In short, death takes away the necessity of both unconscious and conscious/superconscious manipulation of bodily organs, and without either an id or an ego/mind ... the self is reduced to that which is most germane to itself, viz. the soul.

7. Thus one comes, at death, 'face to face' with the core of the self, since there is no longer, to all intents and purposes, an id, an ego, or a mind in existence vis-à-vis the somatic not-selves and their psychesomatic complements in the various manifestations of spirit.

8. Now this accommodation with the core of the self may well seem like an inner light, since the central nervous system is composed of a myriad nerve fibres which, as the centre of nervous impulses, would be likely to incandesce as they coalesced in the process of withdrawing from bodily concerns.

9. But this inner light would not be something taking place in the brain, which is simply one of a number of not-selves, but within the self, so that as one withdrew from the body into the central nervous system, one would become increasingly aware of it precisely because it was inseparable from oneself as self.

10. In other words, there would be no distinction or differentiation between the self and the inner light, because the inner light is the self in its most essential mode, the mode of the soul.

11. But not all souls are the same, any more than all central nervous systems are equal, and therefore it is likely that the inner light would have a tone or tint peculiar to itself as a particular kind of soul, be it metachemical and loving, chemical and proud, physical and pleasurable, or metaphysical and joyful.

12. Thus the colour, to put it crudely, of the inner light, the soul, would differ according to the type of self to which it was affiliated, be that self objective and female or subjective and male, whether in noumenal or in phenomenal terms.

13. I tend to the view that the metachemical axis of space-time devolution descends from silver to red, as from the eyes to the heart, whereas the metaphysical axis of time-space evolution ascends from gold (or yellow) to purple, as from the ears to the lungs.

14. Likewise I incline to the view that the chemical axis of volume-mass devolution descends from orange to blue, as from the tongue to the womb, whereas the physical axis of mass-volume evolution ascends from brown to green, as from the flesh to the brain.

15. I do not, of course, intend to suggest an exact colour correlation between the aforementioned noumenal and phenomenal axes and the organs of sensuality and/or sensibility to which I have referred, but am simply interested in reaffirming the axial parallels which I hold to exist on such a basis.

16. Even on a planar basis, the basis of each elemental plane considered separately, one could distinguish, within an objective/subjective antithesis, the alpha and omega of silver and purple with regard to space and of orange and green with regard to volume from the omega and alpha, within a subjective/objective antithesis, of brown and blue with regard to mass and of gold and red with regard to time.

17. However that may be, I do not doubt that the female central nervous system would be partial, in its objectivity, to tints of soul in both sensuality and sensibility which differed from those of the male nervous system, so that neither on a gender nor on a genetic basis would it be likely that a uniform tint was applicable to all central nervous systems, irrespective of these factors.

18. Thus it could only be that, even with their negative counterparts excluded from consideration at this point, different types of positive afterlife experience would have a corresponding tint or tone relevant to the type of central nervous system responsible for them, and that no 'equality of souls' could therefore be inferred.

19. In fact, even in positive contexts, some souls would be in the Hell of metachemical space or time, some souls in the purgatory of chemical volume or mass, some souls in the earth of physical mass or volume, and some souls in the Heaven of metaphysical time or space, depending, in each case, on whether sensuality or sensibility was most characteristic of each type of central nervous system.

20. And, in terms of colour, this does mean that whereas silver or red would characterize metachemical soul and orange or blue its chemical counterpart, brown or green would characterize physical soul and gold or purple its metaphysical counterpart.

21. Thus the Afterlife would give one confirmation, if ever one needed it, of the type of soul experience peculiar to one's particular type of self, or central nervous system, so that one would automatically 'know' whether one was in Heaven, Hell, purgatory, or the earth.

22. And, knowing such, one would be experiencing, as soul, a corresponding degree of joy, love, pride, or pleasure, as the case may be, though on a more refined basis than anything one could have known in life.

23. And be experiencing it permanently, as a consistent condition, rather than intermittently, as in life, until such time as advanced decomposition of the self, as of the body in general, put a halt to such 'Eternal Life' by effectively reducing everything to 'dust and ashes'.

24. Yet there are those who, fearing that the negativity of their modernist lifestyles would not conduce toward anything overly positive in the grave in any case, would be only too literally partial to 'dust and ashes', through recourse to cremation, as if to shorten or pre-empt the negative experiences of their heathenistic souls or to prove to themselves that the Afterlife was a Christian redundancy and/or superstition anyway, since, so far as they were concerned, loss of consciousness was all there is to dying.

25. Such 'modern-all-too-modern' people usually tend not to believe in an Afterlife anyway, largely because they are less positive than negative, less supreme than primal, given, in typically twentieth-century fashion, to the worship of the inorganic rather than to the worship of the organic.

26. It is as though they were more cosmic or geologic, depending on their class, than universal or personal, more creatures of the various orders of antiself vis-à-vis not-antiself and antiselflessness, so to speak, than of self vis-à-vis not-self and selflessness.

27. Where metachemistry is concerned, space-time devolution is for them more stellar to Venusian in the negativity of inorganic primacy than eyes to heart in the positivity of organic supremacy, and consequently life is correspondingly more ugliness and hatred than beauty and love.

28. Where chemistry is concerned, volume-mass devolution is for them more lunar to oceanic in the negativity of inorganic primacy than tongue to womb in the positivity of organic supremacy, and consequently life is correspondingly more weakness and humility, if not humiliation, than strength and pride.

29. Where physics is concerned, mass-volume evolution is for them more terrestrial to Martian in the negativity of inorganic primacy than phallus to brain in the positivity of organic supremacy, and consequently life is correspondingly more ignorance and pain than knowledge and pleasure.

30. Where metaphysics is concerned, time-space evolution is for them more solar to Saturnalian in the negativity of inorganic primacy than ears to lungs in the positivity of organic supremacy, and consequently life is correspondingly more falsity and woe than truth and joy.

31. I do not envy these 'modern people', these anti-religious zealots of science and politics, for they die as they had lived, as so much heathenistic trash with disposable corpses and disposable souls!

32. But even if time cannot be reversed, evolution presses on, and one day, I am confident, supremacy will be back on the agenda, but with a Superchristian vengeance, a resolve, I mean, to encourage and indefinitely prolong afterlife experiences through extensive and/or intensive recourse to advanced technology.

33. For an Afterlife that didn't cease, like the Christian 'life in death' of the grave, but continued for ever ... is only possible, it seems to me, on the basis of the artificial transmutation of mankind in the centuries to come, so that not only are the Heathen and Superheathen 'Afterdeaths', the afterdeaths of cryogenic freezing and of crematorial burning, overhauled and consigned to the 'rubbish heap of Antichristian history', but the Christian Afterlife is itself eclipsed by that which would be truly eternal - the Superchristian Afterlife of 'Kingdom Come'.

PROFANITY AND SANCTITY REVISITED

1. I distinguished, several cycles ago, between the ego as profane and the soul as sacred in relation to the self, and between the will as profane and the spirit as sacred in relation to the not-self and to selflessness.

2. I also suggested that, in contrast to the noumenal self, both the noumenal not-self and noumenal selflessness could be identified with God and Heaven on the metaphysical axis of time-space evolution or with the Devil and Hell on the metachemical axis of space-time devolution.

3. Likewise I suggested that, in contrast to the phenomenal self, both the phenomenal not-self and phenomenal selflessness could be identified with woman and purgatory on the chemical axis of volume-mass devolution or with man and the earth on the physical axis of mass-volume evolution.

4. Thus, whatever the elemental axis, the noumenal self was never identified with either God and Heaven or the Devil and Hell, any more than the phenomenal self with woman and purgatory or man and the earth, but was always considered independently of what were conceived to be definitions of will and spirit, power and glory, in relation to profanity and sanctity.

5. Since then I have had cause to reconsider my position on this issue, and have finally come to the conclusion that it was too narrow and partial. For if profanity and sanctity can be equated with, say, God and Heaven in one context, the context of metaphysical power and glory, should it not be possible to identify them with God and Heaven in the context of metaphysical form and contentment, as germane to the self.

6. Thus if metaphysical will and spirit can be identified with God and Heaven, why shouldn't metaphysical ego and soul likewise be identified with God and Heaven, albeit on a different basis to will and spirit.

7. For if will and spirit are secondary but ego and soul primary on the subjective axis of metaphysics, then any definition of God and Heaven in relation to will and spirit would have to be secondary compared to the primary nature of definitions of God and Heaven that took their cue from ego and soul, as germane to the noumenal self.

8. Hence metaphysics would afford one confirmation of an axis in which God and Heaven were primary in relation to the ego and soul of the noumenal self, but secondary in relation to the will of the noumenal not-self and to the spirit of noumenal selflessness.

9. Hence truth and joy, the profane and sacred attributes of metaphysical ego and soul, would accord with a primary definition of God and Heaven, whereas impression and holiness, the profane and sacred attributes of metaphysical will and spirit, would accord with a secondary definition of God and Heaven.

10. For metaphysics is the only elemental context, in both outer and inner, sensual and sensible terms, which accords with the existence of God and Heaven, whether primarily ... in relation to the subdivisible noumenal self or secondarily ... in relation to the noumenal not-self and its selfless complement of metaphysical spirit.

11. Dropping from metaphysics to physics, which is also a subjective context due to its vegetative mean, we would likewise have to distinguish between a primary concept of man and the earth in relation to the ego and soul of the physical self and a secondary concept of man and the earth in relation to the will and spirit of the physical not-self and physical selflessness.

12. Hence knowledge and pleasure, the profane and sacred attributes of physical ego and soul, would accord with a primary definition of man and the earth, whereas depression and unholiness, the profane and sacred attributes of physical will and spirit, would accord with a secondary definition of man and the earth.

13. For physics is the only elemental context, in both outer and inner, sensual and sensible terms, which accords with the existence of man and the earth, whether primarily ... in relation to the subdivisible phenomenal self or secondarily ... in relation to the phenomenal not-self and its selfless complement of physical spirit.

14. Crossing from physics to chemistry, as from masculine to feminine, we enter an objective context in which, due to its fluidal mean, self is secondary and the not-self and selflessness primary, since it is in the scheme of things for the objective self to defer to the more objective dispositions of the chemical not-self and chemical selflessness, and so we must distinguish, in contrast to male subjectivity, between a primary concept of woman and purgatory in relation to the will and spirit of the chemical not-self and its selfless complement, and a secondary concept of woman and purgatory in relation to the ego and soul of the chemical self.

15. Hence compression and clearness, the profane and sacred attributes of chemical will and spirit, would accord with a primary definition of woman and purgatory, whereas strength and pride, the profane and sacred attributes of the chemical ego and soul, would accord with a secondary definition of woman and purgatory.

16. For chemistry is the only elemental context, in both outer and inner, sensual and sensible terms, which accords with the existence of woman and purgatory, whether primarily ... in relation to the phenomenal not-self and its selfless complement of chemical spirit or secondarily ... in relation to the subdivisible phenomenal self.

17. Climbing (backwards and upwards) from chemistry to metachemistry, which is also an objective context due to its fiery mean, one would likewise have to distinguish between a primary concept of the Devil and Hell in relation to the will and spirit of the metachemical not-self and selflessness, and a secondary concept of the Devil and Hell in relation to the ego and soul of the metachemical self.

18. Hence expression and unclearness, the profane and sacred attributes of metachemical will and spirit, would accord with a primary definition of the Devil and Hell, whereas beauty and love, the profane and sacred attributes of metachemical ego and soul, would accord with a secondary definition of the Devil and Hell.

19. For metachemistry is the only elemental context, in both outer and inner, sensual and sensible terms, which accords with the existence of the Devil and Hell, whether primarily ... in relation to the noumenal not-self and its selfless complement of metachemical spirit or secondarily ... in relation to the subdivisible noumenal self.

20. Thus whether profanity and sanctity are primary or secondary in the self will depend on the gender orientation of the axis to which they pertain, with the objective axes of metachemistry and chemistry affording one examples of a secondary order of profanity and sanctity in the self (as against a primary order of profanity and sanctity in the not-self and its selfless complement), but the subjective axes of physics and metaphysics affording one examples of a primary order of profanity and sanctity in the self (as against a secondary order of profanity and sanctity in the not-self and its selfless complement).

VARIOUS TRINITIES

1. In metaphysics the noumenal self can be identified with the Son, while the noumenal not-self and selflessness should be identified with the Father and the Holy Spirit respectively.

2. Thus the divisibility of the metaphysical self into ego and soul, primary profanity and sanctity, affords one a contrast between the Son as primary God and the Son (duly resurrected from ego to soul) as primary Heaven, whereas the distinction between the metaphysical not-self as will and metaphysical selflessness as spirit, secondary profanity and sanctity, affords one a contrast between the Father as secondary God and the Holy Spirit as secondary Heaven.

3. Hence, in metaphysics, the Son corresponds to a primary God and Heaven, while the Father and the Holy Ghost correspond to a secondary God and Heaven, the God of impressive power and the Heaven of a holy order of spirit ... as opposed to the God of truthful form and the Heaven of joyful contentment.

4. In physics the phenomenal self can be identified with the son, while the phenomenal not-self and selflessness should be identified with the father and the unholy spirit.

5. Thus the divisibility of the physical self into ego and soul, primary profanity and sanctity, affords one a contrast between the son as primary man and the son (duly resurrected from ego to soul) as primary earth, whereas the distinction between the physical not-self as will and physical selflessness as spirit, secondary profanity and sanctity, affords one a contrast between the father as secondary man and the unholy spirit as secondary earth.

6. Hence, in physics, the son corresponds to a primary man and earth, while the father and the unholy spirit correspond to a secondary man and earth, the man of depressive power and the earth of an unholy order of spirit ... as opposed to the man of knowledgeable form and the earth of pleasurable contentment.

7. In chemistry the phenomenal self should be identified with the daughter, while the phenomenal not-self and selflessness can be identified with the mother and the clear spirit.

8. Thus the divisibility of the chemical self into ego and soul, secondary profanity and sanctity, affords one a contrast between the daughter as secondary woman and the daughter (duly resurrected from ego to soul) as secondary purgatory, whereas the distinction between the chemical not-self as will and chemical selflessness as spirit, primary profanity and sanctity, affords one a contrast between the mother as primary woman and the clear spirit as primary purgatory.

9. Hence, in chemistry, the daughter corresponds to a secondary woman and purgatory, while the mother and the clear spirit correspond to a primary woman and purgatory, the woman of compressive power and the purgatory of a clear order of spirit ... as opposed to the woman of strong form and the purgatory of proud contentment.

10. In metachemistry the noumenal self should be identified with the Daughter, while the noumenal not-self and selflessness can be identified with the Mother and the Unclear Spirit.

11. Thus the divisibility of the metachemical self into ego and soul, secondary profanity and sanctity, affords one a contrast between the Daughter as secondary Devil and the Daughter (duly resurrected from ego to soul) as secondary Hell, whereas the distinction between the metachemical not-self as will and metachemical selflessness as spirit, primary profanity and sanctity, affords one a contrast between the Mother as primary Devil and the Unclear Spirit as primary Hell.

12. Hence, in metachemistry, the Daughter corresponds to a secondary Devil and Hell, while the Mother and the Unclear Spirit correspond to a primary Devil and Hell, the Devil of expressive power and the Hell of an unclear order of spirit ... as opposed to the Devil of beautiful form and the Hell of loving contentment.

13. From the secondary Devil and Hell of the metachemical self to the primary God and Heaven of the metaphysical self via the secondary woman and purgatory of the chemical self and the primary man and earth of the physical self, as from beauty and love to truth and joy via strength and pride and knowledge and pleasure.

14. From the primary Devil and Hell of the metachemical not-self and selflessness to the secondary God and Heaven of the metaphysical not-self and selflessness via the primary woman and purgatory of the chemical not-self and selflessness and the secondary man and earth of the physical not-self and selflessness, as from expression and unclearness to impression and holiness via compression and clearness and depression and unholiness.

15. In the objective contexts of metachemistry and chemistry, corresponding on the female side of life to fire and water, that which corresponds to power and glory takes precedence over whatever corresponds to form and contentment, so that profanity and sanctity are primarily conceived of as having their existence outside the self.

16. In the subjective contexts of physics and metaphysics, corresponding on the male side of life to vegetation and air, that which corresponds to form and contentment takes precedence over whatever corresponds to power and glory, so that profanity and sanctity are primarily conceived of as existing inside the self.

17. The Son takes precedence over both the Father and the Holy Spirit in metaphysics, whilst, in physics, the son takes precedence over both the father and the unholy spirit.

18. Conversely, both the mother and the clear spirit take precedence over the daughter in chemistry, whilst, in metachemistry, both the Mother and the Unclear Spirit take precedence over the Daughter.

ATOMIC AND SUBATOMIC MEANS

1. Subatomically, the ego is always centred in a molecular-wavicle mean, whatever the overall element to which it is affiliated, whereas the soul is centred in an elemental-wavicle mean, that of subatomic essence as distinct from subatomic quality.

2. By contrast to the ego and soul, the will is always based in an elemental-particle mean, whereas the spirit is always based in a molecular-particle mean, that of subatomic quantity as distinct from subatomic appearance.

3. Thus the appearance of the will and the quantity of the spirit, subatomically corresponding to elemental and to molecular particles, ever contrast with the quality of the ego and the essence of the soul, subatomically corresponding to molecular and to elemental wavicles.

4. In fact, the appearance of the will and the quantity of the spirit contrast with the quality of the ego and the essence of the soul ... as power and glory contrast with form and contentment, since the power of the will is ever apparent, the glory of the spirit is ever quantitative, the form of the ego is ever qualitative, and the contentment of the soul is ever essential, whether in per se or 'quasi' manifestations in each case.

5. The ego that is quantified, as superconscious mind, will invariably rebound from selflessness to the core of the self, wherein only essence prevails.

6. For the ego cannot cease being selfish or, rather, of the self even when it is quantified by spiritual selflessness to an extent which transmutes it into superconscious mind and causes it to rebound from such an extreme position to what is more deeply and essentially of itself - namely, the soul of subconscious mind.

7. Thus that which, in the ego, corresponds to a molecular-wavicle mean goes 'back and down' via the elemental-particle mean of the will and the molecular-particle mean of the spirit until, duly transmuted by the latter, it elects to react from the selfless quantification of itself (in molecular particles) to its elemental-wavicle core in the subconscious, wherein it is redeemed by the sanctity of soul.

8. But such a redemption is transient, because the self must again return to ego, and hence to its molecular-wavicle mean, in order to plunge anew from qualitative form (ego) into the apparent power (will) of the not-self and be transmuted by the quantitative glory (spirit) of selflessness, as before.

9. The realization of soul between the breaths, the out-breath of the spirit and the in-breath of the will, happens in a split second, and therefore so fast that one cannot keep conscious track of it, but nevertheless it is during that infinitesimally brief period of time that the self-as-mind psychoconcentrically rebounds from spiritual selflessness to the self-as-soul, prior to a return to self-as-ego.

10. This realization or redemption or enlightenment ... happens in the split-second between the breaths, wherein one makes contact with the deepest part of the self, the soul, and experiences being, whether joyfully in metaphysics, pleasurably in physics, proudly in chemistry, or lovingly in metachemistry, depending on the kind of self to which one relates and the corresponding orders of not-self and selflessness which it consciously exploits.

11. For the being of metaphysics, being essential, is joyful, whereas the being of physics, being only quasi-essential from a qualitative centre, is pleasurable, the being of chemistry, being only quasi-essential (if not, in its phenomenal objectivity, pseudo-essential) from a quantitative base, is proud, and the being of metachemistry, being only quasi-essential (if not, in its noumenal objectivity, pseudo-essential) from an apparent base, is loving.

12. Now although the soul is always found in the elemental wavicles of being, it is not found on the same basis or to the same extent in every element, being first-rate in the protons and/or protinos of metaphysical sensuality and/or sensibility, second-rate in the neutrons and/or neutrinos (not to mention the deuterons and/or deuterinos of the more radical masculine subatomicity) of physical sensuality and/or sensibility, third-rate in the electrons and/or electrinos (not to mention the positrons and/or positrinos of the more radical feminine subatomicity) of chemical sensuality and/or sensibility, and fourth-rate in the photons and/or photinos of metachemical sensuality and/or sensibility.

13. Only when being is genuinely essential is it truly soulful, and hence heavenly. In the quasi-essential quality of physics, by comparison, it is simply earthly, whereas in the quasi-essential quantity of chemistry and in the quasi-essential appearance of metachemistry, by contrast, it is respectively purgatorial and hellish.

14. If being is only in its per se manifestation in essence, then taking, the attribute of ego, is only in its per se manifestation in quality; giving, the attribute of spirit, only in its per se manifestation in quantity; and doing, the attribute of will, only in its per se manifestation in appearance.

15. To contrast the photon and/or photino elemental particles of metachemical will with the proton and/or protino elemental particles of metaphysical will, and each of these noumenal orders of sensual and/or sensible willpower with the electron and/or electrino elemental particles of chemical will and the neutron and/or neutrino elemental particles of physical will, as one would contrast expression with impression (noumenal) and compression with depression (phenomenal).

16. To contrast the photon and/or photino molecular particles of metachemical spirit with the proton and/or protino molecular particles of metaphysical spirit, and each of these noumenal orders of sensual and/or sensible spirit with the electron and/or electrino molecular particles of chemical spirit and the neutron and/or neutrino molecular particles of physical spirit, as one would contrast unclearness with holiness (noumenal) and clearness with unholiness (phenomenal).

17. To contrast the photon and/or photino molecular wavicles of metachemical ego with the proton and/or protino molecular wavicles of metaphysical ego, and each of these noumenal orders of sensual and/or sensible ego with the electron and/or electrino molecular wavicles of chemical ego and the neutron and/or neutrino molecular wavicles of physical ego, as one would contrast beauty with truth (noumenal) and strength with knowledge (phenomenal).

18. To contrast the photon and/or photino elemental wavicles of metachemical soul with the proton and/or protino elemental wavicles of metaphysical soul, and each of these noumenal orders of sensual and/or sensible soul with the electron and/or electrino elemental wavicles of chemical soul and the neutron and/or neutrino elemental wavicles of physical soul, as one would contrast love with joy (noumenal) and pride with pleasure (phenomenal).

19. To descend from the first-rate doing of metachemical will to the fourth-rate doing of metaphysical will via the second-rate doing of chemical will and the third-rate doing of physical will, as from the expressive power of photon and/or photino elemental particles to the impressive power of proton and/or protino elemental particles via the compressive power of electron and/or electrino elemental particles and the depressive power of neutron and/or neutrino elemental particles.

20. To descend from the first-rate giving of chemical spirit to the fourth-rate giving of physical spirit via the second-rate giving of metachemical spirit and the third-rate giving of metaphysical spirit, as from the clear glory of electron and/or electrino molecular particles to the unholy glory of neutron and/or neutrino molecular particles via the unclear glory of photon and/or photino molecular particles and the holy glory of proton and/or protino molecular particles.

21. To ascend from the fourth-rate taking of chemical ego to the first-rate taking of physical ego via the third-rate taking of metachemical ego and the second-rate taking of metaphysical ego, as from the strong form of electron and/or electrino molecular wavicles to the knowledgeable form of neutron and/or neutrino molecular wavicles via the beautiful form of photon and/or photino molecular wavicles and the true form of proton and/or protino molecular wavicles.

22. To ascend from the fourth-rate being of metachemical soul to the first-rate being of metaphysical soul via the third-rate being of chemical soul and the second-rate being of physical soul, as from the loving contentment of photon and/or photino elemental wavicles to the joyful contentment of proton and/or protino elemental wavicles via the proud contentment of electron and/or electrino elemental wavicles and the pleasurable contentment of neutron and/or neutrino elemental wavicles.

23. Whatever their individual standings, will, spirit, ego, and soul are always either based or centred, depending on the context, in subatomic elements and/or elementinos, whereas the id, by contrast, is ever based in the atomicity of the central nervous system and reflects, in consequence, a physiological disposition to instinctively impose upon organs of sensuality and/or sensibility which is not only distinct from the wilful, spiritual, intellectual, and emotional dispositions of power, glory, form, and contentment, as noted above, but independent of doing, giving, taking, and being in what may be called the informality of acting and/or reacting.

24. Yet even the id is conditioned by the type of central nervous system to which it pertains as instinctive impulse, and is in no sense uniformly identical with itself in all elemental contexts, irrespective of gender or of genetics.

25. The objective id of a metachemical and/or a chemical bias is more disposed to acting instinctively than to reacting, whereas the subjective id of a physical and/or a metaphysical bias is more disposed to instinctively reacting (to instinctive actions) than to acting.

26. One could plot a descent of instinctual acting from the most instinctual acting of the metachemical id to the least instinctual acting of the metaphysical id via the more (relative to most) instinctual acting of the chemical id and the less (relative to least) instinctual acting of the physical id.

27. Conversely, one could plot an ascent of instinctual reacting from the least instinctual reacting of the metachemical id to the most instinctual reacting of the metaphysical id via the less (relative to least) instinctual reacting of the chemical id and the more (relative to most) instinctual reacting of the physical id.

28. Whatever the bias of any particular id, as of the central nervous system which is its physiological base, the impulsive actions and/or reactions of the id should also be distinguished from the apparent doing of the will, the quantitative giving of the spirit, the qualitative taking of the ego, and the essential being of the soul.

EXTREMES OF THE SELF

1. The self is divisible not merely between the unconscious impulses of the id and the conscious directives of the ego, as regards physiological and psychological manifestations of the central nervous system, but also between the superconscious sensations of the mind and the subconscious emotions of the soul, both of which are psychical.

2. Hence there exists for the self a distinction between id and ego on the one hand, that of the unconscious and the conscious, and between mind and soul on the other hand, that of the superconscious and the subconscious, the former arguably primary and the latter secondary, since both the superconscious and the subconscious derive from conscious pressures which impinge upon what has been called the somatic not-self and psychesomatic selflessness, the will and the spirit.

3. For the soul tends to lie dormant or, rather, to exist only as a potentiality so long as there has not been a commitment by the self-as-ego to the not-self and a rebound, in consequence, of the self-as-mind from selflessness to the resolution of the self-as-soul, the superconscious extreme duly leading to the subconscious one.

4. But the self-as-soul will always have to return to the self-as-ego, which is the primary or principal manifestation of the self for a creature trapped, as all men are, in form, and thus the human body.

5. On the other hand, the self-as-id, or active impulse, is much less inclined, particularly in the female contexts of metachemical and chemical objectivity, to embrace the soul than the self-as-ego, and for the simple reason that it is at the furthest possible remove from such a psychical position in the nerve-driven impulses of its physiology, which reflects a more basic relationship to the not-self and to selflessness than is to be found in the ego.

6. Unconscious impulse may be a quicker way of manipulating the not-self than conscious ratiocination, but it is only via the conscious self that superconsciousness can be cultivated to any appreciable extent, and duly result in the rebound of the self to subconsciousness which one would associate with the soul.

7. For both the superconscious and subconscious derive, in no small degree, from the conscious self engaged in manipulative dialogue with the somatic not-self and psychesomatic selflessness, and where there is no such dialogue because the conscious self has been substituted by the unconscious self of the id, then no superconsciousness or subconsciousness, corresponding to mind and to soul, emerges, but only a behavioural relationship, based in instinct, of the self-as-id to the not-self and its selfless complement of spirit, whatever the elemental context.

8. Thus the soul is denied by individuals and/or societies that place the emphasis on unconscious impulse at the expense of conscious definition, since the id is not the precondition of the soul but its physiological antithesis, and where acting is paramount, there can be very little scope for being.

9. Not only is there a struggle between the id and the ego, the unconscious and the conscious, for control of the not-self and selflessness, but the distinction between the superconscious and the subconscious, the mind and the soul, is only possible on the basis of the ego, or conscious, and will cease to have any applicability or relevance whenever the ego is denied, in anti-male and/or Antichristian vein, by people or peoples for whom the impulsive activity of the id takes precedence.

10. Therefore in the division of the self between id and ego, either the ego replaces the id, in due conscious vein, or the unconscious takes charge of the self and becomes the principal determinant of will and spirit in the not-self and selflessness, to the detriment of the soul, and hence of psychic fulfilment.

11. Needless to say, the id will only take charge in individuals or societies that are overly objective, and hence of a female disposition, since it is in the nature of females to use instinct to by-pass the conscious whenever they can, bearing in mind that egocentricity is less subjective than objective with them anyway, and that they have a reduced capacity, in consequence, for the kind of conscious ratiocination that requires a subjective precondition either in vegetation or air, the male elements par excellence.

12. Although females can only achieve third- and/or fourth-rate orders of soul, depending on the context, via the ego, or conscious mind, to which they more objectively relate, they nonetheless have a greater tendency than males to rely on the id for impulsive manipulation of the not-self, since not only is it quicker to by-pass the ego in this way (and thus get ahead of the competition, so to speak), but it enables them to avoid emotional entanglements where none were desired, and acts as compensation, moreover, for egocentric shortcomings.

13. This enhanced tendency of females to rely on the id also causes males to impulsively react from the standpoint of their own id, thereby temporarily sacrificing ego to the more basic mode of the self which stems from and relates to a physiological disposition.

14. Nevertheless the id, whilst it may be of unquestionable significance to the self as a starting-point for its relationship to the world, cannot become a permanent substitute for the ego, since the instinctual bias of the unconscious is no match for the intellectual bias of the conscious when it comes to developing the self beyond the selfishness of nervous impulse to the deeper and more lasting experiences of the soul.

15. A life in which the id is granted too much prominence ceases to be meaningful, but becomes akin to that of a soulless automaton, or ghoul, for whom impulsive acting and/or reacting is the instinctual mean.

16. Hope springs unconsciously from the id, as, in negative terms, does fear, since both alike are aspects of active impulse, but hope for love or pride or pleasure or joy, and fear of hatred or humiliation or pain or woe ... are what drives the self in search of or away from the actuality of such experiences, which can only be achieved or avoided, as the case may be, via the ego.

17. Hence the instinctive impulses of the id give rise to hope or to fear, which the ego can then seize upon as it consciously determines the appropriate response and behaviour pattern for the self to follow.

18. In death, however, there is no longer a dialectic between id and ego on the one hand, and mind and soul on the other hand, but simply a confrontation between the id and the soul, the physiological and psychical extremes of the self, which either the id will win or the soul, depending on how one had lived.

19. Such a coming to accounts with the extremes of the self, as the ego and the mind slip away, may well suggest a struggle between damnation and salvation, unconscious activity and subconscious passivity, but the outcome would, in any case, have been predetermined by the pattern of one's life, and one would have no doubt as to whether one was in the 'hell of the id' or in the 'heaven of the soul', the alpha or the omega of the self.

20. For the 'heaven of the soul', whether literally heavenly or of some alternative order of positive experience, only comes to those who have cultivated the soul in life and thus prepared themselves for death, not to those whose physiological obsession with the id precluded all but a mechanistic frenzy of impulsive superficiality, the sort of impulsive superficiality upon which the subsequent superimposition of crematorial damnation would be the Superheathen corollary.

OF IDIOTS AND EGOISTS

1. Returning from the physiological and psychical extremes of the self to the primary distinction between the id and the ego, it comes as no surprise for me to discover that the struggle here is effectively one between idiocy and egoism for control of the self in its relationship to the not-self and to selflessness.

2. Now just as the ego, or conscious mind, is responsible for the rational manipulation of verbal conceptions, or thoughts, so the id, or unconscious mind, is responsible for the irrational, or impulsive, manipulation of non-verbal perceptions, or images.

3. Thus, broadly speaking, it transpires that while the ego is paramount during the day or, at any rate, the period of one's being awake, the id becomes paramount, over and above instinctual activity, during the time, more usually at night, when one is asleep, since the id is just as disposed, in its physiological activity, to manipulating mental perceptions as the ego ... to manipulating mental conceptions.

4. But just as there are different ways of manipulating verbal conceptions ... from reading to thinking (noumenal) via speaking and writing (phenomenal), so there are different ways of manipulating non-verbal perceptions ... from hallucinating to dreaming (noumenal) via fantasizing and daydreaming (phenomenal).

5. Certainly, it is not invariably the case that the id only comes to light, so to speak, at night, during sleep; for dreaming is only one mode of unconscious activity, if generally the most prevalent and persistent mode.

6. Nor, conversely, can it be said that the ego only functions during the day, when one is awake; for there are actually times when it manages or contrives to subvert the dream process in the interests of verbal conceptions.

7. Nevertheless, the distinction between dreams and thoughts or, rather, between the manipulation of non-verbal perceptions by the id and the manipulation of verbal conceptions by the ego, the former largely unconscious and the latter usually conscious, is a very definite and, in most cases, clear-cut one, with corresponding distinctions between idiocy on the one hand, and egoism on the other.

8. I happen to believe that egoists are an altogether superior breed to idiots, although the age is not altogether on my side in this respect, particularly in view of the extents to which artificial modes of idiocy, or id-based activity, including photography, cinema, video, and television, have generally prevailed in life, often to the detriment, if not effective exclusion, of egoism.

9. For there is arguably a parallel, it seems to me, between visionary hallucination and photography, dreams and cinema films, fantasies and videos, and, last but not altogether least, between daydreaming and television, and the artificial has tended, when it hasn't altogether eclipsed the natural ... to at any rate reinforce it, making for an age in which id-oriented idiots have been free to explore a variety of impulsive activities, with due mechanistic disregard for the soul.

10. Thus whether the bias of the id has been metachemical and vision- and/or photography-orientated; chemical and fantasy and/or video-orientated; physical and daydream- and/or television-orientated; or metaphysical and dream- and/or film-orientated, the idiots have been granted, by a plethora of modern technologies, virtually a free hand to do their damnedest in delineating and exaggerating the significance of instinct and impulsive action in the conduct of life.

11. The results, none too surprisingly, have been the systematic selfishness and 'up-tightness', together with a correlative lack of self-cultivation, which modern life presents to the disinterested spectator or philosophical outsider as a lesson in how not to behave if you want to reach any sort of gratificatory accommodation with the soul, whether in life or, more importantly perhaps, in death.

12. Yet, despite populist culture and the general drift of heathenistic modernity, aided and abetted by those twin pillars of objective freedom, 'Britannia' and 'the Liberty Belle', it hasn't all been just 'one way'. The egoist may have been a second-class citizen in those countries especially besotted with idiocy and in the grip of various kinds of image-obsessed idiot, but latterly his predilection for reading or thinking (noumenal) and/or speaking or writing (phenomenal) has ceased to lag naturalistically behind, in book-like vein, the trendy id-mongers of technological advancement, but acquired greater artificial definition, not least of all with respect to the growth of personal and/or universal (Internet-oriented) computing, which surely signifies a writerly if not, in relation to CD-ROMs, a readerly mode of egoism which would suggest that egoism no longer languishes in the painful shadows of idiocy, like a Christian under fire from communist Godlessness, but is now leading society towards a better future, in which the soul will once again become the be-all-and-end-all of earthly or, at any rate, post-worldly if not otherworldly striving.

13. Yes, it seems to me that as the id acquired artificial definition in a variety of image-dominated contexts, so the ego has now acquired something comparable which, whether with regard to computers and/or calculators or to telephones (including mobiles) and/or telephone answering-machines or to midis and/or CD-Players or even to radio and/or radio-cassette recorders, should keep it in the vanguard of contemporary civilization for some time to come.

14. Thus whether the egocentric medium be naturalistic or artificial, traditional or modern, it too has been transmuted in all elemental contexts, from metachemistry and chemistry on the female side of life to physics and metaphysics on its male side, and I fancy that whereas reading and CD-ROMing, or the intellectual utilization of CD-ROMs, constitute metachemical alternatives, speaking and voice-recording, writing and typing, and thinking and computing are their chemical, physical, and metaphysical counterparts within the natural and artificial alternatives of egoism.

SELF AND ANTISELF, ETC.

1. Contrasted to the self, the not-self and to selflessness ... are what may be called the antiself, the antinot-self or, rather, not-antiself, and antiselflessness, which stand to self, not-self, and selflessness as their negative counterparts.

2. For wherever something is positive (and supreme), there will be something negative (and primal) lurking in the background, whether with regard to the self, to the not-self, or to selflessness, and its negativity will derive from and owe more to inorganic sources of a cosmic and/or geologic order than to anything organic, and hence personal and/or universal.

3. Just as the self is divisible between an unconscious id, a conscious ego, a superconscious mind, and a subconscious soul, so the antiself is likewise divisible between an unconscious anti-id, a conscious anti-ego, a superconscious antimind, and a subconscious antisoul.

4. One could think, more basically, of these several manifestations of antiself in terms of the anti-unconscious, the anticonscious, the anti-superconscious, and the anti-subconscious, for they are that which attest to negative modes of the id, the ego, the mind, and the soul.

5. Likewise the not-antiself is a negative mode of the will, while antiselflessness is its negative spiritual counterpart, whether in relation to metachemistry, chemistry, physics, or to metaphysics.

6. Whereas the metachemical self has reference to beauty and love, the metachemical antiself attests to ugliness and hatred, the negative form and contentment of primal space-time devolution.

7. Whereas the chemical self has reference to strength and pride, the chemical antiself attests to weakness and humility, the negative form and contentment of primal volume-mass devolution.

8. Whereas the physical self has reference to knowledge and pleasure, the physical antiself attests to ignorance and pain, the negative form and contentment of primal mass-volume evolution.

9. Whereas the metaphysical self has reference to truth and joy, the metaphysical antiself attests to falsity and woe, the negative form and contentment of primal time-space evolution.

10. In all four elemental contexts, the negativity of the antiself contrasts with the positivity of the self ... as primacy with supremacy - the former owing its existence to an inorganic precondition and the latter to an organic one.

11. Likewise, in relation to the not-self, one should contrast the negative expression of metachemical antipower with the positive expression of metachemical power, the negative compression of chemical antipower with the positive compression of chemical power, the negative depression of physical antipower with the positive depression of physical power, and the negative impression of metaphysical antipower with the positive impression of metaphysical power.

12. Progressing from the antiwill and will to the antispirit and spirit, one should contrast the negative unclearness of metachemical antiglory with the positive unclearness of metachemical glory, the negative clearness of chemical antiglory with the positive clearness of chemical glory, the negative unholiness of physical antiglory with the positive unholiness of physical glory, and the negative holiness of metaphysical antiglory with the positive holiness of metaphysical glory.

13. Just as the id, or unconscious, is concerned with hope in relation to a variety of supreme, or positive, options having reference to the self, so the anti-id is concerned with fear in relation to a variety of primal, or negative, unconscious options having reference to the antiself.

14. For the id is usually optimistic, or hopeful, about the options open to the self, whereas the anti-id can only be pessimistic, or fearful, about things in view of its negative basis in and reference to the antiself.

15. The id, like the self in general, derives from the organic supremacy of the central nervous system, whereas the anti-id, like the rest of the antiself, derives from the inorganic primacy of the Cosmos and/or its phenomenal offshoots in certain parts of the Solar System.

16. When the self is identified too closely with the Cosmos and/or Solar System, it is because primacy prevails over supremacy in what amounts to a primitivistic state-of-affairs in which negativity is effectively hegemonic, and one defers to what has been described as the antiself.

17. For, strictly speaking, the self cannot be identified with the Cosmos and/or its geologic extrapolations in the Solar System, for the self is organic and thus above and beyond the pale of inorganic associations.

18. The self is as superior to the antiself and its negativity ... as the personal and/or universal to the geologic and/or cosmic, since that which is positive owes its positivity to the organic, and the organic stands to the inorganic as supremacy to primacy.

19. Whether one's particular type of self be objective and female or subjective and male, personal and phenomenal or universal and noumenal in either gender, it is as superior to the antiself as the not-self to the not-antiself and as selflessness to antiselflessness, for that which is supreme is both more devolved (if objective) and more evolved (if subjective) than the primal.

20. I have no doubt that, even with an antiself to contend with in relation to cosmic and/or geologic influences, the self can triumph over the primitive forces of negativity and proceed to build the personal and/or universal edifices of supremacy on the cosmic and/or geologic foundations of primacy towards an ever-more positive futurity. For we are far superior, in devolutionary and/or evolutionary terms, to whatever forms a cosmic and/or geologic backdrop to us!

COMPARISONS AND CONTRASTS IN CLASS AND GENDER

1. Just as evil and wisdom constitute two aspects of noumenal actuality, the one metachemical and the other metaphysical, so there will be some wisdom in the individual who is most evil or, at any rate, has metachemical associations with evil and, conversely, some evil in the individual who has metaphysical associations.

2. Just as goodness and foolishness constitute two aspects of phenomenal actuality, the one chemical and the other physical, so there will be some foolishness in the individual who is most good or, at any rate, has chemical associations with goodness and, conversely, some goodness in the individual who has physical associations.

3. Thus whilst evil and wisdom are demonstrably upper-class attributes, with more evil than wisdom in the metachemical context and, conversely, more wisdom than evil in the metaphysical one, so goodness and foolishness are lower-class attributes, with more goodness than foolishness in the chemical context and, conversely, more foolishness than goodness in the physical one.

4. The so-called 'wise man', an upper-class man of a markedly metaphysical disposition, will always have to contend with an evil 'shadow side' to his particular noumenal bias, while, conversely, the so-called 'evil man', an upper-class man or, more correctly, woman ... of markedly metachemical disposition, will always have the benefit of a wise 'shadow side' to his/her particular noumenal bias.

5. Likewise, the so-called 'good man', a lower-class man or, more correctly, woman ... of markedly chemical disposition, will always have to contend with a foolish 'shadow side' to his/her particular phenomenal bias, while, conversely, the so-called 'foolish man', a lower-class man of markedly physical disposition, will always have the benefit of a good 'shadow side' to his particular phenomenal bias.

6. It is my belief that, class and genetics being correlative, people do not usually change planes to any appreciable extent, but remain recognizably either evil and good (if objective) or foolish and wise (if subjective), so that a distinction continues to exist between 'the evil' who are sometimes wise and 'the good' who are sometimes foolish on the one hand, and between 'the wise' who are sometimes evil and 'the foolish' who are sometimes good on the other hand.

7. Were this not so, there would be a continuous alternation between evil and goodness on the one hand, and between foolishness and wisdom on the other hand, but, generally speaking, goodness predominates over evil and foolishness preponderates over wisdom in phenomenal, or lower-class, societies (democratic/Christian), whereas evil predominates over goodness and wisdom preponderates over foolishness in noumenal, or upper-class, societies (autocratic/Buddhist).

8. In objective, female-biased societies, evil and goodness are the principal noumenal/phenomenal alternatives at stake, whereas in subjective, male-biased societies, by contrast, the principal phenomenal/noumenal alternatives will be foolishness and wisdom.

9. A metachemical society, rooted in noumenal objectivity, will emphasize evil - and hence crime, cruelty, and opacity - at the expense of goodness, whereas a chemical society, rooted in phenomenal objectivity, will put the emphasis on goodness - and hence punishment, adroitness, and lucidity and/or transparency - at the expense of evil.

10. A physical society, centred in phenomenal subjectivity, will emphasize foolishness - and hence sin, stupidity, and gravity - at the expense of wisdom, whereas a metaphysical society, centred in noumenal subjectivity, will put the emphasis on wisdom - and hence grace, kindness, and tranquillity - at the expense of foolishness.

11. Metachemical societies are at a moral or, rather, immoral disadvantage to chemical societies, since evil is an immorally inferior alternative to goodness, whereas physical societies are at a moral disadvantage to metaphysical societies, since foolishness is a morally inferior alternative to wisdom.

12. There can be no moral comparison, however, between metachemical and metaphysical societies on the one hand and chemical and physical societies on the other hand, since morality is always subjective, whereas immorality is ever objective, obliging one to contrast the evil of the metachemical with the wisdom of the metaphysical or, in phenomenal contexts 'down below', the goodness of the chemical with the foolishness of the physical.

13. Which is simply to contrast the one gender with the other on both noumenal (upper class) planes and phenomenal (lower class) planes, allowing for the fact that, even though moral in its phenomenal subjectivity, the physical society will be vulnerable to sanction, if not prohibitive discrimination, from the chemical society, since whereas goodness is a superior immoral alternative to evil, foolishness is an inferior moral alternative to wisdom, and that which is superior in the one gender context will tend to feel superior - albeit without philosophical justification - to that which is inferior in the other gender context, even though no comparison - barring their common adherence to phenomenal planes - between the two types of lower-class society is logically sustainable.

14. For you can only compare that which is alike in respect of sharing a common gender orientation, irrespective of its class, and contrast either of those to that which, existing on the opposite side of the gender fence, adheres to the opposite disposition, be it moral and subjective or, in the female case, immoral and objective.

15. Thus although comparisons can be made between objective and subjective, immoral and moral, with regard to class ... where both share a common plane, no such comparisons can be made with regard to gender, since that which is female, and hence objective, can only remain distinct from whatever is male, and hence subjective.

16. Goodness may be better, or objectively (immorally) more desirable from a feminine point of view, than evil, but goodness is only different from foolishness, as evil from wisdom.

17. Similarly, wisdom may be better, or subjectively (morally) more desirable from a divine standpoint, than folly, but wisdom is only different from evil, as foolishness from goodness.

18. Thus while woman may be better than the Devil on the one hand, and God be better than man on the other hand, woman is only different from man, and God different from the Devil.

19. But just as every noumenal actuality has a 'shadow' noumenon and, likewise, every phenomenal actuality a 'shadow' phenomenon, as already defined, so the godly man, the metaphysically upper-class and most respectable man, is capable of evil, just as the feminine woman, the chemically lower-class and most respectable woman, is capable of folly.

20. It is doubtless because the metaphysically upper-class man, though overwhelmingly disposed to wisdom, is capable of evil ... that one should fear (the wrath of) as well as have faith in (the wisdom of) God.

21. Conversely, it is doubtless because the metachemically upper-class man or, more correctly, woman, though overwhelmingly disposed to evil, is capable of wisdom ... that one should have hope (for clemency from) as well as fear (the evil of) the Devil.

22. Be that as it may, I have no doubt that God and Heaven for the metaphysically upper-class man are principally inside the self, and that he achieves godliness and heavenliness for himself or, rather, the self ... whenever he practises metaphysics, whether sensually, in aural terms, or sensibly, in respiratory terms, so that he is God and Heaven at such times when specifically committed to metaphysical praxis.

23. But godliness for the metaphysically upper-class man, the 'wise man', is something continually to be redeemed in the heavenliness of essential being; for godliness is profane in its egocentric qualitativeness (truth) whereas heavenliness is sacred in its psychocentric essence (joy), and thus the raison d'être of metaphysical praxis.

24. The metaphysically upper-class man practises at God for the sake of Heaven, upholds truth in the interests of joy (bliss), is metaphysically egocentric for the sake of his psychocentric self, constantly cycle-shifting, within metaphysics, from taking to being via doing and giving, as from quasi-essential form (truthfully qualitative) to essential content(ment) via quasi-essential power (impressively apparent) and quasi-essential glory (holily quantitative), the ego to the soul of primary God and Heaven via the will and the spirit of secondary God and Heaven, the God and Heaven of the metaphysical not-self and selflessness, both of which subjectively serve the metaphysical self.

25. Not only is there no God and Heaven elsewhere for the metaphysically upper-class man, be he submasculine in sensuality or supermasculine in sensibility, than in his metaphysical self and, to a secondary extent, in both his metaphysical not-self and selflessness, be it sensual or sensible, but claims by others to the contrary meet with no approval or endorsement on his part whatsoever.

26. For there have been fraudulent gods and heavens elsewhere than in the metaphysical realms (of sensuality and sensibility in relation to sequential time and spaced space) ever since the dawn of religion, or what passes in some quarters for such, and they are sometimes not even a masculine or a feminine shortfall - nonetheless duly hyped - from divinity and sublimity so much as their diabolic and infernal antitheses!

27. Worse than the man and earth or than the woman and purgatory duly hyped as God and Heaven ... is the Devil and Hell; for here one enters the sensual and sensible realms of metachemistry, with its Cupidian axis bisecting space (spatially) and time (repetitively), and wherever such an axis passes for God and Heaven ... there can be no genuine godliness and heavenliness, but only the Devil and Hell posing as God and Heaven.

28. Has not the history of Creator-based religions, whether Middle-Eastern or Western, borne ample testimony to the fact that what is actually, to all metachemical appearances of Cupidian devolution, the Devil and Hell ... has been worshipped as God and Heaven?

29. Now, strictly speaking, one can only worship that which is primarily outside the self, not primarily within the self, and wherever the worship of 'God and Heaven' has taken a Creator-based metachemical turn, going all the way back to the Cosmos, it is because the Devil and Hell, to revert to their literal status, are primary in the metachemical not-self and selflessness but secondary in the metachemical self, given the objectivity which prevails in metachemistry in due female terms - terms duly extending down to the chemical realm of woman and purgatory.

30. Wherever subjectivity prevails, on the other hand, then profanity and sanctity are primarily within the self and only secondarily without the not-self, as in the physical not-self and selflessness, but if the primary realization of man and earth within the physical self is one thing, then the primary realization of God and Heaven within the metaphysical self is quite another, and while the former would be Christian, the latter is most decidedly Subchristian in sensuality and Superchristian in sensibility, the Superchristian being the salvation of the Subchristian and methodology by means of which the ultimate profanity may be redeemed in the ultimate sanctity, the sanctity of the metaphysical 'kingdom within'.

SEXUALITY AND THE ID

1. The connection between sexuality, or the fact of one's having sex, and the id is direct, since sexuality is rooted, like the id, in unconscious impulse.

2. Not only does sex occur as a mutually-shared instinctual response to fleshy temptation of a sufficiently alluring nature, but there is an intimate connection between sex and the id during sleep, as and when one experiences a nocturnal emission, or 'wet dream', due to unconscious impulses associated, more usually, with erotic imagery.

3. Just as the brain is located at one end of the central nervous system, so the reproductive organs are located at its other end, as separate manifestations of not-self from that which can be physiologically identified with the self, whose instinctual manifestation is the id.

4. The above must be so, to some extent, even of females, though the feminine axis of tongue to womb would be more characteristic of them, in view of their chemical disposition towards phenomenal objectivity.

5. However that may be (and bearing in mind that metachemical and metaphysical modifications of the self are also possible due to class and gender influences which owe more to noumenal than to phenomenal factors), there can be no question that for most people the unconscious instinctuality of sex derives from the id and therefore is not an isolated matter having nothing to do with the self.

6. But, then, the instinctual self is the most basic manifestation of the self, just as sex is the most basic manifestation of self-expression, and will only be unfettered, or 'free', when there is little or no prohibitive influence from the ego, that conscious manifestation of selfhood which is capable of transcending both the not-self and selflessness in the interests of mind and soul, or superconsciousness and subconsciousness.

7. Thus 'sexual freedom', or the unfettered encouragement of the id to seek sexual fulfilment through the reproductive organs, is only possible on the basis, no less basic than that of the id itself, of a heathenistic norm, since sexual fulfilment is to the id what emotional fulfilment is to the ego - namely its raison d'être and ne plus ultra.

8. Thus unfettered sexuality is only conceivable in a heathenistic context, be it individual or societal, and attests to the absence, for whatever reason, of the kind of conscious constraints or taboos placed upon sexuality when Christian or Christian-type criteria obtain.

9. For the difference between a Heathen and a Christian society ... is that whereas the one has its starting-point in the id and its finishing-point in the gratification of the id through reproductive fulfilment (sex), the other has its starting-point in the ego and its finishing-point in the gratification of the ego through emotional fulfilment (soul).

10. Thus a Christian or Christian-type society, of which my own Superchristian alternative to Christianity, viz. Social Transcendentalism, is a case in point, can only be censorious of sexual freedom and/or unfettered sexuality, since its conception of mankind transcends the animal selfishness of reproductive gratification in the name of the development of self towards a divine or, at any rate, soulful end.

11. When the id is unfettered, on the other hand, then soulfulness is 'beyond the pale' and, with it, the possibility of genuine religion, as temporal concerns, rooted in unconscious impulse, become the be-all-and-end-all of human striving, and mankind are reduced to the survival level of the animal kingdom, with little or no concept of or respect for Eternity ... other than through the mundane satisfaction, where conception is actually effected, of generative continuity.

12. A society in which the id has effectively eclipsed the ego, in which instinctive self-gratification becomes the mean, will be mechanistic and magical, falling back, in materialism, upon the false religions of cosmic and/or geologic primacy, where fantasy of one visionary persuasion or another becomes the principal expression of cultural self-identity, an identity at once Superheathen/Heathen and superfeminine/feminine, with little or nothing to commend it to male sensibility.

13. The symbolical effigies of 'Britannia' and 'the Liberty Belle' perfectly illustrate the Heathen/Superheathen disposition, through primacy, of the Anglo-American West, in which the feminine and the superfeminine have come to the fore at the expense of male subjectivity and reduced society - and by implication most of the individuals of which it is composed - to mechanistic playthings of magical spectacles which owe more to the id, in idiotic fashion, than ever they do to the ego.

14. So long as 'Britannia' and 'the Liberty Belle' are enthroned in their respective countries, there will be no appreciable change for the better, i.e. for the supersession of the id by the ego and, more importantly, of the ego by the soul, but only a continuance of the Heathen/Superheathen norms of female objectivity, as before.

15. Although there is ample evidence, in contemporary society, of egocentric alternatives to id-based mechanisms, such alternatives, for the most part equally mechanistic, are unlikely to tip the balance against the pervasive and influential id-based media in favour of a Christian or, more relevantly for the future, Superchristian alternative.

16. That, it seems to me, could only be done within the Superchristian context of 'Kingdom Come', and then largely, though not exclusively, on the basis of legalizing the use of drugs which are known to have chemical properties commensurate with the development of an 'inner light' such that would overhaul and effectively eclipse the 'outer lights' germane to photographic and filmic media generally, thereby establishing a 'reborn' alternative to them in keeping with the need for a 'kingdom within' that, besides according with Superchristian criteria, would amount to an artificially-contrived 'resurrection of the dead', or of afterlife-type experiences in the grave for those who had every right, within 'Kingdom Come', to otherworldly fulfilments.

17. Before I proceed to discuss 'Kingdom Come' in greater detail, however, a word must be said about the id in connection with an important distinction, hitherto overlooked, between behaviourism on the one hand and mechanism, or mechanistic materialism and/or realism, on the other hand.

18. For 'sexual freedom' can be interpreted in two quite distinct ways, depending on the individual and the society: either in terms of the gratification of the id, the instinctive aspect of the self, or central nervous system, through reproductive fulfilment (sex) or, alternatively, in terms of the denial of reproductive commitment through recourse to contraceptive means of one kind or another, which is less sex, as defined above, than antisex.

19. For where sex is behaviouristic and a reflection, no matter how selfish, of self-respect, antisex is mechanistic and therefore a testimony to the absence of self-respect even on the arguably pagan terms to which the behavioural gratification of the id ordinarily pertains.

20. Thus whereas sex is still rooted in the self, conceived in instinctual terms as id, antisex is rooted in the antiself, the negative unconscious of that which is less supreme than primal in its cosmic and/or geologic associations.

21. Where sex is behaviouristic and crudely mystical, rooted in personal and/or universal concern for generative continuity through reproductive fulfilment, antisex, devoid of reproductive aspirations, is simply mechanistic and magical, rooted in geologic and/or cosmic oppositions to any such fulfilment, since solely concerned to garner what pleasure (sic.) can be obtained via the mechanics of copulation, etc., in response to magical appearances aided and abetted by realism and/or materialism.

22. Not only is antisex a futility when compared or, rather, contrasted to sex as an incentive and reward for reproductive fulfilment, but it requires not a positive but a negative precondition such that owes more to female objectivity than to male subjectivity, and which accordingly stems from the 'lead', if I may speak paradoxically, of objective criteria owing more, through realism and/or materialism, to the not-antiself and its antiselfless complement, than to the self or, rather, antiself as such, since the antiself that acquiesces in antisex is negatively ranged against itself in due primal fashion.

23. Thus in considering the distinction between behaviouristic sex and mechanistic sex, the former crudely mystical and the latter all-too-smugly magical, one is drawn to the conclusion that the former is deserving of more respect than the latter, since demonstrative of that which is in touch with the self as opposed to being negatively ranged against it in due realistic and/or materialistic terms.

24. In fact, it seems to me that what may be called behaviouristic pagans are generally worthy of more respect than their mechanistic and effectively heathen counterparts in the West ... where this distinction between sex and antisex is concerned, and that those who were once Christian 'First' (fallen, more often than not, into Protestant heresy) are now heathen 'Last', while those who are pagan 'Last' (including Subchristians and Subjudaists) may well be among the Superchristian 'First' in the generations to come.

25. Be that as it may, I do not doubt that Protestants, in particular, have paid dearly for their real and/or material gains and greater freedoms, not least of all in terms of loss of self, and hence self-respect. For not only has the conscious self been eclipsed by the unconscious self, as ego by id, but positivity has been overshadowed by negativity in the march of Western decadence and decline from sensual supremacy into the sensual primacy of mechanistic degeneration, making the primitive positivity of the Pagan upon whom Western imperialists formerly wiped their realistic and/or materialistic boots ... seem much the more desirable of the two alternative approaches to egocentric self-denial which rule the contemporary, godless world.

TOWARDS A GAELIC FEDERATION

1. I hinted above that so long as 'Britannia' remained enthroned as symbolical illustration of realistic freedom in the United Kingdom (of Great Britain and Northern Ireland) there would be no appreciable change for the better, so far as the continuing dominance of female objectivity was concerned, and thus little or no prospect of an end to sensual primacy and of a return not merely to sensual supremacy but to sensible supremacy, particularly with regard to a Superchristian disposition surpassing anything Christian.

2. Thus a democratically-mandated political dismemberment of the United Kingdom is crucial, so I contend, to the achievement of the desired change and to the dethronement, in consequence, of 'Britannia', since such a symbolical effigy of the realistic mechanism of sensual primacy is only meaningful in relation to the existence of Great Britain, and thus to the Union of England, Scotland, and Wales (together, in the broader context of the United Kingdom, with Northern Ireland, that greater part of the province of Ulster).

3. However, such a Union, presided over by the monarchy, is not only bad, I shall argue, for Britain, particularly for the predominantly Gaelic countries of Scotland and Wales, but is also bad for Ireland, both North and South, since the loyalty of Protestant Ulstermen to the British throne and/or 'mainland' is - and has long been - an obstacle to a united Ireland, and hence to lasting peace within Ireland as a whole.

4. The fact of a divided Ireland can only continue to bedevil hopes for lasting peace, since those who, as pro-republican Catholics, seek unity with the South have to be weighed against (the falsely-contrived majority within the Ulster statelet of) those who remain loyal to Britain and whose opposition to Irish unity is the principal reason for the island's continuing division.

5. So long as Catholics and Protestants continue to exist and to espouse their respective aspirations or loyalties, as the case may be, there will not be a solution to Ireland's divided predicament, a predicament historically created by the British and maintained, with British military support, by their colonial offshoots.

6. Thus any solution to the tragedy of Irish partition requires an end to sectarian rivalry and division, and the adoption, in its place, of a new religion such that transcends the phenomenal shortcomings and moral limitations of Christianity, be these Catholic or Protestant.

7. There can be no unity between Irishmen in a united Ireland so long as sectarian divisions exist, and therefore the religion which created those divisions and which is responsible for their continuance will have to be democratically rejected by the peoples concerned, in order that they may opt for unity on the basis of the Superchristian religion which I have identified, throughout my work, with Social Transcendentalism, as being that which accords, in its metaphysical completeness, the completeness of metaphysical sensibility, with the will of the (Gaelic) Second Coming or, to all intents and purposes, Messianic Superchrist.

8. But I do not regard a united Ireland as possible so long as Britain continues to exist, since loyalty by Protestant Ulstermen to Great Britain remains both logical and inevitable in view of their 'British' ancestry.

9. Thus I foresee the need to placate that loyalism through the concept and, hopefully, future actuality of a Gaelic federation of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales, since if Ireland is to be united, it should only be on the basis of a compromise between Nationalist and Unionist traditions, such that requires acceptance of a new and better - from the Gaelic standpoint - Union, in which Irish unity can officially come to pass.

10. For, even without sectarian divisions, the prospects for a united Ireland that ignored Unionist loyalism would be very bleak, bearing in mind the inevitability of loyalist opposition to Irish nationality.

11. But a united Ireland that came to pass because the majority of Unionists, arguably of Scotch and/or Welsh Gaelic descent, were prepared to live within a Gaelic federation of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales, and because Nationalists were prepared to accept unity on the basis of Ireland's inclusion within such a federation, would, it seems to me, prove both durable and peaceable.

12. For then one has what is best for Irishmen in general, viz. unity between Gaels of every national persuasion in what would effectively be a new country that, with Scotland and Wales, gave Ireland the added security of not having the British giant, that superstate created by Englishmen to control Gaels and enable England to pursue her civilized goals wherever she might, 'breathing down its neck', as at present, but of having 'the old enemy' at a significantly greater remove from itself in what would eventually amount, in all probability, to an English republic, an English nation that, without territorial claims or responsibilities in respect of the United Kingdom, would no longer have need of the monarchy and no longer be prevented, in consequence, from drawing closer to Rome via a disestablished Church.

13. Yes, I have no doubt that the only 'way out' of Britain for Scotland and Wales is through the establishment of a Gaelic federation with Ireland, and that the only way that Irish unity can be honourably and lastingly effected is through acceptance of a federal unity with Scotland and Wales, so that, for the first time in their turbulent history, Gaels may join together into a supra-national federation within the European Union and achieve a permanent accommodation with one another on the basis of Social Transcendentalism, the Superchristian successor, so far as I am concerned, to the terrible dichotomy within Christianity of Catholicism and Protestantism.

14. But to have the chance of so doing, Gaels must be granted the opportunity, in all three Gaelic countries, of voting for religious sovereignty, the ultimate sovereignty in the evolution of sovereignties, and, by implication, for the right to religious self-determination within the meritocratic framework of Social Transcendentalism, with its concept of a triadic Beyond (the Centre) in which persons of Puritan, Anglican, and Roman Catholic denominational descent could find a common Superchristian identity for themselves, independently of Creator-based worship, not only in Ireland but eventually in Scotland and Wales as well.

15. For so long as Christianity persists in existing, there will be no prospect of religious harmony between the polarized denominations, and no prospect, moreover, of Gaelic unity both within Ireland and, more generally, within what has been termed a Gaelic Federation, potentially commensurate, so far as I am concerned, with the principal, if not pristine, manifestation of 'Kingdom Come'.

16. For 'Kingdom Come' is no myth or figment of the imagination, but something that can initially be brought to pass here on earth, provided that the will is there and that people are sufficiently acquainted with the implications and teachings of Social Transcendentalism to be able to respond in a positive manner to the prospect of Messianic deliverance from 'sins and/or punishments of the world', of which their respective (republican and parliamentary) modes of political sovereignty are a case in point.

17. For that which, in religious sovereignty, is not of the world lies beyond it, and that which lies beyond the world is germane, in its otherworldly pursuits, to 'Kingdom Come', particularly when conceived in relation to the establishment of a Gaelic Federation whose Messianic figurehead and effective leader would, in his supreme metaphysical bias, be a 'god-king', the 'philosopher-king' long hoped for by 'the faithful' to lead them beyond the 'sins and/or punishments of the world' into the graces of the Superchristian Other World, wherein godly truth and heavenly joy would reign for ever more, and specifically within the top tier of the triadic Beyond for those who were most deserving of it.

18. Yet authentic grace through respiratory sensibility, viz. transcendental meditation, would be a very different proposition from the inauthentic grace that obtains, through verbal absolution, for repentant Catholics, and the fulcrum of religion would accordingly be shifted-up from what, in Christianity, is effectively an economic 'bovaryization' in the sin of knowledge to a religious per se in the grace of truth, whose psychocentric transmutation is not the heaviness of pleasure in physical soul, but the lightness of joy in metaphysical soul, the soul-of-souls.

19. Even those who have been earmarked for the bottom and middle tiers, duly subsectioned, of the triadic Beyond ... would experience something of this religious per se, albeit duly modified in watery (feminine) and vegetative (masculine) terms to suit their more purgatorial and earthly overall dispositions.

20. Yet those who, for whatever reasons, had no desire to become a part of 'Kingdom Come' in either its administrative or its religious manifestations would be well advised, in the event of a majority mandate for religious sovereignty under Social Transcendentalism, to take themselves away, presumably, in most cases, to England, with due eschatological implications.

21. For the prospect of a Gaelic Federation would divide the wheat from the chaff, the Gael from the Brit, and result, sooner or later, in the exodus of the latter, whether as Anglo-Irish, Anglo-Scotch, or Anglo-Welsh, from those countries which were opting for religious sovereignty within a Social Transcendentalist context.

22. Since a Gaelic Federation would have to be Gaelic in all contexts, intellectual as well as cultural, persons who could not abide the supersession of English by Gaelic as a first language would have little option, it seems to me, but to remove themselves from the federation in question.

23. For Gaelic unity cannot be achieved on the basis of English, but only in relation to the Gaelic language, even if, initially, Irish Gaelic, Scotch Gaelic, and Welsh Gaelic were obliged to co-exist in each of the respective Gaelic countries ... prior to the creation, in times to come, of a unitary Gaelic language drawn from, yet also transcending, each and every Gaelic tradition.

24. Only Gaelic can do proper justice to the cultural aspirations of Social Transcendentalism, not a genderless tongue like English which, even if regarded in a 'civilized' light, would fall as far short of the Superchristian mark as woman of superman or water of air or ... literature of music, if not altogether antithetical to it in terms of its materialistic rejection of gender.

25. And this Gaelic manifestation of 'Kingdom Come', of a Gaelic federation of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales, would need a unitary emblem, an emblem transcending the national flags of the Republic of Ireland and Great Britain, a banner, I mean, in which the Superchristian ethos of Social Transcendentalism was granted due emblematic exemplification in the guise of what I have elsewhere described as a 'Supercross', or inverted CND design upon which both masculine and feminine signs were granted due prominence in reflection of their harmonious co-option to the ideological religion in question.

26. I have occasionally changed my mind as to what colours would best characterized this Supercross of 'Kingdom Come', but I believe I have finally settled on a compromise solution, from a supra-national standpoint, by opting for a ruby-coloured Supercross upon a turquoise ground, the ruby a tempering of Welsh red and the turquoise a combination of Irish green and Scottish blue, thereby representative of the blending into one harmonious colour of the two principal components of our prospective federation.

27. Be that as it may, I have no doubt whatsoever that such a unitary emblem, whatever its final colouration, is absolutely crucial to the establishment of a Gaelic federation of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales (together, if mutually desirable, with the Isle of Man and certain offshore islands), since it will be necessary to put all historical flags, including those of Scottish and Welsh nationalism, behind it in the interests of Gaelic unity and the development of an ultimate culture such that will do Superchristian justice to each of the countries in question, duly blended, following 'Judgement', or the democratically-mandated option on religious sovereignty, into one nation within the European Union.

28. Doubtless England will retain its own national flag, the Cross of St. George, even if the 'Union Jack' of Great Britain is destined to be discarded in the event of Ireland (both North and South), Scotland, and Wales opting to join together in the interests not only of deliverance from English dominance, but of unity between all Gaels in what would amount to an altogether new type of 'Kingdom', one vastly different, in its heavenly orientation, to the old, in which Social Transcendentalism would reign supreme in testimony to the transcendence of Catholic and Protestant divisions through Superchristian resolution.

29. The Gael, be he Catholic or Protestant, 'Irish' or 'British', has much need of such a transcendence of dichotomous Christianity, and only through voting for religious sovereignty via Social Transcendentalism can there be any prospect of lasting peace and reconciliation coming to pass, since he will never again be politically divided through religion.

30. What England initially created, only the Gael can re-create, for it is in his interests to be delivered from the republican world (of Southern Ireland) and/or monarchic netherworld (of the United Kingdom) to the Messianic otherworldly salvation of 'Kingdom Come', in which culture will blossom as never before under the wise guidance of the 'philosopher-king' and effective Second Coming ... of Superchristian Revelation.

VOICE OF THE SELF

1. In music, the self finds articulation through the voice, both instinctually, with the id, and intellectually, with the ego, the one arguably Pagan and the other effectively Christian.

2. When the id utilizes the voice for purposes of self-revelation, one gets chanting, or something analogous, whereas when the ego utilizes the voice for such purposes the result is singing, which will be less instinctual and correspondingly more intellectual, making use, as a rule, of verbal concepts.

3. The self that finds a musical outlet for itself through chanting, being of an animal disposition, is principally interested in sexual fulfilment, whereas the self that sings, being more fully human, is capable of transmuting ego into soul, albeit providing the will to an emotional end is actively there.

4. Thus whereas the unconscious self, or id, remains partial to an un-egocentric level of vocals which may not even attain to intellectual articulation, the conscious self, or ego, has the possibility of transmuting ego into soul via mind, as when the quantified self, or superconscious, rebounds from selflessness to its emotional core in the soul, or subconscious.

5. The technique of transmuting ego into soul via mind is called vocalizing, and in vocalizing the ego is purged of intellect through emotion, which takes hold of verbal concepts and strings them out ... until they become redeemed by soul, melody duly superseded by pitch.

6. Obviously, this process of transmuting ego into soul through vocalizing can happen at a variety of different levels ... from metachemical and chemical to physical and metaphysical, since there are as many ways of singing as there are elements, and as many types of soul ... from love and pride on the female, or objective, side of life ... to pleasure and joy on its male, or subjective, side.

7. Thus whilst one need not doubt that there are metachemical, chemical, and physical kinds of vocalizing, full justice to the soul will only be done in the metaphysical context of religious music, with or without instrumental accompaniment. For, compared with metaphysical joy, physical pleasure is economic, while, contrasted to physical pleasure, one finds that chemical pride is political and, compared with chemical pride and contrasted to metaphysical joy, it transpires that metachemical love is scientific.

8. Often one kind of singing can be distinguished from another on the basis of pitch, with high pitch at one end of the vocal spectrum and low pitch at its other end, the former superficial and the latter profound, since female singing extends from soprano to contralto via mezzo-soprano, whereas male singing extends from alto to bass via tenor and baritone, the bass totally beyond female parallels.

9. Often, too, technique is significant in enabling one to differentiate a scientific approach to singing from a religious approach, the former expressive and the latter impressive, and to further differentiate each of these (noumenal) extremes from what may, in phenomenal terms, be called a political approach to singing from an economic approach, the former compressive and the latter depressive.

10. Thus we are in effect distinguishing rhythm from pitch on the one hand, that of the noumenal types of singing, and harmony from melody on the other hand, that of the phenomenal types of singing, which owe rather more to volume and mass, in lower-class vein, than to time and space, whatever the axial alternatives one cares to consider.

11. There are also, of course, instrumental combinations and preferences which underlie vocals and make it possible for one to discern a bias towards either metachemistry, chemistry, physics, or metaphysics, as the case may be, with percussion highly prominent in metachemical, or scientific, music; keyboards generally prominent in chemical, or political, music; strings (including guitars and harps) generally prominent in physical, or economic, music; and wind (including pipes) highly prominent in metaphysical, or religious, music.

12. Doubtless most composers aim to establish a parallel between the kind of vocal music and the instrumental accompaniment, since metachemical music, being expressive, is rhythmic, and no instruments can compete with percussion where rhythm is concerned; chemical music, being compressive, is harmonic, and no instruments can compete with keyboards where harmony is concerned; physical music, being depressive, is melodic, and no instruments can compete with strings where melody is concerned; and, last but hardly least, metaphysical music, being impressive, is pitchful, and no instruments can compete with wind where pitch is concerned.

13. Thus we are in effect differentiating the elemental particles, whether metachemical per se or otherwise, of 'scientific music' from the molecular particles, whether chemical per se or otherwise, of 'political music', and each of these objective kinds of music from the molecular wavicles, whether physical per se or otherwise, of 'economic music', and the elemental wavicles, whether metaphysical per se or otherwise, of 'religious music', as between rhythm and harmony on the one hand, and melody and pitch on the other.

14. Of course not all music is vocal, whether completely or in part, although the best of it arguably is, if one associates 'the best', in whatever elemental context, with self-realization, whether expressively, compressively, depressively, or impressively, and accordingly places self-gratification above self-denial through an overly objective disposition towards the not-self and selflessness, a disposition that can only be female even when males follow suit and sacrifice the subjectivity of self, whether selfishly in the id or self-enhancingly in the ego, to the objectivity of not-self and selflessness either literally, by adopting rhythmic and/or harmonic instrumental preferences, or effectively and paradoxically, by treating the melodic and pitchful biases of their own subjective not-self and selflessness, whether physical or metaphysical, in a quasi-objective and, hence, primarily instrumental way, and presumably due to the continual pressure, within a female-dominated civilization, of objective values.

15. For it does seem - and Western civilization provides ample confirmation - that an objective hegemony in society will tend to condition music away from the self, and hence vocals, towards the not-self and selflessness, and hence instrumentals, whether in rhythm and harmony or, less straightforwardly, in melody and pitch, making for an instrumental bias over vocal music.

16. Thus people come to identify music, in an objective society, primarily with instrumentals and only secondarily with vocals, even though, as the most subjective of art forms, music is more suited to a primary definition with regard to vocals, and hence to self-realization, and to a secondary definition with regard to instrumentals, and hence to self-denial through affirmation of not-self and selflessness, power and glory, will and spirit, at the expense of form and contentment, ego and soul.

17. Of course, vocal music can also be less a matter of self-realization through the ego than of self-affirmation through the id, where chanting rather than singing is its principal manifestation, and there is no question but that this can exist, as a kind of pagan outsider germane (in its 'alternative' bias) to some kind of cultural 'underground' or sub-culture, within societies which are predominantly objective and hence mechanistic, with greater respect for instrumentals, and by implication the materialism of musical instruments, than for vocals.

18. But even egocentric vocal music will always be something of a second-class citizen and comparatively uphill struggle in mechanistic societies, where the self counts for less, in the objective scale of things, than the not-self and selflessness of a female hegemony.

19. Nevertheless vocal music is still possible in such societies and continues to be composed and sung, if predominantly more on a metachemical (jazz) and chemical (pop) basis than in relation to physical (operatic) and metaphysical (ecclesiastical and/or traditional) alternatives of arguably a more male-biased, or subjectivistic, persuasion.

20. And the better the vocal music, the more will ego be transmuted into soul, with an ascending spectrum of emotional merit ... from love to joy via pride and pleasure.

21. Although, as a Messianic philosopher, I am not overly in favour of music, be it instrumental or vocal, on account of my metaphysical bias being towards respiratory sensibility, and hence transcendental meditation conceived as the salvation of metaphysics from airwaves to the breath, outer and 'once born' to inner and 'reborn', I am not so wildly optimistic as to suppose that, at least for the foreseeable future, mankind could live without music, since whilst it may not be the greatest or highest 'art', it is arguably the greatest art form, and one that holds an irresistible charm for people, whatever their age or sex.

22. What I am cautiously hopeful about is that music will become, in the future, less instrumental and more vocal, as society becomes less objective and more subjective, less Superheathen and more Superchristian, with a corresponding shift of emphasis in the self from id-based vocals to ego-centred vocals such that will intimate, no matter how paradoxically compared to meditative sensibility, of emotional redemption in the soul.

23. And I feel that whereas classical music was - and still is - largely acoustic and 'naturalistic' in its orchestral bias, what may be termed 'superclassical' will be electric and synthetic, by which I mean bearing testimony to a synthetically-modified abstraction and/or extrapolation from naturalistic precedent, which will allow for the emulation and/or transcendence of orchestral sounds - as, indeed, of virtually any instruments which owe more to concrete nature than to abstract supernature.

24. Thus it inevitably follows that comprehensive synthesizers will figure prominently in the superclassical overhaul and effective eclipse of classical music, as Superchristian criteria replace Christian criteria in the advance of civilization towards its supernatural peaks, aided and abetted by computers and - crucial to egocentric 'rebirth' - the availability of various symbols on screen from which music and/or text can be read and duly transmuted upwards via such vocalizing, itself synthetically modified, as would be requisite to the exemplification of a soulful end.

25. If art is the 'handmaiden of religion', then synthetic vocal music, in particular, will be the art form which most panders to the ideological religion of Social Transcendentalism, becoming, at its highest level, a pitchful intimation, duly vocalized, of meditative praxis for those who would be unable to completely transcend music, and hence the airwaves, in the interests of meditation upon the breath.

26. But pitch needn't necessarily be high, or fast, since it seems to me that the deepest pitch is the most impressive, confirming one in the notion that the 'tieferness', so to speak, of things lies in the basso profundo of that which exemplifies the most joy in Om-like vein, a joy at once metaphysical and male in its calm subjectivity.

27. For just as the male voice stretches beyond the female one in terms of its depth and profundity, the bass overhauling not only the baritone, tenor, and alto of male vocal alternatives, but leaving the contrasting female shallowness of soprano, mezzo-soprano, and contralto in the wake of its plumbing of the soulful depths, so should the profoundest music aim to re-create an impression of profundity through depth, the bass register mystically freed from magical or mechanistic subversion, and enabled to deliver to the voice that pitchful accompaniment which would be at the core of the synthesizer ... pretty much as the bass voice itself is at the core of musical soul.

28. But if the bass voice is beyond the range of most people, men as well as women, then the baritone and the tenor on the male side of the gender divide and the mezzo-soprano and the contralto on its female side ... would still have a place within the triadic Beyond of 'Kingdom Come' which, though less metaphysical than physical or chemical, would enable melody and harmony to act as a support for pitch in its plumbing of the utmost cultural joy, a support largely, if not entirely, beyond rhythmic expression.

THE CORE OF THE SELF

1. The utmost religious joy, however, can only come via transcendental meditation, since it is that which utilizes the 'air-within' of the breath to achieve both a transmutation of the egocentric self and a rejection of its spiritualization thereof, in the interests of emotional redemption, the superconscious duly superseded by the subconscious as self reacts against the threat of excessive selflessness to achieve for itself the enhancement of self which is commensurate with the soul, the kernel of its being.

2. Thus only the 'kingdom within' of metaphysical sensibility can deliver to the self its profoundest joy, a joy which goes beyond, or transcends, anything recourse to metaphysical sensuality via the airwaves can deliver to the self, albeit even the metaphysical 'kingdom without', which is rather more theocratic than meritocratic, can deliver joy to the self, thereby confirming the presence of metaphysical soul.

3. For here, too, one is dealing with being in relation to essence, soul in relation to breath, self in relation to air, albeit it be the 'outer air' of the airwaves, with a joy that is correspondingly less deep, less lasting, and arguably less fulfilling, since more sensual than sensible, and being further compromised by the anterior sensuality of love in relation to the metachemical soul of autocracy.

4. For autocracy precedes theocracy, as the stellar cosmos precedes the solar cosmos, or as Jehovah precedes Satan, or as eyes precede ears, or as Saul precedes David ... in the sensual alternatives, both primal and supreme, negative and positive, to the noumenal 'kingdoms without', the one objectively rooted in spatial space and the other subjectively centred in sequential time, a metaphysical 'fall guy', in its submasculine subjectivity, for superfeminine denigration from the objectivistic 'on high' of metachemical precedence.

5. And even the Christian Church came to reflect, in the course of time, this dichotomous hierarchy in which the 'First Mover' tended to pull (sensual) rank on the 'Fallen Angel', as stellar Jehovah upon solar Satan or optical Saul upon aural David, and autocracy accordingly got the better of theocracy, came off better, one might say, in the struggle between Church and State, submasculinity and superfemininity, for control over men's lives.

6. Such it has always been in the West, with alternations between New Testament and Old Testament, the Father vis-à-vis Christ and Jehovah vis-à-vis Satan, with theocracy disposed or obliged to shuffle between the Father and Satan as the submasculine was transposed from an ascendant position, in the New Testament Father, beyond Christ and over the demonized Pan of a subverted, and hence Satanic, earth ... to a dependent and deferential position, in the Old Testament, beneath Jehovah, where, correspondingly Satanic, it was duly abandoned in favour of the autocracy of Jehovah and the concept of God not as 'Father of the Son' but as 'First Mover' and effective 'Creator of the Universe' (cosmos).

7. Thus the Church itself shifted ground to suit the occasion, moving from a quite admirable 'once-born' position in the Father to a less than admirably 'once-born' position in Jehovah where, despite male terminology, superfemininity was effectively 'top dog' over submasculinity, in due autocratic fashion.

8. But if religion was always on somewhat shaky ground in the Christian West, even when Satan had been taken down a plane or two from a 'fallen angel' status to a subterranean one to suit a theocratic concept of God in the Father ... and one wonders, in consequence, what basis for denigration of the latter there could possibly have been for a God and a Devil who share the same gender, if with noumenal and phenomenal distinctions relative to separate 'kingdoms without', it could hardly be said of science that it, too, was always on shaky ground there, bearing in mind the authenticity of autocracy in a world where metachemical evil always had the Bible-sanctioned advantage over metaphysical wisdom, particularly in view of the latter's almost chimerical disposition to abandon wisdom for evil, New Testament for Old Testament, as and when circumstances deemed fit.

9. An intelligent cynic would certainly have solid grounds for doubting the 'rock' upon which the Church was thematically built, and for dismissing religion, in consequence, as a lost cause in the unequal struggle with evil ... were he disposed to limit his concept of religion to the West and, more specifically, to the Christian faith, of which the Catholic Church has long regarded itself as being the principal, if not the sole, exemplar.

10. But if Western religion has never done proper justice to the doubting cynic, then neither can it be said that the Christian Church has done anything like proper justice to religion, since it has remained, throughout its long history, rooted and/or centred, depending on the context, in the concept of God as 'Creator', be that God autocratic and Old Testament or theocratic and New Testament, and one cannot imagine things ever being substantially different so long as the Bible continues to function as the 'rock' upon which the thematic foundations of the Church was built, albeit a 'rock' which presents one face now and a completely different one the next moment, as already discussed.

11. No, it seems to me that justice will only be done to religion when, through effectively Superchristian teachings such as these, people opt - democratically and peacefully - to move beyond the Church and thereby dispense with the Bible, so that instead of being held back from metaphysical sensibility by metachemical and/or metaphysical sensuality, they elect to be saved from it to the possibility, for those who are 'up to it', of meditative praxis, thereby acquiring complete independence, through Social Transcendentalism, from Creator-based scientific and/or religious primitivity ... for the sake of the optimum development of their selves, with especial reference to the soul and, in relation to transcendental meditation, the soul-of-souls most especially.

12. For the soul, remember, lies at the core or 'heart' of the self, and one cannot even begin to cultivate the soul-of-souls, the metaphysically sensible soul of joyful being, unless one is free of, or has been delivered from, religious constraints of the sort that stem from Biblical adherence to concepts of God rooted and/or centred in the Cosmos, the religious primitivity of which precludes the possibility of metaphysical independence.

13. Difficult as metaphysical sensibility would be when the concept of God was centred in metaphysical sensuality (the Father), it is next-to-impossible when such a concept is rooted in metachemical sensuality (Jehovah), and the objectivity thereof bedevils any attempt to come to terms with self-advancement (from ego to soul) by ensuring that the focus of religion is always outside the self ... in either supreme or, more usually in relation to the Cosmos, primal manifestations of not-self and selflessness, will and spirit.

14. Hence the entire tradition of other-based religion must be rejected in toto, not just on the half-measure basis of Christianity, but with intent to 'turning the tables' on religious objectivity once and for all, so that the self is completely released from the clutches of not-self primacy and/or supremacy and is able, in consequence, to develop an unequivocally soul-oriented redemption through the lead of metaphysical sensibility.

15. Only Social Transcendentalism, the ideological religion which I have created and identified with a Superchristian disposition appropriate to 'Kingdom Come', can provide the People with the opportunity to win deliverance from Christian constraints or limitations and, more importantly, put the Heathen and Superheathen freedoms of secular modernity objectively behind them.

16. But if there is to be such a deliverance, then the People - and the Gaelic electorates above all - will have to seize the opportunity, at some future time, of voting for it, since only be utilizing the democratic process to vote for religious sovereignty can there be any prospect of achieving the right to self-realization in 'Kingdom Come', which I have provisionally tended to identify, all along, with a federation of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales, together with the Isle of Man and/or various offshore islands, in what has been called the Gaelic Federation but could also, and with equal justification, be called a Federation of Social Transcendentalist Centres.

17. Thus I am, to all intents and purposes, the Gaelic Second Coming, and it is my hope and belief that such a Superchristian destiny - not incompatible, so far as I am concerned, with the notion of a Superjudaic one - does more justice to the concept of a 'Second Coming' than any previous manifestation of Messianic deliverance has ever done, be it Russian, German, Spanish, or whatever.

18. For religious sovereignty, the issue of my enhanced Messianic credibility, provides the possibility of deliverance not only from religious falsehoods of the sort in which the Christian Church has always been rooted, but, more contemporaneously and perhaps significantly, the possibility of deliverance from 'sins and/or punishments of the world', including the political (democratic) and economic (capitalist) shortfalls from an otherworldly 'Kingdom' whose religion would be truly heavenly.

19. For the world is something that should be overcome, democratically and peaceably, if man is to stand any chance not only of overcoming woman - that heathenistic obstacle to enhanced subjectivity - but of overcoming himself through godliness, and rejecting the Devil in consequence.

20. Else woman will continue to reign, through the Devil, over man, and the prospects of a 'brotherhood of men', much less supermen, can only remain extremely remote.

21. I teach the overcoming of the world through Social Transcendentalism, and I maintain that only in the otherworldly context of 'Kingdom Come', symbolic of the Centre, will there be any reasonable prospect, through religious sovereignty, of both a 'brotherhood of men' in knowledge and pleasure and, more significantly, a 'brotherhood of supermen' in truth and joy, these latter manifestations of selfhood alone commensurate, primarily and universally, with God and Heaven in their metaphysical elevation above the earth.

22. Thus the development of the self from ego to soul via mind is commensurate with the redemption of the self in the sacred transcendence of profanity, whether that profanity be knowledgeable and masculine in vegetativeness or truthful and divine (supermasculine) in airiness, the latter alone capable, with its noumenal subjectivity, of redemption in the sublimeness of that sensible being which, thanks to mystical essence, lies joyfully at the core of the metaphysical self, like some heavenly treasure waiting to be uncovered and, hence, revealed in all its inner splendour.

LONDON 1998 (Revised 2012)

The Core of the Self