Op. 114
REVALUATIONS AND
TRANSVALUATIONS
Aphoristic Philosophy
Copyright © 2013 John
O'Loughlin
_____________
CONTENTS
Aphs. 1–136
____________
1. I
wrote in an earlier text, viz. Revolutionary Afterthoughts, of
conservatism being right-wing and radicalism left, as the following extract
will show: 'One could - and I'm confident many people would - identify
conservatism with being right wing and radicalism with being left wing, and
therefore it should be maintained that salvation from moral conservatism to
moral radicalism, bound psyche to free psyche, is commensurate with a
progression from the moral right to the moral left, as from the vicious
morality of sin and (for females) pseudo-crime to the virtuous morality of
Grace (and for females) pseudo-Punishment, all of which would diametrically
contrast with damnation, on the descending axis, from immoral radicalism to
immoral conservatism, free soma to bound soma, as being commensurate with a
regression from the immoral left to the immoral right, as from the vicious
immorality of Evil and (for males) pseudo-Folly to the virtuous immorality of
good and (for males) pseudo-wisdom.'
Frankly, I do not now believe that I was correct to do so, and for the
following reasons.
2. Whether
one is viciously or virtuously moral or immoral is a different issue, it now
seems to me, from whether one is to be adjudged left or right; for one can be
vicious or virtuous in either psyche or soma, and therefore moral or immoral
according to whether one is adjudged to be psychic or somatic - something
which, in any case, is not about being virtuous or vicious but, on the
contrary, about being either left or right, left in psyche, right in soma, as
the following paragraph will attempt to demonstrate.
3. The
radical, we had established, are always free, but this is equally true of both
types of hegemonic radicalism, viz. metachemical and metaphysical, and both
types of subservient radicalism, viz. antimetaphysical and antimetachemical,
except that the latter are free contrary to their respective gender actualities
and therefore on the paradoxical terms of either soma for the antimetaphysical
or psyche for the antimetachemical in consequence of the hegemonic gender's
primary influence being either somatic in the case of metachemistry or psychic
in the case of metaphysics.
4. But
no mode of radical freedom exists independently of a subordinate mode of
radical binding, whether in respect of psyche in the noumenally sensual context
of metachemistry and antimetaphysics or of soma in the noumenally sensible
context of metaphysics and antimetachemistry.
For either the State is hegemonic and the Church subordinate, as in the
former context, or the Church is hegemonic and the State subordinate, as in the
latter context, and in neither is the State to be associated with anything
other than soma or the Church with anything other than psyche.
5. In
contrast to this, the conservative, we found, are always bound, but this is
equally true of both types of nominally hegemonic conservatism, viz. chemical
and physical, and both types of nominally subservient but - at the behest of their respective overall
hegemonic gender parallels - subversive conservatism, viz. antiphysical and
antichemical, except that the latter are bound contrary to their respective
gender actualities and therefore on the paradoxical terms of either psyche for
the antiphysical or soma for the antichemical in consequence of the nominally
hegemonic gender's primary influence being either somatic in the case of
chemistry or psychic in the case of physics.
6. But no
mode of conservative binding exists independently of a subordinate mode of
conservative freedom, whether in respect of soma in the phenomenally sensual
context of chemistry and antiphysics or of psyche in the phenomenally sensible
context of physics and antichemistry.
For either the Church is hegemonic and the State subordinate, as in the
former context, or the State is hegemonic and the Church subordinate, as in the
latter context, and in neither is the Church to be associated with anything
other than psyche or the State with anything other than soma.
7. Granted,
then, an axial disparity between an ascent from conservatism to radicalism in
the case of church-hegemonic society and a descent from radicalism to
conservatism in the case of state-hegemonic society, this is not, contrary to
the extract from Revolutionary Afterthoughts quoted above, equivalent to
a progression from the moral right to the moral left on the one hand and to a
regression from the immoral left to the immoral right on the other hand,
despite the indubitable distinctions between vice and virtue which characterize
the contrary fates in such diametrically antithetical terms, but is, rather,
equivalent to a progression from the conservative left to the radical left in
respect of church-hegemonic criteria and, conversely, to a regression from the
radical right to the conservative right in respect of state-hegemonic criteria,
so that what finally determines whether something is 'left' or 'right' is not
its class status in relation to radicalism or conservatism, the free few or the
bound many, but its moral or immoral significance in relation to psyche or
soma.
8. Thus
an axial ascent, within church-hegemonic society, from the vicious morality of
the psychically bound to the virtuous morality of the psychically free is
commensurate with a progression from the conservative left to the radical left,
as from anti-self to pro-self, anti-peace to pro-peace, whereas an axial
descent, within state-hegemonic society, from the vicious immorality of the
somatically free to the virtuous immorality of the somatically bound is
commensurate with a regression from the radical right to the conservative
right, as from pro-notself to anti-notself, pro-war to anti-war.
9. Therefore
in representatively hegemonic terms each axis is either of the Left or of the
Right, psychically left in church-hegemonic terms or somatically right in
state-hegemonic terms, but each of these principal positions is divisible
between 'anti' and 'pro' manifestations of psyche or soma which distinguish the
many from the few, the conservative from the radical, since those who are
viciously and virtuously moral, or psychic, stand to those who are viciously
and virtuously immoral, or somatic, as the conservative/radical Left to the
radical/conservative Right.
10. One
cannot, however, leave this axial disparity in representative terms, as between
the hegemonic factors already described; for there are also subordinate factors
to be considered, whether state subordinate in relation to the axis diagonally
ascending from phenomenal sensuality to noumenal sensibility or church
subordinate in relation to the axis diagonally descending from noumenal
sensuality to phenomenal sensibility, both of which complicate the overall
picture.
11. In
the case of the diagonally ascending axis, it should be maintained that,
correlative with the salvation of the moral from bound to free psyche, comes
the counter-damnation of the pseudo-immoral from free to bound soma, and that
this is commensurate with a counter-regression from the pseudo-radical right to
the pseudo-conservative right, as from the 'pseudo' modes of pro-notself to
anti-notself, pro-war to anti-war, whereas in the case of the diagonally
descending axis it follows that, correlative with the damnation of the immoral
from free to bound soma, comes the counter-salvation of the pseudo-moral from
bound to free psyche, which is commensurate with a counter-progression from the
pseudo-conservative left to the pseudo-radical left, as from the 'pseudo' modes
of anti-self to pro-self, anti-peace to pro-peace.
12. Therefore
in what could be called unrepresentatively subordinate terms each axis is
either of the pseudo-Right or of the pseudo-Left, somatically right in
state-subordinate terms or psychically left in church-subordinate terms, but
each of these subordinate positions is divisible between 'pro' and 'anti'
manifestations of soma or psyche which distinguish the many from the few, the
conservative from the radical, since those who are viciously and virtuously
pseudo-immoral, or somatic, stand to those who are viciously and virtuously
pseudo-moral, or psychic, as the radical/conservative pseudo-Right to the
conservative/radical pseudo-Left.
13. There
is as considerable a difference, however, between the hegemonic and subordinate
modes of church morality as between the hegemonic and subordinate modes of
state immorality, and therefore one cannot suppose that the pseudo-Left,
whether viciously or virtuously of psyche, are anything like as unfreely or
freely psychic as their hegemonic counterparts on the axis that diagonally
ascends from phenomenal sensuality to noumenal sensibility, or that the
pseudo-Right, whether viciously or virtuously of soma, are anything like as
freely or unfreely somatic as their hegemonic counterparts on the axis that
diagonally descends from noumenal sensuality to phenomenal sensibility.
14. Moreover
the pseudo-Left are as fated to remain in the shadow of the genuine Right in
state-hegemonic society as the pseudo-Right in the shadow of the genuine Left
in church-hegemonic society. And this
applies equally to both genders, whether in relation to the primary and
secondary manifestations of church subordination vis-à-vis their
state-hegemonic counterparts on the diagonally descending axis or in relation
to the primary and secondary manifestations of state subordination vis-à-vis
their church-hegemonic counterparts on the axis that diagonally ascends.
15. Therefore
there is no sense in trying to hype or exaggerate the significance of either
the pseudo-Left or the pseudo-Right vis-à-vis the more representatively Right
or Left of each type of society, any more than there would be much sense in
trying to exaggerate the significance of the pseudo-Left at the expense of the
Left or of the pseudo-Right at the expense of the Right across the axial divide
which distinguishes those led by morality in church-hegemonic fashion from
those ruled by immorality in state-hegemonic fashion.
16. What
really matters is not the standing of Left to pseudo-Left or of Right to
pseudo-Right, or vice versa, but the deference of pseudo-Right to the Left,
whether in sensuality or sensibility, and of pseudo-Left to the Right, likewise
whether in vice or virtue, in the interests of axial stability and overall
accountability; for there is no more a situation in which the Left can exist
independently of the pseudo-Right than one in which the Right can exist
independently of the pseudo-Left, radicalism and conservatism hanging together
almost as two sides of the same phenomenal or noumenal coin even as one either
progresses/counter-regresses or regresses/counter-progresses, according to
axis, from the one to the other on both genuine and 'pseudo', hegemonic and
subordinate, terms in both primary and
secondary gender contexts.
17. Therefore
along with the progressive axial ascent in male salvation from sin to grace of
the antihumanistically antiphysical to the, as it were, transcendentalistically metaphysical and in
female salvation from pseudo-crime to pseudo-punishment of the
nonconformistically chemical to the antifundamentalistically antimetachemical,
as from conservative Left to radical Left on both primary and secondary psychic
terms, must go the counter-regressive axial ascent in male counter-damnation
from folly to wisdom of the antinaturalistically antiphysical to the
idealistically metaphysical and in female counter-damnation from pseudo-evil to
pseudo-good of the realistically chemical to the antimaterialistically
antimetachemical, as from pseudo-radical Right to pseudo-conservative Right on
both primary and secondary somatic terms.
18. Conversely,
along with the regressive axial descent in female damnation from evil to good
of the materialistically metachemical to the antirealistically antichemical and
in male damnation from pseudo-folly to pseudo-wisdom of the anti-idealistically
antimetaphysical to the naturalistically physical, as from radical Right to
conservative Right on both primary and secondary somatic terms, must go the
counter-progressive axial descent in female counter-salvation from crime to
punishment of the, as it were, fundamentalistically metachemical to the
antinonconformistically antichemical and in male counter-salvation from
pseudo-sin to pseudo-grace of the antitranscendentalistically antimetaphysical
to the humanistically physical, as from pseudo-conservative Left to
pseudo-radical Left on both primary and secondary psychic terms.
19. In
the case of the ascending axis, therefore, that which is authentically Left will
be accompanied by a pseudo-Right the somatic nature of which stands in state
subordination to a church hegemony, whether the triumph of psyche over soma to
which that hegemony appertains be vicious or virtuous, bound or free,
conservative or radical, sensual or sensible, whereas in the case of the
descending axis that which is authentically Right will be accompanied by a
pseudo-Left the psychic nature or, rather, nurture of which stands in church
subordination to a state hegemony, whether the triumph of soma over psyche to
which that hegemony appertains be vicious or virtuous, free or bound, radical
or conservative, sensual or sensible.
20. Obviously
the overall distinction between church-hegemonic/state-subordinate society and
state-hegemonic/church-subordinate society owes much if not everything to
gender, since the former can only prevail under a male lead of society as a
reflection of the male gender actuality of psyche both preceding and
predominating over soma, whether on the absolute terms of most wavicles/least
particles which characterizes the metaphysical male as a sensible upper-class
noumenon or on the relative terms of more (compared to most) wavicles/less
(compared to least) particles characterizing the antiphysical male as a sensual
lower-class phenomenon, whereas the latter only prevails in consequence of a
female rule of society as a reflection of the female gender actuality of soma
both preceding and predominating over psyche, whether on the absolute terms of
most particles/least wavicles which characterizes the metachemical female as a
sensual upper-class noumenon or on the relative terms of more (compared to
most) particles/less (compared to least) wavicles characterizing the
antichemical female as a sensible lower-class phenomenon.
21. Ironically,
whereas the absence of a noumenally sensible upper-class control of society in
respect of the diagonally ascending axis would make for a heathenistic state of
worldly freedom in which the hegemonic chemical sought their own freely somatic
advantage at the expense of the antiphysical, feminine females conditioning
society, after their own relative somatic bias, towards free soma and bound
psyche in such fashion that the emphasis could only be on the former, the
presence of a noumenally sensual upper-class control of society in respect of
the diagonally descending axis is what makes for a heathenistic state of
worldly binding in which the nominally hegemonic physical are unable to seek
their own psychic advantage at the expense of the antichemical because the
latter are able, at the behest of the overall metachemical hegemony, to subvert
the masculine male conditioning of society, after their own relative psychic
bias towards free psyche and bound soma, in such fashion that the emphasis does
not fall on the former but on the latter, in paradoxically female
fashion.
22. Consequently
while the absence of a noumenally sensible control of society would be
heathenistically bad for the phenomenally sensual, not least for males, it is
the presence of a noumenally sensual control of society that is
heathenistically good for the phenomenally sensible, with particular reference
to females, since in all but a small minority of cases males are precluded from
being anything like as psychically free as they would otherwise be, no matter
how morally desirable such freedom may happen to seem from a physical
standpoint, and are rendered psychically subordinate to a somatic emphasis and
overall control of society which guarantees axial stability on state-hegemonic terms
and ensures that the Church - and hence Christianity - will never be more than
subordinate and effectively pseudo-moral, primarily concerned not with sin in
antiphysics and grace in metaphysics but, in paradoxical vein, with crime in
metachemistry and punishment in antichemistry, neither of which have any
bearing on ecclesiastic authenticity whatsoever but testify, in
counter-progressive fashion, to counter-salvation from the female manifestation
of noumenal sensuality to its phenomenal counterpart in sensibility, the male
psychic equivalents in antimetaphysical pseudo-sin and physical pseudo-grace
being merely secondary in the overall female-dominated integrity of church
subordination.
23. For
you cannot be secondary in the State and primary in the Church in such
circumstances. Such primacy, were it to
materialize, would be independent of the antichemical subversion of physics at
the behest of an overall metachemical controlling power and therefore contrary
to the heathenistic integrity and interests of state-hegemonic society. It would, in fact, amount to a more pedantic
approach to Christianity that made a God out of Man and elevated the Word, as
an intellectual medium for the transmission of knowledge, out of all proportion
to its actual worth, reducing religion from metaphysics to physics in such
fashion that salvation or redemption, as you prefer, became falsely
commensurate with intellectual knowledge rather than with the transcendence of
ego in soul - something that can only happen in relation to metaphysics, and
therefore in terms, for mankind, of a respiratory repudiation of cerebral
knowledge from the standpoint of Truth and of pleasure from the standpoint of
Joy, so that universality prevails at the expense of personality or, more
correctly, personality is transcended by universality, as vegetation by air.
24. There
are, however, several reasons why certain persons should prefer personality to
universality, not least in relation to a lower-class disposition conditioned,
in no small measure, by lowland criteria in a temperate region of the world
which conduced towards what some might consider an unduly humanistic bias, but
such reasons would not stand up to metaphysical logic where such logic was
possible by dint of a more upper-class disposition stemming from or
appertaining to airy environments that were comparatively otherworldy in
consequence of a highland orientation that airily 'flew in the face' of
temperate nature, with its verdant vegetation.
25. Truth
is not susceptible to being other than what it is, and those who are capable of
Truth will always 'see through' the lie of lesser or contrary allegiances, such
as knowledge and strength or even beauty, not to mention weakness and ignorance
or ugliness and illusion, posing as Truth.
Even if they can be justified for a time, such allegiances cannot expect
to prevail in lieu of Truth for
ever; for time, in a manner of speaking, catches up with them and their
pretensions and impostures are exposed, to stand nakedly bereft of credibility
before the cool inner light of Truth, whose airy spirit should have no
difficulty in blowing them away.
26. Granted
that those who are reduced, as males, to being secondary in the State will
continue to be secondary in the Church, which is no genuine church, it does not
necessarily follow that, the hegemonic state being right wing and the
subordinate church pseudo-Left, there is no such dichotomy within either the
State or the Church; for of course there is, if with a bias favouring the Right
in view of the extent to which soma prevails over psyche in consequence of
female dominion.
27. Contrariwise,
granted that those who are reduced, as females, to being secondary in the
Church will continue to be secondary in the State, which is no genuine state,
it does not necessarily follow that, the hegemonic church being left wing and
the subordinate state pseudo-Right, there is no such dichotomy within either
the Church or the State; for of course there is, if with a bias favouring the
Left in view of the extent to which psyche prevails over soma in consequence of
male dominion.
28. But
when we speak of such a dichotomy in either the State or the Church we should
be careful not to exaggerate it in relation to right/left or left/right
polarity; for in neither case could there be any such polarity but, rather, a
distinction between the primary and secondary manifestations of
state-hegemonic/church-subordinate criteria on the one hand, amounting to Right
and quasi-Right in the political context and to quasi-pseudo-Left and
pseudo-Left in the religious context, and between the primary and secondary
manifestations of church-hegemonic/state-subordinate criteria on the other
hand, which amounts to Left and quasi-Left in the religious context and to
pseudo-Right and quasi-pseudo-Right in the political context. For in all such contexts the dominion of the
one gender over the other ensures that nothing truly independent - and
therefore contrary to - the prevailing ethos can expect to exist.
29. Consequently
in the case of the diagonally ascending axis of
church-hegemonic/state-subordinate society it must follow that primary and
secondary modes of bound or free psyche are as much of the Left as their
somatic counterparts are of the pseudo-Right, nothing right wing, whether 'pseudo'
or otherwise, having any more place in the hegemonic church than anything left
wing, whether genuine or otherwise, could possibly have a legitimate place in
the subordinate state, exceptions to the general rule notwithstanding.
30. Likewise
in the case of the diagonally descending axis of
state-hegemonic/church-subordinate society it must follow, in complete contrast
to the above, that primary and secondary modes of free or bound soma are as
much of the Right as their psychic counterparts are of the pseudo-Left, nothing
left wing, whether 'pseudo' or otherwise, having any more place in the
hegemonic state than anything right wing, whether genuine or otherwise, could
possibly have a legitimate place in the subordinate church, exceptions to the
general rule notwithstanding.
31. That
said, it follows that neither type of society can really countenance deviations
from its prevailing ethos, for the stability of each is premised upon the
ability of the relevant upper-class free radicals to fashion the lower-class
masses of bound conservatives after their own image, albeit in reverse psychic
or somatic disposition, as the case may be, and thereby not only preclude
worldly tyranny or anarchy, the former more likely to follow from untempered
chemical hegemony over antiphysics in phenomenal sensuality, the latter from
untempered physical hegemony over antichemistry in phenomenal sensibility, but
simultaneously bolster and legitimize their own respective overworldly
hegemonies - metachemistry over antimetaphysics in noumenal sensuality,
metaphysics over antimetachemistry in noumenal sensibility - so that unrest or
revolt on the part of the subservient gender is overruled, if not neutralized,
in relation to the importance attaching to worldly stability in respect of either
the antichemical subversion of physics from the standpoint of state-hegemonic
criteria or the antiphysical subversion of chemistry from the standpoint of
church-hegemonic criteria, neither of which lower-class paradoxes would be
possible without the overall hegemonic control of their upper-class gender
parallels.
32. Therefore
although it may be harsh on the antimetaphysical and antimetachemical upended genders under
the hegemonic control of metachemical rulers or metaphysical leaders, the
metachemical/antimetaphysical complementarity constituting a 'vicious circle'
in noumenal sensuality and the
metaphysical/antimetachemical complementarity a 'virtuous circle' in noumenal
sensibility, their paradoxical fates have to be weighed against the benefit to the
world that comes from worldly stability in compromise as, in the one case, the
physical hegemony over antichemistry is precluded from anarchically leading, in
male vein, to an undue emphasis on psychic freedom through being somatically
subverted from below at the behest of metachemical freedom diagonally backwards
'on high', and, in the other case, the chemical hegemony over antiphysics is
precluded from tyrannically leading, in female vein, to an undue emphasis on
somatic freedom through being psychically subverted from below at the behest of
metaphysical freedom diagonally forwards 'on high', with a consequence that, in
the one instance, Christian anarchy becomes rather more the exception to the
heathenistic rule and, in the other instance, heathen tyranny rather more the
exception to the Christianistic rule, so to speak, insofar as in neither
phenomenal case is freedom more than subordinate to binding and consequently
ever in the shadow of the antithetical modes of conservatism which become the
lower-class counterparts to the prevailing modes of upper-class radicalism, be
they somatic in metachemistry or psychic in metaphysics.
33. Considered
dispassionately, as from the noumenal standpoint of an overview of the
phenomenal world, you cannot encourage freedom in the masses, because, quite
apart from the irrelevance of somatic freedom to antiphysical males and of
psychic freedom to antichemical females, all large numbers of people have, like
animals, to be herded or husbanded or otherwise corralled and shepherded in
such fashion that they do least damage to one another and to themselves; for
too many creatures wandering if not stampeding everywhichway can only lead to
violence or confusion - something, alas, which does happen from time to time
and in some societies or so-called civilizations more than others, whether
because they have degenerated from axial sense or never really acquired any,
with consequences that are all-too-predictably tyrannical or anarchic, as the
case may be.
34. But
if the masses are to be protected from the consequences of too much freedom of
one sort or another, depending on the prevailing gender disposition of any
given people, then it is necessary that freedom should remain the principal
concern of the few, the radical elites whose duty it is to control the masses
both in their own and one another's best interests, insofar as worldly
stability can only be guaranteed on the basis of axial consistency in either
church-hegemonic or state-hegemonic fashion, and such stability is crucial if
overworldly stability is to be assured and the hegemonic positions of females
over males in noumenal sensuality or of males over females in noumenal
sensibility stand the test of eternal validation - something it can only do in
conjunction with the worldly masses and not independently of them, since the
time-under-space subservient gender will protest its paradoxical secondary
radicalism - somatic in the case of the antimetaphysical, psychic in the case
of the antimetachemical - if the primary radicalism which controls it cannot
justify itself in relation to the stability of the many in respect of worldly
compromise between the nominally hegemonic and subservient genders in volume
and mass achieved at the behest of the overall controlling influence of the
metachemical in the case of noumenal sensuality or of the metaphysical in the
case of noumenal sensibility, antichemistry only turning the gender tables on
physics by dint of metachemical primacy, antiphysics only doing likewise to
chemistry by dint of metaphysical primacy or, more correctly, supremacy - the
former rooted in soma, the latter centred in psyche.
35. Consequently
the world is intensely problematic to the point of unworkable without these
controlling agents, these ruling and/or leading authorities, and the
paradoxical sufferings of that section of the few who are obliged to live at
cross-purposes with their gender actualities under the hegemonic gender can be
eternally justified only in relation to the benefits which accrue to the many
in consequence of such 'world overcoming' as ensues from the overall hegemonic
gender having its way at the expense of the nominally hegemonic gender via its
lower-class gender parallel who establishes the axial link that binds the
conservative to the radical, the bound to the free in reverse image of its
Maker, be that Maker somatically evil or psychically graceful, of Devil the
Mother or, in metaphysics, of God the Father, the under-plane corollary of the
one being the Antison of Antigod and of the other being the Antidaughter of the
Antidevil.
36. Be
that as it may, radicalism, like conservatism, can be either left or right
wing, but will only be Left when psychic and Right when somatic, the progression
from the conservative left to the radical left having to be weighed not only
against the regression from the radical right to the conservative right but, in
each case, against their respective subordinate complements in either soma or
psyche, whose affiliations, ever at open or closed variance with their own,
will remain 'pseudo' in both radicalism and conservatism.
37. Where
each of these primary and secondary positions are paradoxically equivalent,
however, is in their status with respect to either vice or virtue. For vice is not simply
somatically free and virtue psychically so, although that is arguably the
principal case. That which is
psychically bound is the vicious complement to whatever is somatically free
and, conversely, the somatically bound has a virtuously free psychic
complement.
38. But
besides the need to know whether something is primarily or secondarily vicious
or virtuous, hegemonic or subordinate, it could, with reason, be argued that
the only really vicious positions are somatically free and the only really
virtuous positions psychically free, so that anything that was psychically
bound, whether in noumenal or phenomenal sensuality, would be less vicious per se than viciously neutral vis-à-vis its
somatic complement, whereas whatever was somatically bound, whether in
phenomenal or noumenal sensibility, would be less virtuous per se than
virtuously neutral vis-à-vis its psychic complement.
39. For
just as there is a state/church distinction between free soma and bound psyche
in noumenal sensuality, whether in respect of metachemistry or antimetaphysics,
so there may well be a vicious/viciously neutral distinction between these
upper-class representatives of radical freedom and pseudo-conservative binding
which would contrast with the virtuously neutral/virtuous distinction, in
phenomenal sensibility, between the antichemical and physical manifestations of
conservative binding and pseudo-radical freedom, the axial antithesis between
free and bound soma not simply one of vicious vis-à-vis virtuous immorality
but, rather, of vicious immorality and virtuously neutral immorality or, more
correctly in relation to an approximately neutral position, amorality; that
between bound and free psyche not simply one of vicious vis-à-vis virtuous pseudo-morality
but, rather, of viciously neutral pseudo-amorality vis-à-vis virtuous
pseudo-morality. For on this basis
virtue is, strictly speaking, no less removed from the sphere of the State than
vice from that of the Church, even if a neutrality that leans one way or the
other, and is effectively amorally intermediate between immoral and moral
alternatives, has to be allowed for in relation to the free conditioning
factors, whether primary or secondary.
40. Likewise
just as there is a church/state distinction between bound psyche and free soma
in phenomenal sensuality, whether in respect of antiphysics or chemistry, so
there may well be a viciously neutral/vicious distinction between these
lower-class representatives of conservative binding and pseudo-radical freedom
which would contrast with the virtuous/virtuously neutral distinction, in
noumenal sensibility, between the metaphysical and antimetachemical
manifestations of radical freedom and pseudo-conservative binding, the axial
antithesis between bound and free psyche not simply one of vicious vis-à-vis
virtuous morality but, rather, of viciously neutral amorality and virtuous
morality; that between free and bound soma not simply one of vicious vis-à-vis
virtuous pseudo-immorality but, rather, of vicious pseudo-immorality vis-à-vis
virtuously neutral pseudo-amorality. For
on this basis vice is, strictly speaking, no less removed from the sphere of
the Church than virtue from that of the State, even if a neutrality that leans
one way or the other, being amorally intermediate between immoral and moral
alternatives, has to be allowed for in relation to the free conditioning
factors, whether primary or secondary.
41. Consequently
we must distinguish the viciously neutral amorality of antiphysical and chemical
bound psyche from the vicious pseudo-immorality of antiphysical and chemical
free soma in phenomenal sensuality, distinguishing each of these from the
virtuous morality of metaphysical and antimetachemical free psyche and the
virtuously neutral pseudo-amorality of metaphysical and antimetachemical bound
soma in noumenal sensibility, so that as one progressively ascends, in
church-hegemonic vein, from the viciously neutral amorality of sin and
pseudo-crime to the virtuous morality of grace and pseudo-punishment, so one
counter-regressively ascends, in state-subordinate vein, from the vicious
pseudo-immorality of folly and pseudo-evil to the virtuously neutral
pseudo-amorality of wisdom and pseudo-good.
42. Contrariwise
we must distinguish the vicious immorality of metachemical and antimetaphysical
free soma from the viciously neutral pseudo-amorality of metachemical and
antimetaphysical bound psyche in noumenal sensuality, distinguishing each of
these from the virtuously neutral amorality of antichemical and physical bound
soma and the virtuous pseudo-morality of antichemical and physical free psyche
in phenomenal sensibility, so that as one regressively descends, in
state-hegemonic vein, from the vicious immorality of evil and pseudo-folly to
the virtuously neutral amorality of good and pseudo-wisdom, so one
counter-progressively descends, in church-subordinate vein, from the viciously
neutral pseudo-amorality of crime and pseudo-sin to the virtuous
pseudo-morality of punishment and pseudo-grace.
43. Taking
the diagonally ascending axis of church-hegemonic and state-subordinate
criteria first, it should be evident that the ascent, in progressive vein, from
bound to free psyche, is equivalent to salvation from negative amorality to
positive morality, anti-blessedness to pro-blessedness, whereas the
counter-descent, in counter-regressive vein, from free to bound soma, is
equivalent to counter-damnation from positive pseudo-immorality to negative
pseudo-amorality, positive pseudo-cursedness to negative pseudo-cursedness, the
'pro' and 'anti' forms of pseudo-cursedness.
44. Where,
on the other hand, the diagonally descending axis of state-hegemonic and
church-subordinate criteria is concerned, it should be evident that the
descent, in regressive vein, from free to bound soma, is equivalent to
damnation from positive immorality to negative amorality, pro-cursedness to
anti-cursedness, whereas the counter-ascent, in counter-progressive vein, from
bound to free psyche, is equivalent to counter-salvation from negative
pseudo-amorality to positive pseudo-morality, negative pseudo-blessedness to
positive pseudo-blessedness, the 'anti' and 'pro' forms of pseudo-blessedness.
45. For
whereas that which is positive is either somatically free or psychically free,
that, by contrast, which is negative is either psychically bound or somatically
bound, and therefore the biased amoral complement to either an immoral (if
somatic) or a moral (if psychic) order of freedom.
46. Hence
whilst it is logical, on the diagonally descending axis, that positive
immorality and negative pseudo-amorality should live together as two sides of
the same noumenally sensual coin, a coin divisible between metachemically
primary and antimetaphysically secondary manifestations of each type of vice,
it is just as demonstrably logical that negative amorality and positive
pseudo-morality should live together as two sides of the same phenomenally
sensible coin, a coin divisible between antichemically primary and physically
secondary manifestations of each type of virtue.
47. Likewise
whilst it is demonstrably logical, on the diagonally ascending axis, that
negative amorality and positive pseudo-immorality should live together as two
sides of the same phenomenally sensual coin, a coin divisible between
antiphysically primary and chemically secondary manifestations of each type of
vice, it is just as logical that positive morality and negative
pseudo-amorality should live together as two sides of the same noumenally
sensible coin, a coin divisible between metaphysically primary and
antimetachemically secondary manifestations of each type of virtue.
48. Verily,
vice and virtue are only absolute antitheses in respect of free soma and free
psyche, but in no case is there a parallel axial antithesis between vicious
immorality and virtuous morality, but either between vicious immorality and
virtuous amorality in state-hegemonic society or between vicious amorality and
virtuous morality in church-hegemonic society, vicious pseudo-amorality being
the church-subordinate antithesis to virtuous pseudo-morality and vicious
pseudo-immorality the state-subordinate antithesis to virtuous amorality.
49. Consequently
morality and immorality will never be found in church/state juxtaposition but
only either morality or immorality of one kind or another and its complementary
mode of amorality, amorality leading to morality no less surely than immorality
to amorality on both primary and secondary terms in either church-hegemonic and
state-subordinate or state-hegemonic and church-subordinate societies, given
the requisite distinctions between 'authentic' and 'pseudo' modes of each.
50. But
in every case where there is a moral/amoral or an immoral/amoral
complementarity, whether in such fashion or the other way round, there will be
either a virtuous correspondence between positivity and negative neutrality or
a vicious correspondence between negativity and positive neutrality; for in no
axial position can there be two positives or two negatives in any given
class/gender juxtaposition but only a distinction between free and bound or
bound and free, the free always being positive, whether viciously or
virtuously, and the bound ... negative, whether viciously or virtuously.
51. Hence
the viciously immoral positivity of absolute somatic freedom has ever to be
contrasted with the viciously pseudo-amoral negativity of absolute psychic
binding in the noumenally sensual context of metachemistry and antimetaphysics,
and both of these, in axial descent, with the virtuously amoral negativity of
relative somatic binding and the virtuously pseudo-moral positivity of relative
psychic freedom in the phenomenally sensible context of antichemistry and
physics.
52. Hence
the viciously amoral negativity of relative psychic binding has ever to be
contrasted with the viciously pseudo-immoral positivity of relative somatic
freedom in the phenomenally sensual context of antiphysics and chemistry, and
both of these, in axial ascent, with the virtuously moral positivity of
absolute psychic freedom and the virtuously pseudo-amoral negativity of
absolute somatic binding in the noumenally sensible context of metaphysics and
antimetachemistry.
53. I
believe I have used such terms as 'concrete ethereal' and 'abstract ethereal'
in the past - see, for example, Revelationary Afterthoughts - in order
to distinguish the absolute nature of noumenal sensuality from the absolute
nurture of noumenal sensibility, and would like to revert to them now in order
to underline the particle/wavicle distinction which exists between these
antithetical manifestations of noumenal absolutism which of course operate in
relation to what has been described as the elemental bias of the
contexts in question, a bias that makes for either a most particle/least
wavicle absolutism in the case of noumenal sensuality or, conversely, for a
most wavicle/least particle absolutism in the case of noumenal sensibility.
54. Hence
not only was the concrete ethereal adjudged to be commensurate with noumenal
sensuality, specifically with respect to its metachemical component, but that
which was defined as concrete in an ethereal way had reference to a context
typified by elemental particles in most particle/least wavicle mode in which
there was a ratio of 3:1 in favour of particles as against wavicles and
therefore in favour of soma as against psyche, with the emphasis very much on
somatic freedom as opposed to psychic binding, which, as we now know, is merely
the viciously pseudo-amoral corollary of immoral vice.
55. Contrariwise,
not only was the abstract ethereal adjudged to be commensurate with noumenal
sensibility, specifically with respect to its metaphysical component, but that
which was defined as abstract in an ethereal way had reference to a context
typified by elemental wavicles in most wavicle/least particle mode in which
there was a ratio of 3:1 in favour of wavicles as against particles and
therefore in favour of psyche as against soma, with the emphasis very much on
psychic freedom as opposed to somatic binding, which, as we now know, is merely
the virtuously pseudo-amoral corollary of moral virtue.
56. Similarly
I have used such terms as 'concrete corporeal' and 'abstract corporeal' in the
past in order to distinguish the relative nature of phenomenal sensuality from
the relative nurture of phenomenal sensibility, and would like to revert to
them now in order to underline the particle/wavicle distinction which exists
between these antithetical manifestations of phenomenal relativity which of
course operate in relation to what has been described as the molecular
bias of the contexts in question, a bias that makes for either a more (compared
to most) particle/less (compared to least) wavicle relativity in the case of
phenomenal sensuality or, conversely, for a more (compared to most)
wavicle/less (compared to least) particle relativity in the case of phenomenal
sensibility.
57. Hence
not only was the concrete corporeal adjudged to be commensurate with phenomenal
sensuality, specifically with respect to its chemical component, but that which
was defined as concrete in a corporeal way had reference to a context typified
by molecular particles in more (compared to most) particle/less (compared to
least) wavicle mode in which there was a ratio of 2½:1½ in favour of particles
as against wavicles and therefore in favour of soma as against psyche, with the
emphasis very much on somatic freedom as opposed to psychic binding, which, as
we now know, is merely the viciously amoral corollary of pseudo-immoral vice.
58. Contrariwise,
not only was the abstract corporeal adjudged to be commensurate with phenomenal
sensibility, specifically with respect to its physical component, but that
which was defined as abstract in a corporeal way had reference to a context
typified by molecular wavicles in more (compared to most) wavicle/less
(compared to least) particle mode in which there was a ratio of 2½:1½ in favour
of wavicles as against particles and therefore in favour of psyche as against
soma, with the emphasis very much on psychic freedom as opposed to somatic
binding, which, as we now know, is merely the virtuously amoral corollary of
pseudo-moral virtue.
59. Anyone
familiar with the above theories might reasonably suppose that one could
proceed from the concrete to the abstract ethereal via the concrete and
abstract corporeal, as though from will to soul via spirit and ego or,
alternatively, from power to contentment via glory and form, but such would
not, in fact, be the case; for not only are the concrete ethereal and the
abstract ethereal absolutely antithetical, and therefore incommensurate, but
the phenomenal positions of the concrete and abstract corporeal will not, as a
rule, be independent of axial controlling agents in the noumenal sphere and
therefore won't typify the world, excepting in the unfortunate event of the
context of phenomenal sensuality being overly heathen in respect of an
untempered chemical hegemony over antiphysics or the context of phenomenal
sensibility being overly Christian in respect of an untempered physical
hegemony over antichemistry, so that the one was characterized by a
molecular-particle bias and the other by a molecular-wavicle bias, as suggested
above.
60. Such,
however, is not how things generally pan-out in practice; for a context of
phenomenal sensuality that was overly characterized by a molecular-particle
bias would be heathenistically aloof, in the concrete corporeal, from the
possibility of Christian or, better, Catholic redemption, whereas a context of
phenomenal sensibility that was overly characterized by a molecular-wavicle
bias would be Christianistically or, better, puritanically aloof, in the
abstract corporeal, from the possibility of Heathen redemption which, no matter
how seemingly bad from a pedantically Christian point of view, is precisely
what makes for the goodness of bound soma, specifically with regard to the
antichemical mode of phenomenal sensibility, and thus for axial consistency and
continuity in respect of state-hegemonic criteria, which, no matter how
undesirable from a more genuinely religious standpoint in which the Church was
hegemonic, at least guarantees worldly stability in the context of phenomenal
sensibility and thereby precludes the likelihood and, indeed, inevitability of
anarchy in consequence of an unduly physical lead of society in the interests
of a knowledgeable free psyche.
61. Obviously
an undue emphasis on free psyche of a physical order is no more desirable from
an antichemical standpoint than an undue emphasis on free soma of a chemical
order from the standpoint of
antiphysics, the revolt of males against such an emphasis almost bound
to lead to tyrannical opposition on the part of the chemically hegemonic,
whether literally female or not, since objective oppression directed against
psyche must ever be contrasted, in sensibility, with subjective repression of
soma.
62. Therefore
neither phenomenal sensuality nor phenomenal sensibility can be left at the
mercy of their respective hegemonic genders, for whom, in volume over mass,
either the concrete corporeal relativity of a molecular-particle bias in the
more (compared to most) particles/less (compared to least) wavicles of the
chemical would spell free-somatic heathen doom to the antiphysical or, in
phenomenal sensibility, the abstract corporeal relativity of a
molecular-wavicle bias in the more (compared to most) wavicles/less (compared
to least) particles of the physical would spell free-psychic Christian doom to the
antichemical.
63. As we
have seen, what happens once inter-class axial consistency of a diagonally
ascending order is introduced into the frame in the interests of both worldly
and overworldly stability and continuity, is that, in phenomenal sensuality,
the antiphysical partially turn the tables on the chemical at the behest of the
metaphysical over the antimetachemical in noumenal sensibility, so that instead
of a molecular-particle bias in overly heathen vein the lower-class male
actuality of more (compared to most) wavicles/less (compared to least)
particles in the relative precedence of soma by psyche is able to establish a
molecular-wavicle bias commensurate with an emphasis on psyche, even if such an
emphasis necessarily has to reflect the nominally hegemonic gender's actuality
(in relation to the more - compared to most) particles/less - compared to least
- wavicles of the relative precedence of psyche by soma) of bound psyche as the
corollary of free soma, except that now it is not as the subordinate corollary
of free soma but, with the psychic assistance of that which freely pertains to
the overall metaphysical hegemony, effectively hegemonic over free soma in
consequence of the antiphysical subversion of chemistry.
64. Contrariwise,
what happens once inter-class axial consistency of a diagonally descending
order is introduced into the frame in the interests of both overworldly and
worldly stability and continuity, is that, in phenomenal sensibility, the
antichemical partially turn the tables on the physical at the behest of the
metachemical over the antimetaphysical in noumenal sensuality, so that instead
of a molecular-wavicle bias in pedantically Christian vein the lower-class
female actuality of more (compared to most) particles/less (compared to least)
wavicles in the relative precedence of psyche by soma is able to establish a
molecular-particle bias commensurate with an emphasis on soma, even if such an
emphasis necessarily has to reflect the nominally hegemonic gender's actuality
(in relation to the more - compared to most - wavicles/less - compared to least
- particles of the relative precedence of soma by psyche) of bound soma as the
corollary of free psyche, except that now it is not as the subordinate
corollary of free psyche but, with the somatic assistance of that which freely
pertains to the overall metachemical hegemony, effectively hegemonic over free
psyche in consequence of the antichemical subversion of physics.
65. Thus
through the paradoxical subversions of the nominal phenomenal hegemonies at the
behest of their noumenal gender counterparts, neither phenomenal sensuality nor
phenomenal sensibility remain contexts that could be simply defined as either
concrete or abstract corporeal but, notwithstanding the basic persistence of gender
influence appertaining thereto, become respectively abstract corporeal in terms
of bound psyche taking precedence over free soma and concrete corporeal in
terms of bound soma taking precedence over free psyche, with axial consistency
established between the de
facto abstract corporeal and the de jure abstract ethereal in respect
of church-hegemonic society, and between the de jure concrete ethereal
and the de facto concrete corporeal in respect of state-hegemonic
society, each of which has its own subordinate orders of state or church, as
already discussed.
66. Hence
as salvation proceeds from the relative wavicle aspects of the abstract
corporeal to the absolute wavicle aspects of the abstract ethereal in respect
of bound to free psyche in church-hegemonic society, thereby progressing from
sin and pseudo-crime to grace and pseudo-punishment, so counter-damnation
counter-recedes from the relative particle aspects of the abstract corporeal to
the absolute particle aspects of the abstract ethereal in respect of free to
bound soma in state-subordinate society, thereby counter-regressing from folly
and pseudo-evil to wisdom and pseudo-good.
67. Contrariwise,
as damnation recedes from the absolute particle aspects of the concrete
ethereal to the relative particle aspects of the concrete corporeal in respect
of free to bound soma in state-hegemonic society, thereby regressing from evil
and pseudo-folly to good and pseudo-wisdom, so counter-salvation
counter-proceeds from the absolute wavicle aspects of the concrete ethereal to
the relative wavicle aspects of the concrete corporeal in respect of bound to
free psyche in church-subordinate society, thereby counter-progressing from
crime and pseudo-sin to punishment and pseudo-grace.
68. Hence
there is about the diagonally ascending axis from phenomenal sensuality to
noumenal sensibility a progressive/counter-regressive ascent from more
(compared to most) wavicles/less (compared to least) particles to most
wavicles/least particles, as from a 2½:1½ to a 3:1 ratio in favour of psyche at
the expense of soma, in which antihumanism and transcendentalism take
precedence over nonconformism and antifundamentalism in church-hegemonic terms
and antinaturalism and idealism over realism and antimaterialism in
state-subordinate terms.
69. Contrariwise,
there is about the diagonally descending axis from noumenal sensuality to
phenomenal sensibility a regressive/counter-progressive descent from most
particles/least wavicles to more (compared to most) particles/less (compared to
least) wavicles, as from a 3:1 to a 2½:1½ ratio in favour of soma at the
expense of psyche, in which materialism and antirealism take precedence over
anti-idealism and naturalism in state-hegemonic terms and fundamentalism and
antinonconformism over antitranscendentalism and humanism in church-subordinate
terms.
70. Just
as, from a strictly somatic point of view, it could be said that females get a
raw deal on the diagonally ascending axis, so, from a strictly psychic point of
view, it has to be said that males get a raw deal on the diagonally descending
axis; for in no society is it possible to treat males and females exactly
alike, as though they were equal, when the basic somatic/psychic contradiction
of the genders - the Biblical 'friction of the seeds' - is such that the female
can only have her freedom (in reflection of the precedence of psyche by soma in
either absolute or relative terms according to class) at the expense of the
male in sensuality or the male only have his freedom (in reflection of the
precedence of soma by psyche in either relative or absolute terms according to
class) at the female's expense in sensibility.
71. Such
antithetical types of freedom lead, as we have seen, to antithetical types of
society in which either somatic freedom is triumphant in female vein or, on the
diagonally ascending axis, psychic freedom triumphs in male vein, and each of
these societies will tend to trumpet its own brand of freedom as though there
could be only one freedom, so accustomed are they to either being ruled, in
female-hegemonic vein, by a somatic concept of freedom which, from the
standpoint of morality, is commensurate with what is worst in civilization and
therefore alone reflective of vice in both barbarous and pseudo-philistine
terms, or led, in male-hegemonic vein, by a psychic concept of freedom which,
in contrast to immorality, is commensurate with what is best in civilization
and therefore alone reflective of virtue in both cultural and pseudo-civil
terms.
72. But
the enemy of that which is centred in virtue in both cultural and pseudo-civil
terms is of course the society rooted in vice in both barbarous and
pseudo-philistine terms, and such a society is scarcely worthy of the name
'civilization', since ruled by Devil the Mother rather than led by God the
Father, and therefore disposed to somatic freedom at the expense of psychic
freedom and at the cost, more pertinently, of psychic binding, which can only
stand in a church-subordinate relationship to what is, in fact, a
state-hegemonic situation reflective of the precedence of psyche by soma.
73. Such
an enemy of moral virtue, rooted shamelessly in immoral vice, does not and in
all probability cannot exist independently of amoral virtue; for such somatic
freedom as accrues to noumenal sensuality is only viable as long as it is
antithetically partnered, one might say, by somatic binding in the phenomenally
sensible realm at the worldly base of the diagonally descending axis, so that
there is an inter-class relationship between evil and good on the one hand and
between pseudo-folly and pseudo-wisdom on the other hand, the hand not of
primary but of secondary state-hegemonic criteria on the male side of the
gender divide.
74. Therefore
even in state-hegemonic terms, the male is secondary to the female and no more
than a quasi-right-wing shadow to the Right who has to accept criteria stemming
from and appertaining to the precedence of psyche by soma. He is, to say the least, 'bent'; for no male
can escape unscathed from the subversion of his gender in state-hegemonic
society, and few if any such pseudo-foolish or pseudo-wise males,
notwithstanding gender transmutation in relation to either evil or good, can
escape the taint of somatic deviousness which betrays what is colloquially
termed a 'sonofabitch', or someone who is always likely to betray his gender
for somatic gain, whether in relation to noumenal sensuality or to phenomenal
sensibility, and thus whether from the standpoint of what could be no-less
colloquially described as an 'antibum' or a 'prick'.
75. I
believe it was Sartre who, in Existentialism and Humanism, said that existence precedes
essence, but, frankly, I don't think he was speaking from a male point of view
but, rather, as someone whose Protestant-derived worldview owed more than a
little to state-hegemonic criteria in which the precedence of psyche by soma is
institutionalized in such fashion that males get turned from the path or
possibility of righteousness in sync with their gender actuality (of psyche
preceding and predominating over soma in one of two class ratios, as discussed
above) to one of gender corruption in which they play second fiddle, as it
were, to females or to what effectively appertains to female-hegemonic and/or
subversive criteria, and no longer become worthy of respect as males to the
extent that they are only too ready to oppose male liberation from a standpoint
rooted in female dominion.
76. Thus
do they reveal themselves as the heathenistic enemies of God the Father (not to
mention his antimetachemical bride the Antidaughter of the Antidevil) for whom
religion is largely a closed issue and science alone worthy of respect or
furtherance, particularly that aspect of science which most conforms with
materialistic free enterprise, not forgetting its anti-idealistic complement in
antimetaphysics, and is able to prey upon the weak and ignorant masses of what,
in church-hegemonic society, would be called the meek, all the more ruthlessly
and successfully so in proportion to the extents to which they have been
democratized and therefore divided between various competing political
interests which no longer or, rather, cannot hold the People to any degree of
flock-like homogeneity vis-à-vis ecclesiastic authority because fundamentally
in opposition to any such homogeneity, having come, by whatever devious or
circuitous path, from that which directly stems from the manifold divisiveness
of somatic freedom in Devil the Mother and has its parliamentary resolution in
somatic binding, not least in respect of allegiance to the reigning monarch,
but which, in republican transmutation, still manages to further political
heterogeneity and to further weaken the masses in the face of the kinds of
noumenally sensual exploitation stemming from somatically free enterprise which
rain down upon them on a weekly if not daily basis, rendering them less capable
of psychic redemption in proportion as they become more somatically deferential
and merely the passive playthings of wilful licence.
77. One
has heard the Catholic Irish rather graciously and, I think, fairly described
as a God's people, but, boy! are they up against it at the moment, what with
all the metachemical and antimetaphysical distractions and impositions which
owe little or nothing to God the Father, never mind the Antidaughter of the
Antidevil, and much if not everything to Devil the Mother together with her
pseudo-foolish 'fall guy' accomplice, the Antison of Antigod, and these days
more than ever on a synthetically artificial basis commensurate with a sensually
superficial manifestation of cyborgization.
78. I am
no blind humanist, whether bourgeois or proletarian, to have anything against
the cyborgization of life in relation to the development of globalization, but
I certainly believe that the sooner its sensual manifestation is augmented and
even overhauled by a sensible manifestation commensurate with 'Kingdom Come'
(as defined in previous texts), the better it will be for the entire globe, not
just the West or the East, and the more genuinely universal life will become.
79. For
at the moment it is still pretty personal, even under a polyversal
heterogeneity appertaining to the divide-and-rule principles of noumenal
sensuality, and worse from a divine standpoint than its being either personal
or polyversal is the extent to which the impersonal masses of what were
formerly more homogeneously the meek are being exploited and deflected towards
those very state-hegemonic distractions which make universality all but
impossible, all but impossible because it requires a precondition that, having
been influenced and exploited by external factors, is neither quasi-personal in
political vein nor quasi-polyversal in scientific vein, but properly impersonal
in social vein and therefore in line for the possibility - indeed inevitability
- of theocratic universality.
80. Such
universality has always been more the hope of the faithful in Christ or, at any
rate, the Catholic Church, than an actual fulfilment; for no matter how much
they may opt for the grace of verbal absolution the meek have ever had to
contend with the shortcomings of their worldly predicament in the impersonality
and, for that matter, antipersonality of phenomenal sensuality, coupled to the
impositions of a distractive nature which stem, by and large, from the combined
class efforts of the polyversal and what shall be called the anti-impersonal,
the former hegemonic over what could be called the anti-universal, the latter
subversive of the personal at the behest of an overall metachemical hegemony.
81. Therefore
not simply impersonality leading to universality, or, indeed, personality
stemming from polyversality, but, more gender specifically, antipersonality
leading, for the antiphysical, to universality, coupled to impersonality
leading, for the chemical, to antipolyversality, on both church-hegemonic and
state-subordinate terms, in contrast to anti-impersonality stemming, for the
antichemical, from polyversality, coupled to personality stemming, for the
physical, from anti-universality, on both state-hegemonic and
church-subordinate terms.
82. But
it is very difficult, if not impossible, for antipersonality to lead to
universality, not least in the church-hegemonic terms of antihumanism to
transcendentalism, if impersonality is being preyed upon by polyversality to
such an extent that it becomes quasi-polyversal and in turn makes it all the
more likely, if not inevitable, that antipersonality, preyed upon by
anti-universality, will become quasi-antiuniversal and therefore as ready to
defer to illusion as its female counterpart to evil.
83. Unless
there is a new order of universality, coupled to a new order of
antipolyversality, it will not be possible to bring both the antipersonal and
impersonal back into line with church-hegemonic and state-subordinate criteria,
and that is what has to be done if those of phenomenal sensuality are to be
both saved and counter-damned from their worldly predicament to one that offers
them not merely hope for a universal/antipolyversal deal in 'Kingdom Come', but
the actual realization of that hope in practical and theoretical fulfilment.
84. That
is where the Second Coming or, as I prefer to phrase it, equivalent to a Second
Coming fits-in to the overall picture; for it is only through the advocate and
embodiment of religious sovereignty that the people of phenomenal sensuality
can ever achieve, via a paradoxical utilization of the democratic process to a
profoundly theocratic/anti-aristocratic end, rights in relation to religion
which will deliver them from the world more expeditiously and, ultimately,
efficaciously than would otherwise be possible, and precisely because it will
lead to the kind of system and moral order, broadly identifiable with Social
Theocracy, in which the development of religious sovereignty will be given the
sorts of synthetically artificial encouragement that would be commensurate with
the attainment, later if not sooner, of global universality and, hence, global
peace in unity with what has been described as the virtuous circle of noumenal
sensibility.
85. Therefore
Social Theocracy is the solution to the problem not only of the world
considered from a phenomenally sensual point of view, but to the problem of
that which exploits the alpha world of the phenomenally sensual from the
contrary state-hegemonic and church-subordinate standpoints of noumenal
sensuality and phenomenal sensibility, in a sort of
alpha-overworldly/omega-worldly axial conspiracy against the meek.
86. For
nothing short of a majority mandate for religious sovereignty will enable the
phenomenally sensual to be delivered both from themselves and their exploiters
to a system that, centred in noumenal sensibility, will dedicate most if not
all of its energies to transmuting them from their lowly status in antiphysics
and chemistry to the high estates of metaphysics and antimetachemistry on terms
which, deriving from and pertaining to synthetic artificiality, will portend
the possibility if not inevitability of global universality/antipolyversality
in God the Father/the Antidaughter of the Antidevil, thereby remaining aloof
from anything worldly, not to mention netherworldly, as it brings the
otherworldly to its righteous culmination via the sensible cyborgization of
life to an eternal end in the omega points of a space/time continuum that will
constitute the virtuous circle of an ultimate yang and yin or, more correctly
antiyin.
87. That,
in a nutshell, is the goal. But it
remains a possibility that I believe can be technologically and ideologically actualized
in the decades and centuries to come, as was never possible in previous
centuries, not least because of the want of sufficient global and technological
sophistication. In fact, it would not be
exaggerating to say that, certainly in the West, there has never really been
any great commitment to God the Father, not to mention the Antidaughter of the
Antidevil, in the virtuous circle of metaphysics and antimetachemistry, and for
the simple reason that such a noumenally sensible commitment has never really
been possible for want of genuine transcendentalism/antifundamentalism in the
face of other and more basic orientations.
88. For
what, in a word, was Christianity, but the death not of God, as might at first
appear to be the case, but the death if not literally of Devil the Mother then
certainly of the worship of Devil the Mother on the Cross, that Devil who was
taken, heathenistically, for God, and made the subject of pagan sacrifice,
being allegedly wrathful and something to fear.
Did not the sacrifice of man to some Devil hyped as God end with the
sacrifice of Devil the Mother's Son on the Cross? And is not the Immaculate Conception
theologically justified on the basis that Mary symbolizes not an agent of God,
miraculously impregnated by God as cosmic Creator, but the earthly embodiment
of Devil the Mother who attests to the fact that there is nothing anterior in
the Cosmos, nor even in nature or mankind, to Devil the Mother, and therefore
nothing or no-one that could impregnate her from above (a metachemical
position) and make her the vehicle of a conventional female conception? What was worshipped as the Son of God by
Christians was in effect the Son of Devil the Mother who, by his sacrifice on
the Cross, put an end to the need of mankind to sacrifice to Devil the Mother,
as the Catholic West passed beyond both cosmic and natural religion.
89. Henceforth
mankind would bear witness, in Christianity, not to the literal death of God -
for something commensurate with Eternal Life can never die, nor can we accept
that what died on the Cross was literally the Son of God - but to the effective
death of worship of Devil the Mother,
whose earthly personification gave birth to a Son who would die that
mankind could live independently of pagan sacrifice by bearing Eucharistic
witness to His own sacrifice through the bread and wine of His sacramental body
and blood, partaking of the death of paganism through the worship of the
Crucified.
90. Therefore
Christianity does not bear witness to the death of God on the Cross but to the
death of the worship of Devil the Mother which paves the way for the birth of
man, for the Son of Man (or the earthly embodiment of Devil the Mother) who,
following the resurrection, becomes in theological estimation the Son of God who
sits on the right-hand side of the so-called Father, meaning not God the Father
(in the metaphorical sense of psyche preceding soma, father preceding son, as
the male actuality par excellence) but
Devil the Mother, so that His ascension is akin to an implicit metaphysical
omega that exists independently of an explicit metachemical alpha that His
sacrifice made it possible for Christian mankind to relegate to the historical
background of religious significance.
91. All
that mattered was that there was a Son of God 'on high' who - distinct even
from the concept of a so-called Sacred Heart of the Risen Christ that, in
antimetachemical bound soma, can and does get roped-in to a perpendicular
triangularity of Catholic decadence in which some symbolic analogues of eyes
and ears constitute its noumenally sensual components - would remain on the
right-hand side of Devil the Mother until his return to earth, in the guise of
the Second Coming, when He would proclaim the absence of God the Father from
Heaven, of metaphysical free psyche, and of the need to establish God the
Father not only at the expense of mankind but at the expense of any remaining
allegiance to Devil the Mother hyped as God, so that it becomes evident that it
was in fact the sacrificial rejection of Devil the Mother by the Son of the
Immaculate Conception, or the earthly incarnation of Devil the Mother, that
makes God the Father possible, even if, things being what they are, such a
possibility can be no more than latent during the ensuing era of man, of
mankind, that necessarily follows, in Western worldly vein, upon the heels, so
to speak, of the cosmic and natural deaths of Devil the Mother (albeit Anglican
Monarchism to some extent revived the natural form of the latter in the
course of its affiliation with the apex of the diagonally descending axis of
state-hegemonic criteria, one step back from Catholic mankind that was only
precluded from embracing Judaic cosmic-kind in unequivocally Old Testament vein
by the persisting relevance of the New Testament, in respect of Christendom).
92. Thus
must the Resurrected remain theologically peripheral to the world in
anticipation of the time when His return to earth in the guise of a Second
Coming is feasible by dint not only of the ensuing era of man drawing towards a
close, but of the technology which man has developed being sufficiently
advanced that some more genuine aspiration towards God the Father, coupled to
the Antidaughter of the Antidevil for females, becomes possible - something it
never was in the transcendentally implicit past when, short even of
transcendental meditation in Eastern Buddhist vein, the Catholic West made do
with verbal absolution for penitential contrition as its phenomenally sensual
instincts went their temperate worldly way in effectively lowlander vein, the
welfare of the masses as opposed to a monk-like elite being of paramount
concern to a religion rooted in the many in typically Western fashion.
93. Christianity,
then, bears witness if not literally to the death of Devil the Mother - for
cosmic bodies corresponding to metachemical sensuality, not to mention
antimetaphysical sensuality, still persist - then certainly to the end of pagan
worship thereof, even as such a noumenally sensual entity, with specific
reference to metachemistry, continues to be broadly regarded, in Old Testament
vein, as God. But it bears witness to
the death of paganism on both totalitarian and, later, liberal terms, broadly
commensurate with Catholicism and Protestantism, just as the birth of man follows
on both liberal and, later, totalitarian terms, broadly commensurate with
bourgeois and proletarian forms of humanism to which first the French
Revolution and then the Russian Revolution paid their respective tributes, and,
indeed, the death of man follows from this on both totalitarian and,
subsequently, liberal terms, broadly commensurate with Fascism (Nazism) and
Capitalism, of which America is the latter-day exemplar of the liberal death of
man par excellence.
94. What
must come next is the birth not of the Devil, as conventional champions of the
'death of God' theory would have us believe, but the birth, through
cyborgization of a sensibly synthetic orientation, of God the Father, coupled
to the Antidaughter of the Antidevil, so that, via the Second Coming, the teacher and advocate of
such a birth, it becomes possible, for virtually the first time in the West, to
champion something that transcends not merely man but the Resurrection of
Christ to Son-of-God status and thereby enters into global co-operation and
competition with the East, overhauling such Buddhist transcendentalism as
transcendental meditation signifies in a penultimate, or mankind, stage of
metaphysical evolution, but also challenging and, hopefully, liberating that
other and more alpha-stemming segment of the East from the still-extant
adherences to Devil the Mother hyped as God (not to mention Antidevil the
Antimother hyped as God from an antimetachemical standpoint which, bereft of
metaphysical freedom to defer to, gets roped-in, somatically, to the cosmic
mode of perpendicular triangularity characterizing civilizations unequivocally
rooted in Old Testament criteria) which persist for want of that temperate
environmental advantage, traditionally characterizing much of the West, that
made a Christian alternative to space/time heathenistic norms dominated by
noumenal sensuality religiously possible.
95. But
if the death of man has had to pass through totalitarian and liberal stages,
the latter of which is still extant, then it cannot come as a surprise for
anyone to learn that the birth of God will also pass from a liberal to a
totalitarian stage as it evolves from its initial pluralism in what, in
previous texts, has been described as the triadic Beyond of 'Kingdom Come' to a
more noumenally sensible culmination in which metaphysics and antimetachemistry
will represent the Beyond in non-triadic terms, terms closer to a monadic
duality between God the Father/Heaven the Holy Soul coupled in metaphysical
bound soma to the Son of God/the Holy Spirit of Heaven, and the Antidaughter of
the Antidevil/the Unclear Soul of Antihell coupled in antimetachemical bound
soma to Antidevil the Antimother/Antihell the Unclear Spirit, which will
signify the virtuous circle of Truth and Joy coupled to a truthful approach to
beauty and a joyful approach to love, together with Beauty and Love coupled, in
secondary free psyche, to a beautiful approach to truth and a loving approach
to joy as constitutive of the antifundamentalist complement, in antimetachemistry,
to the transcendentalism of that primary free psyche commensurate with Truth
and Joy in the church-hegemonic aspects of metaphysics.
96. After
the totalitarian stage of the birth of God/the Antidevil, one might speak, in
space-centre vein, of the Eternal Life of God/the Antidevil as the complete
antithesis, on either count, to the Eternal Death of the Devil/Antigod, the
Eternal Death of that which cosmically burns in a stellar/solar, clear/unholy
alliance of noumenal sensuality in which Devil the Mother/Hell the Clear Spirit
coupled to the primary bound psyche of
the Daughter of the Devil/the Clear Soul of Hell rules over the Antison
of Antigod/the Unholy Spirit of Antiheaven coupled, in secondary bound psyche,
to Antigod the Antifather/Antiheaven the Unholy Soul, which signifies not a
virtuous circle but a sort of vicious circle of Ugliness and Hatred coupled to
an ugly approach to illusion and a hateful approach to woe, together with
Illusion and Woe coupled, in secondary free soma, to an illusory approach to
ugliness and a woeful approach to hatred
as constituting the anti-idealist complement, in antimetaphysics, to the
materialism of that primary free soma commensurate with Ugliness and Hatred in
the state-hegemonic aspects of metachemistry.
97. Thus
one could speak of an overall noumenal antithesis between Devil the Mother/the
Antison of Antigod and God the Father/the Antidaughter of the Antidevil which
would flank, on an alpha/omega basis, the death of the worship of Devil the
Mother/the Antison of Antigod, the birth of man, or the worship of mankind, the
death of man, or the worship of the machine, and the birth of the experience of
God the Father/the Antidaughter of the Antidevil which has still to come and
will make possible the definitive realization, in space centres, of noumenal
sensibility, being that which logically leads on to it in the course of the
synthetically artificial evolution, in 'Kingdom Come', of both metaphysics and
antimetachemistry.
98. But
that is a grand overview, somewhat wishful at present, of both death and life,
and before there can be any possibility of the birth of God the Father/the
Antidaughter of the Antidevil, coupled to their respective somatic corollaries,
the death of man must proceed apace and enter a new phase, in certain
countries, which encourages the prospect of cyborg resurrection from out the
worship of the machine characterizing contemporary civilization.
99. There
are, as already described, two main views of man over and above the simple
generic concept of mankind (as lying somewhat in between the animal kind and
cyborgkind), not only in respect of birth and death, but in terms of man as a
sort of end-in-himself, which is rather humanistic and therefore physical, and
man not as an end-in-himself but, rather, as an antihumanistic means to a new
and higher end, what in Catholic tradition would be regarded as God in respect
of a sort of implicit transcendentalism that dare not speak its name openly
from fear not only of contradicting the explicit materialism - I say nothing of
subordinate fundamentalism - of the Old Testament in regard to Devil the Mother
hyped as God, but of revealing its shortfall in regard to transcendental
meditation as the mankind stage or manifestation of God the Father/Heaven the Holy
Soul, etc., that would parallel Christianity, if from a Buddhist standpoint, as
the religion, centred New Testament-wise in Christ, of a people given,
environmentally and for other reasons, to a mankind stage of religious
evolution that necessarily overhauled anything rooted, Old Testament-wise, in
either nature or the Cosmos, but just as inevitably fell short of anything
centred, Social Theocratically, in the Cyborg, conceived, from a somewhat
Nietzschean standpoint, as man's logical successor.
100. Nevertheless,
even if Catholic man is not capable, exceptions to the human rule
notwithstanding, of attaining to God the Father on anything like an explicit
and genuinely transcendentalist basis, albeit still within a penultimate
context of godliness that not only falls short of the possibility of its
ultimate manifestation in the coming age of cyborgization, but exists in the
shadow, as it were, of man, whether in terms of his birth or death, he is still
a far cry, traditionally, from being an end-in-himself, like those males for
whom the world is its own reward and whom we have characterized as physical,
whether on humanistic church-subordinate terms or on naturalistic
state-hegemonic terms.
101. There
is therefore, in this narrower sense, antiman and man, the antiphysical and the
physical, but also, in each phenomenal context, woman and antiwoman, the
chemical and the antichemical, neither of whom can be left out of the overall
worldly dichotomy between the phenomenally sensual and their sensible counterparts.
102. There
is also, as we have seen, that which controls antiman and woman, being germane
to the metaphysical and antimetachemical contexts of noumenal sensibility,
which we may call godly and antidevilish, thereby
classing them apart from the generality of persons identifiable with phenomenal
sensuality.
103. But there is also, as noted, that which controls antiwoman
and man, being germane to the metachemical and antimetaphysical context of
noumenal sensuality, which we can call devilish and antigodly, thereby classing
them apart from the generality of persons identifiable with phenomenal
sensibility.
104. Therefore
in returning to our axial distinctions between the meek and the righteous,
phenomenal sensuality and noumenal sensibility, on the one hand, and the vain
and the just, noumenal sensuality and phenomenal sensibility, on the other
hand, it becomes evident that we are dealing, outside simple species
definitions, with more than simply man or antiman. We are also dealing with woman and antiwoman,
the devilish and the antigodly, the godly and the antidevilish, all of whom
differ from one another on a class or a gender basis within contexts either
ruled by sensuality or led by sensibility.
105. The
concept of 'mankind', as a crass generalization for a two-legged species
capable of thought, becomes rather irrelevant in the face of such manifold
distinctions, as does the notion of 'human being' vis-à-vis people who spend
much of their time demonstrating that, quite apart from the existence of human
beings, they are more like doings or givings or takings, not to mention
antidoings, antigivings, antitakings, and even antibeings who will be more or
less human depending on the extents to which they are also, or alternatively,
devilish or antigodly, godly or antidevilish, womanly or antimanly, manly or
antiwomanly, as the case may be.
106. Man
as a kind distinct from animals and plants is no more homogeneous than the
other kinds but is capable of being identified with a great many different
roles and circumstances, and while there are some who will more literally
approximate to what is human, or humanistic, there will be others who just as
readily approximate to what is antihuman, or antihumanistic, not to mention to
what is antinaturalistic rather than naturalistic within antiphysics as opposed
to physics, thereby suggesting a closer affiliation with the death of man than
with his birth or worship.
107. There is nothing special about being human, or
humanistic, in the estimation of God, or godliness. The
godly are only really interested in the antihumanistic, the antimanly, and then
to the extent that they can be saved to transcendentalism; for the death of man
is a precondition of the birth of God, while the antidevilish corollary of
godliness would evince a similar interest in the salvation of the
nonconformistic, the subverted womanly, to the extent that they could be saved,
in secondary vein, to antifundamentalism, passing from the death of woman under
antihumanist subversion to the birth of the Antidevil under a divine hegemony
in transcendentalism.
108. But those who are neither antiphysical nor chemical, neither
antimasculine nor feminine, but either antifeminine or masculine, antichemical
or physical - what can the godly and/or antidevilish do for them? Nothing!
For they appertain to a different axis from that which reflects
church-hegemonic and state-subordinate criteria, being at the worldly base of
the diagonally descending axis of state-hegemonic and church-subordinate
criteria, and far from the few wishing to save the many, as from bound to free
psyche, and to counter-damn them, as from free to bound soma, it is the many
who would like to damn the few and render them less somatically free in
consequence, perhaps even rendering some of them more psychically free in
proportion as they become counter-saved from bound to free psyche and thus
partake in the worship of the birth of both antiwoman and man in phenomenally
sensible partnership, the former primary in both state and church, the latter,
duly subverted from below, no more than secondary manifestations of
state-hegemonic and church-subordinate criteria who consequently have no option
but to live the life of man as a sort of slave to antiwoman, who is in turn a
slave to the devilish who rule a freely somatic metachemical roost at the
expense of an antigodly 'fall guy'.
109. No,
'mankind' is too vague a word to do justice to these much more complex and
multiform operations of disparate categories of persons, some of whom are more
or less human than others. There are
those who are of God and the Antidevil, there are those who, though of antiman
and woman, can be saved, no matter how intermittently or impermanently, to God
and the Antidevil; and there are those, by contrast, who are of antiwoman and
man, and others who, though of the Devil and Antigod, can be damned, no matter
how intermittently or impermanently, to antiwoman and man. Saved, in church-hegemonic
vein, from bound to free psyche, and damned, in state-hegemonic vein, from free
to bound soma. Not forgetting, of
course, the counter-damnation, in state-subordinate vein, from free to bound
soma and the counter-salvation, in church-subordinate vein, from bound to free
psyche, as in relation to the somatic or psychic affiliates, as the case may
be, of the hegemonic factors.
110. Therefore
just as there are godly and antidevilish types at work trying to save
antimasculine and feminine types, as from phenomenal sensuality to noumenal
sensibility, so there are devilish and antigodly types at work trying to resist
being damned by antifeminine and masculine types, as from noumenal sensuality
to phenomenal sensibility. The axes
effectively pull in opposite directions, the diagonally ascending one up from
the many to the few, the diagonally descending one down from the few to the
many, and therefore they are completely incommensurate and antithetical in
virtually every respect.
111. And,
in overall historical terms, it could be argued that the death, at least in
cosmic terms, of Devil the Mother leading to the birth of man, on both liberal
and totalitarian humanist terms, has closer associations with the diagonally
descending axis than ever it does with its diagonally ascending counterpart, in
connection with which it is more logical to distinguish between the death of
man and the birth of God the Father, as and when, transcending mere implicit
hope of and allusion to the latter, the Second Coming equivalent brings his
teachings into the world to lead the antiphysical, coupled to their chemical
counterparts, towards the possibility of a new metaphysical dispensation which,
hegemonic over antimetachemistry, will resurrect the phenomenally sensual dead
in such fashion that they become the recipients of a degree and kind of Eternal
Life commensurate with the most evolved and therefore per se manifestation of God/the Antidevil in
the cyborg supersession not simply of mankind's more (compared to most) evolved
approach to noumenal sensibility (where applicable), but also, and no less
importantly, of nature's less (compared to least) evolved approach to noumenal
sensibility (where applicable) and the Cosmos's least evolved approach to
noumenal sensibility (where applicable) - approaches that, with good reason,
have always been in the shadow of either man, woman, or the Devil, as the case
may be, and are not capable of a truly representative stance or status in
consequence.
112. Be
that as it may, the ascending and descending axes differ so antithetically that
even in sex and sport, about which I shall now expatiate at some length, there
are major differences, not least in respect of the relationship of psyche to
soma or vice versa, and the extent to which sport, reflecting such
relationships, can be either church hegemonic and state subordinate or, by
contrast, state hegemonic and church subordinate.
113. For it has logically occurred to me that sport is no more
simply one thing or another, of the State or of the Church, than sex, since
there is always a subordinate somatic dimension to church-hegemonic society and
a subordinate psychic dimension to state-hegemonic society, no matter how much
psyche and soma may typify the respective alternatives. Therefore just as in Revolutionary
Afterthoughts I distinguished the Irish games of hurling and Gaelic football
from their British counterparts rugby and association football on the basis of
an axial distinction between the many and the few of church-hegemonic society
on the one hand and the few and the many of state-hegemonic society on the
other hand, I did not, I believe, exclude soma from the former context or,
indeed, psyche from the latter, and therefore it can be maintained that each of
the sports is indicative, in their different ways, of both a church and a state
dimension, if with a bias one way or the other according to the axis to which
the sport would seem to conform.
114. Therefore
we can no more limit hurling and Gaelic football to bound and free psyche
respectively than rugby and association football to free and bound soma, even though
such ascriptions would arguably conform to what most characterizes each of
these particular kinds of sport, bearing in mind their association with
church-hegemonic criteria in the case of the Irish games and with
state-hegemonic criteria in the case of the British games. Clearly there is a state-subordinate
dimension to both hurling and Gaelic football, not least in respect of points
or goals scored under the crossbar, which complements, from below, the points
scored over the bar between the extended uprights in arguably more
representatively church-hegemonic vein, as when a bound (in the case of
hurling) or a free (in the case of Gaelic) psychic parallel is indicated in
respect of the greater height attaching to such points.
115. Contrariwise,
there is evidently a church-subordinate dimension to both rugby and association
football, not least in respect of points scored (more usually via spot kicks)
between the extended uprights in the case of rugby or goals scored via the head
in the case of football, which complements, from above, the points scored under
the bar or to either side of the uprights in the form of tries in rugby and
goals scored via the foot in football in arguably more representatively
state-hegemonic vein, as when a free (in the case of rugby) or a bound (in the
case of football) somatic parallel is indicated in respect of the lesser height
and/or greater depth attaching to such tries and/or goals.
116. But
just as we cannot limit such games to church or state, even if a bias towards one
or the other will more usually typify their respective axial integrities,
neither, it seems to me, can they be limited to only one gender or gender
influence, as though simply significant of a male input from antiphysics to
metaphysics on the ascending axis or of a female input from metachemistry to
antichemistry on the descending one; for if the Irish games are not entirely
male to the extent that they, or some equivalent thereof, are often played by
females, then it would be foolish to suppose that the British games were
entirely female when more usually played by males. Or, rather, it would be as presumptuous to
suppose that there was no chemical or antimetachemical dimension to the Irish
games as that there was no antimetaphysical or physical dimension to the
British games, irrespective of the extents to which both pairs of axially
antithetical games remained either church hegemonic or state hegemonic which,
in any case, is something that can apply from the standpoint of either gender,
if on different terms, since according with either a primary or a secondary
approach to each.
117. Frankly
I like to think that, in association football, low goals scored with the foot
should be somatically distinguished from high goals scored with the foot,
whether in consequence of having been hit on the volley or simply struck with a
top corner or arching descent in mind, just as low goals scored with the head
should be psychically distinguished from high goals scored with the head, more
usually in consequence of the player having to jump rather than dive, and if
such a distinction is between an antirealist and a naturalist approach to a
state-hegemonic parallel in the case of booted goals and an antinonconformist
and a humanist approach to a church-subordinate parallel in the case of headed
goals, then who am I to argue? I see no
other interpretation to put on the methodology of football scoring than one
that confirms either a bound somatic or a free psychic orientation on both
antichemical and physical terms in which state-hegemonic criteria will take
precedence, in bound soma, over church-subordinate criteria in keeping with the
general nature of phenomenal sensibility as that which, stemming from noumenal
sensuality, signifies the just retort of the many to the somatically free
antics of the few.
118. Likewise,
in respect of the latter, I see no reason not to think that, in rugby, tries
scored either side of the uprights should be somatically distinguished from
those scored inside the uprights, while points scored between the uprights in
consequence of a drop kick should be psychically distinguished from those
scored in such fashion from a spot kick, and if such a distinction is between a
materialist and an anti-idealist approach to a state-hegemonic parallel in the
case of tries and a fundamentalist and an antitranscendentalist approach to a
church-subordinate parallel in the case of drop and spot kicks, then who am I
to argue? I see no other interpretation
to put on the methodology of rugby scoring than one that confirms either a free
somatic or a bound psychic orientation on both metachemical and
antimetaphysical terms in which state-hegemonic criteria will take precedence,
in free soma, over church-subordinate criteria in keeping with the general
nature of noumenal sensuality as that which, issuing from an overall female
hegemony, signifies the right of the somatically free to have their centrifugal
way on both loosely and closely objective terms.
119. Be
that as it may, distinctions in hurling similar to those of football between
low and high points between the extended uprights and low and high goals under
the crossbar should confirm an antiphysical/chemical distinction between
church-hegemonic criteria in respect of antihumanism/nonconformism and
state-subordinate criteria in respect of antinaturalism/realism, even if this
may be the reverse of the Gaelic football distinctions between high and low
points between the extended uprights and high and low goals under the crossbar
as confirmation of a metaphysical/antimetachemical distinction between
church-hegemonic criteria in respect of transcendentalism/antifundamentalism
and state-subordinate criteria in respect of idealism/antimaterialism, in that
the male positions would be higher than the female and therefore truly
reflective of a hegemonic position.
120. Either
way, whether with an emphasis on bound psyche at the expense of free soma in
hurling or, from the standpoint of noumenal sensibility, on free psyche at the
expense of bound soma in Gaelic football, points between the extended uprights
would, I argue, be more representatively church-hegemonic than those scored
beneath the crossbar, even if counting for less in the overall points register
than goals, and therefore one can only conclude that, in contrast to the
British games, the Irish ones attach greater significance, morally and
culturally, to whatever is scored above the crossbar than to its more mundane
and, in effect, state-subordinate counterpart beneath it.
121. Of
course, there will be those who say that I have got the Irish games the wrong
way around, since hurling is demonstrably higher - the application of hurley to
slitter, or sliothar, generally requiring that play proceeds at a consistently
greater height from the ground to football
where any running or dribbling-like tendency is concerned - than Gaelic
football which, as the name suggests, simply parallels association football
from the standpoint of phenomenal sensuality as opposed to sensibility, and is
therefore more of a People's game than hurling.
However, much as I would respect such an argument, I frankly don't
believe that to be the case; for Gaelic football is no more foot-low, like
soccer so often is, than American so-called football, and is in that sense also
something of a misnomer, as indeed is the term rugby football for a game that
generally proceeds on the basis of carrying and running with the ball -
necessarily elongated or oblong to facilitate grip - close to one's chest.
122. Besides,
quite apart from the more elevated standing of Gaelic football than the latter
part of the name would suggest, there is something phallic-like about a hurley
that, no matter how high it may be wielded, suggests more of a mundane status
in relation to the world, while points scored with it between the extended
uprights are more likely to suggest a correlation with bound than free psyche
in respect of the more pressing need to clasp the hurley with both hands,
especially since points scored between the uprights in Gaelic football can be
via the clenched fist of a raised arm, and there is surely nothing more
ideologically or morally elevated than the clenched fist of a such an arm -
something to which the more noumenally sensible are invariably drawn, as to a
subjectively centripetal omega-point of ideological resolution.
123. However,
I am prepared to concede that I could be wrong in my estimation of the relative
standings of hurling and Gaelic football (though virtually every stick-wielding
game one can think of seems to appertain to a lower plane than its stick-free
counterpart, cricket to rugby, baseball to gridiron, hockey to football, etc.)
even if, despite or perhaps because of my long exile from Ireland, I don't
happen to believe so, largely, I suspect, because I am confident that Gaelic football
is not only axially antithetical on an upper-class basis to rugby football, but
that a like-antithesis between Australian rules football and American football
can be adduced which might well be respectively more radically Left and Right
again than these antithetical manifestations, within the comparatively narrow
confines of the British Isles, of the radical Left and the radical Right, the
freely psychic and the freely somatic.
124. But
if games like these are divisible, over and above class distinctions, between
psyche and soma, then so, of course, is sex, which is not just a matter of
coitus, of somatic intercourse, but also has a long and even in some respects
honourable tradition of oral sex behind it which, so I believe, would stand in
a broadly psychic relationship to its somatic counterpart, whether arguably
more prevalent or not.
125. Obviously
that can be logically reduced to an antithetical distinction between church-
and state-hegemonic criteria; for if the one is to be identified with psyche
and the other with soma, then oral sex will always stand closer to the Church
and coitus to the State, irrespective of whether in hegemonic or subordinate
vein, depending, one could argue, on the axis to which it is affiliated in any
given context.
126. But
we should distinguish, in any event, between oral sex in respect of
church-hegemonic criteria and its church-subordinate counterpart, as well as
between coitus in respect of state-subordinate criteria and its state-hegemonic
counterpart on each of the rival axes.
For in such fashion we will come to the conclusion that whereas it could
be said that oral sex takes precedence over coitus on the diagonally ascending
axis, logic compels us to the view that coitus would take precedence over oral
sex on the diagonally descending axis, the former characterized by a psychic
emphasis, the latter by a somatic one.
127. Be
that as it may, it would not be my view that oral and coitus took exactly the same
forms on each of these axes, in view of the extents to which they conformed to
either an overall male dominion in church-hegemonic society or to an overall
female dominion in state-hegemonic society, the lower-class female and male
positions of each duly subverted by the technically subordinate opposite gender
at the behest of its parallel overall
controlling one, whether in respect of rulership or leadership.
128. Therefore
much as I incline to the assumption that coitus would more typify a society in
which the State was hegemonic rather than subordinate, I cannot pretend that
that only applies to heterosexual coitus, since it seems to me that, whilst
embracing coitus of a broadly heterosexual nature, especially with respect to
the use of contraception, such a society would be more partial, in consequence
of female hegemonic and subversive criteria in metachemistry and antichemistry,
to both lesbian and gay modes of homosexual coitus, with lesbianism epitomizing
the height of sexual vanity and male homosexuality the just retort, largely
though not exclusively from a secondary state-hegemonic standpoint, of
somatically subverted males to the hegemonic or subversive power of females
which is fundamentally responsible, all along, for deflecting them from psychic
freedom in relation to their gender actuality to either free or bound somatic
emphases, according to class, which exist in the shadow of their respective
female counterparts.
129. Of
course, one cannot categorically presume that lesbianism is simply the product
of a metachemical hegemony and male homosexuality the physical retort to
antichemical subversion on the part of somatically bound females, although this
may appear to be the most logical conclusion.
What I am convinced of is that both lesbianism and male
homosexuality can be noumenal or phenomenal, absolute or relative, so that we
can distinguish, class-wise, between a solitary approach to homosexual coitus
which may or may not involve some form of penetrative sex and a couple-based
approach to it in which there will be penetrative sex in one of both cases
between the consenting couples. Hence
coitus need not automatically imply coupling, least of all in respect of
metachemical and antimetaphysical somatic criteria, where it will more usually
take the form of masturbation, nor need we suppose that any such absolute
approach to sex necessarily excluded lower-class people or, conversely and more
bizarrely, that sexual coupling was exclusively lower class.
130. But
whatever the context, whether noumenal or phenomenal, homosexual coitus will, together with
modified heterosexual coitus, including recourse to anal penetration, more
typify persons affiliated to the diagonally descending axis of state-hegemonic
criteria by dint of the extent to which such an axis is reflective of female
dominion, whilst oral sex, although secondary to such criteria, will take a
more somatic form than its church-hegemonic counterpart in respect of recourse
on either an absolute or a relative basis to cunnilingus or fellatio, female or
male types of oral sex which, when not heterosexually balanced, can take either
a lesbian or a gay form on both one- and two-sided terms.
131. But
if the axis descending from noumenal sensuality to phenomenal sensibility
attests to a distinction between free and bound forms of coitus in
state-hegemonic vein and bound and free forms of oral sex in church-subordinate
vein, then it is on its diagonally ascending counterpart that one would expect
oral sex, suitably reinterpreted in relation to various types of kissing, to
take on more significance than coitus in relation to church-hegemonic criteria,
and for a similar distinction between a
phenomenally sensual and a noumenally sensible approach to both oral and
coitus to make their appearance, not least in respect of a progression from the
relativity of couples to the absolutism of individuals, as from the many to the
few.
132. Frankly,
I do not doubt that oral sex, regarded in this more elevated light, would be
more characteristic of church-hegemonic criteria, progressing, as it were, from
the psychic binding of loving couples to the psychic freedom of individuals
bestowing solitary or one-sided kisses in a much freer, less personal
manner. Also I do not doubt that, in a
society characterized by male hegemonic and subversive criteria in metaphysical
and antiphysical terms, not only will kissing be the principal mode of oral sex
and even of sex, but baser forms of oral sex will be effectively taboo, as
taboo, in respect of somatic irrelevance, as cunnilingus and fellatio and,
indeed, the whole spectrum of lesbian and gay homosexuality, whether oral or
coital. For such manifestations of
sexual perversion stem, in large measure, from female domination of society,
and where that is institutionally and culturally taboo, then so will be all
forms of sexual perversion and, not least, deviation.
133. Even
heterosexual coitus will be comparatively independent of contraceptive
perversion of sex from its original propagative essence in respect of the reproductive
organs, since the male who subverts the female allows himself to be sucked-in
by and to free soma from a standpoint centred in bound psyche, preferring that
coitus should not become the focus of sexual attention but remain more the
by-product, as it were, of oral stimulation in a loving relationship, even, in
some sense, the exception to the general (kissing) rule.
134. Of
course, times change and other criteria impose themselves, as in relation to
AIDS, or are imposed upon any given society from without via imperial influence, not withstanding the
extent to which the overall death of man factors-in to a general withdrawal
from reproductive sex in favour of pleasure or pain in connection with the
utilization of various gadgets or artificial stimulants; but I cannot pretend
that, as a rule, the godly are partial to acquiescence in sexual perversion or
deviation, and would wish to condone activities which fly in the face of
church-hegemonic/state-subordinate criteria, including undue emphasis on coitus
of one type or another at the expense of oral sex, as defined above.
135. Frankly,
there is no way that a society built around the lead of God the Father/the
Antidaughter of the Antidevil could allow itself to be implicated in
acquiescing in sexual perversion or deviation, of which not only bestiality and
paedophilia, but rape and self-abusive recourse to pornography must be
accounted among the more extreme departures from sex, whether straight or
perverse, between consenting adults, but would be obliged to condemn any such
acts outright and trust to the goodwill and sense of the People to reject and
refrain from them.
136. For
it is not for the elect of God the Father to condone what stems, whether
directly or indirectly, from Devil the Mother, but to deliver the People, as
far as lies in their power, from such corruptions, in order that they may be
all the more capable, when the time is ripe, of living as and like God the
Father/the Antidaughter of the Antidevil, whether this means on a basis that
transcends relative sex altogether or on a basis that, more positively,
appertains to noumenal sensibility in whatever synthetically artificial
transmutations of psychic freedom come radically to pass in the progressive
evolution of Eternal Life beyond the alpha-world, or perhaps one should say
antiworld of antiman, in the omega points of otherworldly redemption, where sex
for reproductive purposes would become a thing of the past in view of the
extents to which civilization had been or was becoming sensibly cyborgized and
therefore even more orally hegemonic and coitally subordinate than would be
metaphysically or antimetachemically the case at present (where applicable), as
can only transpire in the noumenal sensibility of the most evolved manifestations
of God the Father/the Antidaughter of the Antidevil in the definitive heaven of
joy/antihell of the loving approach to joy which constitute, in their pure and
impure, male and female, approaches to supreme being, Heaven the Holy Soul/the
Unclear Soul of Antihell, both of which, in the achievement of their
evolutionary perfection, will be as much beyond sex as beyond sport of any
description, and therefore blessedly at peace with themselves in the virtuous
circle of a gender harmony that will last for ever.
LONDON 2004 (Revised
2012)
Revaluations and Transvaluations
