1. From fire to air via water and vegetation (earth), as from materialism to idealism via realism and naturalism, or Hell to Heaven via Purgatory and the Earth, or appearance to essence via quantity and quality.

2. Appearance leads to quantity no less than fire to water, or the Devil to woman, or crime to punishment. Conversely, quality leads to essence no less than vegetation to air, or man to God, or sin to grace.

3. One could distinguish male from female in terms of two coins - the first, or female, coin with things diabolic on the tails side and feminine on the heads side, like fire and water, and the second, or male, coin with things masculine on the tails side and divine on the heads side, like vegetation and air. Such, to use a simple analogy, is the difference, as I conceive it, between female and male.

4. Hence, for me, 'female' is not just relevant to things feminine; it is also germane to things diabolic, i.e. superfeminine in sensuality and subfeminine in sensibility. Likewise, 'male' is not just relevant to things masculine; it is also germane to things divine, i.e. submasculine in sensuality and supermasculine in sensibility.

5. Conceived in the most general terms, males and females are not just masculine or feminine; they are also, to greater or lesser extents (depending on a number of factors, including class, ethnicity, culture) divine or diabolic.

6. Just as there will always be more femininity in females and masculinity in males, so there must always be more diabolism in females and divinity in males. Such it was in the beginning, and such it will continue to be, so long as males and females exist, whether as men and women or, alternatively, as gods and devils.

7. Objectivity, which proceeds in barbed fashion, whether with regard to divergence (external) or convergence (internal), is always female, whereas subjectivity, which proceeds in curved fashion, is usually male.

8. Both fire and water are objective, the former in noumenal terms (as befitting appearance), the latter in phenomenal terms (as befitting quantity). Conversely, both vegetation and air are subjective, the former in phenomenal terms (as befitting quality), the latter in noumenal terms (as befitting essence).

9. The noumenal elements of fire and air have reference to the apparent and essential planes of Space and Time - the former in terms of Space-Time, the latter in terms of Time-Space.

10. The phenomenal elements of water and vegetation have reference to the quantitative and qualitative planes of Volume and Mass - the former in terms of Volume-Mass, the latter in terms of Mass-Volume.

11. The apparent planes or, rather, plane-bisecting axis of Space-Time, in which the noumenal element of fire has its throne, is spatial with regard to external contexts and repetitive with regard to internal ones, both alike being metachemical.

12. The essential axis of Time-Space, in which the noumenal element of air has its throne, is sequential with regard to external contexts and spaced with regard to internal ones, both alike being metaphysical.

13. The quantitative axis of Volume-Mass, in which the phenomenal element of water has its place, is volumetric with regard to external contexts and massed with regard to internal ones, both alike being chemical.

14. The qualitative axis of Mass-Volume, in which the phenomenal element of vegetation has its place, is massive with regard to external contexts and voluminous with regard to internal ones, both alike being physical.

15. By 'contexts' I imply an impersonal/personal distinction between particles and wavicles, primary and secondary manifestations of any given element, as with regard to science and religion on the one hand, effectively that of the elemental extremes of subatomic bodies, but with regard to politics and economics on the other hand, effectively that of the molecular intermediaries of subatomic bodies (whether in particle or wavicle modes).

16. Besides the elements of fire, air, water, and vegetation, there are also, of course, subatomic elements such as photons, protons, neutrons, and electrons, as well, in my estimation, as what I call 'elementinos', or photinos, protinos, neutrinos, and electrinos, which have reference, in my work, to internal contexts, or those contexts, in other words, in which supreme and sensible manifestations of impersonal/personal 'rebirth' tend to prevail over whatever, in comparatively 'once born' fashion, is primal and sensual, whether with regard to primary (particle) or secondary (wavicle) options.

17. Just as fire and water are primary elements by dint of their particle basis in appearance and quantity respectively, so I maintain that vegetation and air are secondary elements by dint of their wavicle basis or, rather, centre in quality and essence respectively.

18. Likewise I happen to believe that females, corresponding to feminine and diabolic manifestations of mankind, are primary, while males, corresponding to masculine and divine manifestations of mankind, are secondary, given their qualitative and essential biases. Women, for instance, are not, on that account, the 'second sex', although they will be reduced to a subordinate status whenever or wherever Christian-type criteria, necessarily favouring males (and men in particular), supplant the more standard 'Heathen' criteria which tend to characterize average sexual and social relationships.

19. The essence of Christianity or, rather, of any Christian-type ideology which is anxious to provide a solution (salvation) to the moral problem (for men) of the World and its (inevitably) Heathen criteria, is the offering of an alternative world or, more correctly, lifestyle ... in which (in particular) men are freed from that chief characteristic of Heathen norms, viz. female dominion, and thus encouraged to cultivate, within a 're-born' context, subjective values more germane, in any case, to what is properly male. The Christian is one who has abandoned wife (if married), daughter, sister, mother, grandmother, aunt, girlfriend - in short, females in general - in order to follow the path of Christ, which is effectively that of the Cross. For Christianity is nothing if not a solution, for males, to the problem of female domination, and that is why it is profoundly un-Christian for the mouthpieces of Christ, viz. His ministers, to be anything but male.

20. Of course, the Church, in any or all of its various denominations, is not and never has been truly Christian, in the sense of advocating the separation of males from females to the extent of barring mixed congregations. The Church panders to the World even as, in theory if rarely in practice, it offers hope to men of a better world in Christ. When such a 'better world' is not conveniently relegated to the grave, it is all too often identified with economic betterment and ... family values - the very things which Christ would have and, in fact, did regard as an obstacle to salvation!

21. Economics can be a stepping stone to religion, as sins to grace, or masculine to divine, but it should not be turned into an end-in-itself, else that which is properly pertinent to religion will be 'beyond the pale', and any possibility of Heaven through God accordingly be ruled out. Unfortunately this is in fact the case where, in particular, Protestant countries are concerned, whose churches are, for the most part, such in name only, not in substance! For unless one accepts the reality of airy idealism in its relationship to grace, there is no true religious dimension but only the shameful alternative of Heathen dominion, the dominion of economics by politics and science, as of masculinity by femininity and devility, vegetation by water and fire. If Catholicism leaves something to be desired from a truly religious standpoint, it is at least broadly Christian and not, like the Protestant churches, heathenistically pseudo-Christian. It may be compromised by the World, but it is much less of the World.

22. Philosophically considered, the World is, for me, a combination of feminine and masculine factors, of water and vegetation, Purgatory and the Earth (or oceanic and terrestrial aspects of the planet). It is an amoral compromise between phenomenal manifestations of objectivity and subjectivity, evil and good, and therefore something that falls short of moral perfection. Its amorality results from the combination, through compromise, of relatively immoral (feminine) and relatively moral (masculine) elements. Absolutely immoral (diabolic) and absolutely moral (divine) elements are respectively behind and beyond it.

23. That which combines diabolic and divine factors, fire and air, Hell and Heaven, I call Limbo. Like the World below, Limbo is also an amoral compromise, albeit between noumenal manifestations of objectivity and subjectivity, evil and good, and therefore it, too, falls short of moral perfection. However, the Devil and God do not compromise so easily or readily as woman and man, feminine and masculine, given their comparatively absolutist standings in relation to the noumenal planes of Time and Space, and so it often transpires that, scorning each other, they elect to rule or to lead, as the case may be, women and men.

24. Whether the Devil rules women and men or whether God leads men and women ... will depend upon the relationship of women to men 'down below' in the phenomenal realms of Volume and Mass. When men are dominated by women, as in the Heathen context of the World, then the Devil will rule them, since She is a higher and anterior type of femaleness, corresponding to the noumenal planes of Space-Time (with particular reference, in sensuality, to spatial space). When, on the other hand, men are not dominated by women because they have elected to turn their back on women in due Christian fashion (abandoning wives, sisters, mothers, etc.), then God will lead them, since He is a higher and posterior type of maleness, corresponding to the noumenal planes of Time-Space (with particular reference, in sensibility, to spaced space).

25. Thus it can be maintained that so long as worldly compromise between feminine and masculine elements is the mean, the Devil will rule society, whereas the deliverance of men from such worldly compromise through Christ, or some Christ-equivalent Messiah who signifies the overcoming of the World, effectively results in the otherworldly leadership of society by God.

26. However, both the Devil and God have a vested interest in either ruling the World (as in the Devil's case) or leading mankind beyond it (as in God's case), since neither is at ease in the compromise of Limbo, which stands to them as the World to men and women. In fact, it is their absolutist inability to tolerate each other's company which drives them, the objective and subjective extremes of life, to seek either dominion over or deliverance of the World (from itself) and its feminine/masculine relativity.

27. Of course, the above is a slightly facetious account of a more complex relationship, although fire and air, for instance, are no less real, on their own exalted planes of existence, than water and vegetation 'down below', in what are comparatively phenomenal planes of worldly mundaneness. Fire is effectively the first, or most basic and primitive element, and air the last and most evolved element, so that air, arising from vegetation, is in no small degree oblivious of the existence of fire (except, however, when it is accidentally or wilfully burnt). Thus, contrary to Biblical teachings, the Devil, corresponding to fire, is first and God, with His airy correlations, decidedly last - in other words, that which, in elemental terms, is the ultimate Creation rather than the root Creator. We proceed from the Devil and/or Hell to God and/or Heaven, not vice versa, and this is so even in relation to the external contexts of impersonal and personal deities, viz. stellar plane preceding solar plane in the one context, and eyes preceding ears in the other context. Unfortunately, had theology grasped this fact, the world, and the West in particular, would not have made the barbarous mistake of taking the Devil for God and God for the Devil, with very different historical consequences for all concerned!

28. It seems to me that there is a correlation, in very general terms, between the four elements and the main racial groupings on this planet, viz. red, white, black, and yellow, with fire correlating with the red race, water with the white race, vegetation (earth) with the black race, and air (gas) with the yellow race. At any rate, I would argue, in general terms, for such a correlation, which finds cultural confirmation, it seems to me, in the extents to which the different elements, variously transmuted, figure in the ethnic traditions of each of the races - fire figuring very prominently in the red man's culture (as in smoking pipes, funeral pyres, cosmic worship, etc.); water figuring very prominently in the white man's culture (as in baptism, alcoholic drinking, writing, etc.); vegetation figuring very prominently in the black man's culture (as in eating, sex, dancing, etc.); air figuring very prominently in the yellow man's culture (as in sniffing and/or snorting, meditating, horse riding, etc.).

29. Basing racial generalizations on the elements, which isn't as crazy as it might at first appear, does not encourage one to acquiesce in the theory that the human race began in Africa, in the black man, and slowly evolved from there to include red, white, and yellow alternatives to him, alternatives which are no less traditionally indigenous, in global terms, to the West, the North, and the East than he, the black man, is indigenous to the South. On the contrary, an elementally-inspired concept of man in relation to the four main races would suggest that only the yellow race evolved from black ancestry, as air from vegetation (earth), whereas the white race, somewhat antithetical to the black, would be more likely to have evolved or, rather, devolved from the red man, the Indian, as water from fire. In fact, I am so convinced of the plausibility of this theory ... that I have no difficulty in regarding the red man as the oldest and most primal race, just as fire is the most primal element, and the yellow man, by contrast, as the youngest and most evolved race, just as air is the most evolved element. In between, in phenomenal as opposed to noumenal fashion, would appear to lie the white and black races - the former corresponding to water and the latter to vegetation, the one broadly feminine and the other no less broadly masculine. Which is to say, that whereas the white race is more objective than subjective, the black race, by contrast, is more subjective than objective, given, like vegetation, to 'taking' whatever objectivity falls, in rain-like fashion, upon it.

30. Of course, when one starts thinking in gender terms, then 'feminine' and 'masculine' become only two aspects or manifestations of what is more comprehensively female or male, manifestations corresponding, in watery or vegetative fashion, to the phenomenal planes of volume and mass. Behind and beyond these phenomenal attributes are the noumenal attributes of diabolic and divine, corresponding to fire and air, and it is here, it seems to me, that we are less inclined to think in terms of black and white but more inclined, by contrast, to think in terms of red and yellow, whether with regard to external or internal contexts; whether, that is to say, with reference to superfeminine-to-subfeminine in the one case, that of fire, or submasculine-to-supermasculine in the other case, that of air. Fire falls through Space-Time and air rises through Time-Space, while, down below in the phenomenal planes, water falls through Volume-Mass and vegetation rises through Mass-Volume. Hence not only the possibility, indeed probability, of a devolutionary progression from fire to water, red to white on the one hand, but of an evolutionary progression from vegetation to air, black to yellow on the other hand, the former reflective of diabolic and feminine manifestations of objectivity, the latter, by contrast, no less reflective of masculine and divine manifestations of subjectivity.

31. However, if this theory is valid, we should have no hesitation in ascribing to the red and white races a primary character overall, reflective of their elemental correspondence to fiery and watery modes of objectivity, while reserving for the black and yellow races a secondary character overall, reflective of their elemental correspondence to vegetative and airy modes of subjectivity. Nor should we have any difficulty in extrapolating white from red in the one case and yellow from black in the other, the latter pair arising independently of the former pair ... as vegetation and air may be said to arise independently of fire and water, given their correspondence to that which is male as opposed to female, and thus subjective as opposed to objective.

32. Thus not only, according to this theory, are the races not derivable from a single source, one of African origin, but they are not equal ... in the sense of having a similar or identical elemental correspondence. Reds and Yellows appertain to the noumenal planes of Space and Time (albeit in diametrically opposite terms), whereas Whites and Blacks appertain to the phenomenal planes of Volume and Mass (albeit in diametrically opposite terms). There are also grounds for arguing, on this basis, that the female races, being primarily objective, are broadly evil and the male races, their subjective counterparts, no less broadly good; though this would be akin to making a distinction between science and politics on the one side, that of fire and water, as between economics and religion on the other side, that of vegetation and air. In other words, one between the primary and secondary in both noumenal and phenomenal manifestations.

33. There is a sense in which tobacco-smoking is a white man's Hell, a manifestation of cultural fundamentalism that lies behind his more characteristic humanism of alcohol-drinking, with its fluidal (watery), or purgatorial connotations. But if tobacco-smoking, being fiery, is hellish, then how are we to describe the smoking of dope - say, hashish or marijuana - by comparison? The answer, it seems to me, is that dope-smoking signifies a red man's Hell, a cultural fundamentalism per se, and that the smoking of, say, 'joints' by Whites is therefore equivalent to their having gone to a red man's Hell, as from phenomenal fundamentalism in tobacco to noumenal fundamentalism in hashish. Thus does the notion of Western or, more correctly, European decadence present itself in relation to the smoking of dope by persons whose cultural traditions were rooted in tobacco. They have passed over from the relative hell of a mode of smoking which is peripheral to the mainstream humanist culture of beer- or wine-drinking ... to the absolute hell of a mode of smoking which is the fundamentalist per se, and where, presumably, alcohol is peripheral in the guise of spirits, the fieriest of alcoholic options.

34. One thing is absolutely clear: dope-smoking could not be encouraged in a society that was led by God rather than ruled by the Devil - in short, in a transcendentalist society. On the contrary, meditation of an airy character would be the principal mode of cultural indulgence for those who related to what could, I suppose, be regarded as a yellow man's Heaven.

35. And yet, how difficult it is to meditate now in any so-called advanced industrial country! How everything seems to obstruct one from taking meditation seriously! One has only to consider how polluted by traffic the air is ... to have grave reservations about focusing one's attention upon the lungs and their divine truth. Personally, I can never venture out-of-doors, or even open my bedroom window, without feeling thoroughly disgusted by the amount of traffic pollution which poisons the air and makes breathing, that God-given right, an increasingly hazardous experience! How can one take genuine spirituality seriously in a world where what one consciously breathes-in has been spoiled by the ever-present onslaught of exhaust fumes from the millions of cars, buses, trucks, motorcycles, lorries, etc., which congest the roads, turning life into a living hell? Not only do they look bad with their so-often garish colours, the bitter fruit of commercial expedience; they smell bad. In fact, they create an almighty stench which is sometimes so overpowering as to make one feel physically sick. And every year there are more of them on the road, more dinosaur-like monsters which can only belch fumes into the atmosphere and growl or snarl or hoot or rasp in a blatantly subhuman manner - ample testimony, it seems to me, to the low moral calibre of your average driver! In fact, so barbarously subhuman has the whole sorry show become that the phenomenon known as 'road rage' has gained, and will doubtless continue to gain, in momentum, expressing the reptilian savagery into which a sizeable proportion of the human race would seem to have sunk in this 'age of the motorcar', or whatever it is, that has reflected so poorly on contemporary so-called civilization.

36. Yes, we still live, despite the late-twentieth-century collapse of Communism and other barbarous ideologies, in a fundamentally barbarous age, when people are so dominated by the Devil that they think nothing of polluting the air and rendering acquiescence in God, in lung-centred meditation, all but impossible. Not all people, of course, but still a significant number all the same, some of whom are so morally ignorant and bestial that they think nothing of daily polluting themselves as well, inhaling tobacco smoke into their lungs with a frequency and determination which suggests to me an all-out war on God, on what their religious traditions have all along refused to acknowledge as divine, with consequences all-too-painfully familiar, if the insouciance with which they light up another cigarette is anything to judge by! But isn't that the average modern man all over, with his cynical dismissal of religious idealism as fit only for 'fairies' or 'cranks'? As if he were truly a man and not a lamentably feminized male whose vegetative integrity has long since dwindled to a subservient submission beneath the twin evils of water and fire which rain down on him as he drives his motorvehicle along the smoke-filled highways and byways of the urban hell, with or without a cigarette dangling from his twitchy lips all the while! Such a man is no Christian, whatever he may think of himself. He is a once-born Heathen, and what little masculine respect he still has ... is severely compromised by the petrol and water with which he drives his car, or whatever, to the limit of both its and his endurance, a testing age for all concerned, even the innocent!

37. For my part, I would prefer to hear praying people say: 'Lord, give us this day our daily breath and deliver us from fools'; for it is the fools who are making the world ever more unfit for self-respecting people to live in, and so long as they prevail, with their overly democratic sentiments, there is not much prospect of a better world coming to pass.

38. Stout, for instance Guinness, achieves an earthy darkness in its fluidal presentation which suggests a vegetative essence more correlative of masculine than of feminine connotations, and from which the frothy head wells-up like air in bubbly intimation of divine resolution. Such a paradoxically masculine drink as stout is arguably as Irish as, say, Gaelic Football or Hurling, and stands in marked contrast to the light beers and lagers which, with smaller head, are more resolutely feminine in their watery transparency. Yet even Irish stout is only quasi-vegetative, given its fluidal substance. And therefore the drinker of stout is still effectively feminizing himself through fluidal intake, even though less blatantly so than the habitual drinker, more usually English, of lager or light ale.

39. For my part I say, the less alcohol a man drinks the more of a man he is. For anyone who has a truly vegetative integrity will seek rather to minimize than to maximize his fluidal intake, especially with regard to beers and wines.

40. There is besides vegetative and airy approaches to alcohol, the watery and fiery approaches of larger and/or white wine on the one hand, and of red wine and/or spirits on the other. Probably wine stands above beer or lager as Rugby above Association Football, whether we then distinguish white wine from red on the basis of Rugby League from Rugby Union, or Puritanism from Dissenterism, or even Toryism from Liberalism. Whatever the case, there is assuredly a fiery connotation about red wine which takes it to the borders of spirits, the latter of which may well be more genuinely fundamentalist and therefore fiery. In fact, it is as if we had passed over, from a Christian or Protestant fundamentalism in wine-drinking to a non-Christian fundamentalism more properly constitutive of 'the Behind'.

41. Certainly Gridiron, or American so-called Football, stands behind Rugby in relation to what is a more blatantly fundamentalist context, and the same can be said, it seems to me, for spirits vis-à-vis wines. Conversely, Gaelic Football stands beyond Association Football in relation to what is a partly transcendentalist as opposed to predominantly humanist context, and the same can be said for stout vis-à-vis beer.

42. Thus it could be argued that spirits and stouts are as far apart as it is possible for alcoholic drinks to get, with wines and beers (including lagers) coming in between. Nevertheless, I am not advocating - and would not advocate - alcohol-drinking of any description, not even with regard to stouts, since alcoholism is one of the chief scourges of the modern world, not least of all where the white man is concerned. It is also one of the most expensive rip-offs.

43. What particularly interests me about alcohol, apart from its cultural varieties and their applicability to different ethnic traditions, is the consideration that even stout may not be all it seems, and that, beneath its superficially masculine appeal, there is really a feminine con-trick that has been used, with no inconsiderable success, against the (in particular) Gaelic Irish by Anglo-Irish interests whose main concern, apart from financial betterment, was to prevent them from becoming too naturalistic and posing a stronger threat, in consequence, to British rule. How better, in this respect, than to provide them with fluidal temptations that had the paradoxical appearance of a male bias about them - vegetation and air, in stout and froth, seemingly getting the better of water and fire? But, really, a feminizing influence even so!

44. Increasingly my sense of the British, of what it means to be British, is of one's being English or Anglo-Welsh, Anglo-Scottish, or Anglo-Irish. In other words, being British is not necessarily commensurate with Britain (although, superficially, that must appear to be the case), but, rather, with being English or of English descent in either of the so-called British Isles. Britishness as an overspill of Englishness, therefore, into what were, and predominantly still are, the Gaelic countries of Wales, Scotland, and Ireland. For does not Gaelic culture co-exist with Britishness, both in Ireland and in Scotland and Wales?

45. To be sure, being Gaelic is the opposite of what it means to be British. It is to have endured, and still be enduring, British rule in the forms of Anglo-Irish, Anglo-Scottish, and Anglo-Welsh control, which descends from and remains loyal to England. The Gaels are not British but subject to the British forms of English imperialism. Hence for them Britain is the one thing that acts as an obstacle to Gaelic freedom and nationality. All of them - Irish, Scotch, and Welsh Gaels - have a vested interest in rolling back the British forms of English influence to England itself, so that, at the end of the day, the Gaelic countries can co-exist with the English nation on an equal and independent basis, one in which there would be neither Great Britain nor the British Isles but, effectively, the Anglo-Gaelic Isles of England on the one hand, and a Gaelic Federation on the other. Such a federation would principally be of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales, and it is my hope that it would come to replace the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and do so, moreover, democratically and within the scope of a New Order such that makes religious sovereignty, or the concept thereof, its principal identity.

46. Certainly, I do not believe that Scotland and Wales can or would wish to achieve independence from England on a politically republican basis, given their predominantly Protestant populations, since what applies to Ulster loyalists with regard to the desirability of monarchy vis-à-vis the Catholic loyalty of the Irish Republic to papacy ... must surely apply to Scotland and Wales, which would simply find secular republicanism - something, incidentally, that Southern Ireland knows little or nothing about - beneath them. That being the case, it is unlikely that they would or could opt out of the U.K., much less Britain, when they have a vested interest in clinging to monarchy, the very thing which this writer regards as, in a manner of speaking, 'the next best thing', give or take a scruple of conscience, to papacy. Nor is it likely that either Scotland or Wales would opt for monarchy independently of England, since that would lead to the possibility of three monarchs in what is now Great Britain, and effectively set the clocks back to the sort of friction-prone situation that historically applied. So, frankly, there is little scope for either Scottish or Welsh independence from England other than on a moderately devolved basis within Great Britain.... Which, of course, means that the problem of Britain vis-à-vis not only Ireland but the Gaelic peoples in general still exists, and such a problem is fraught with insoluble difficulties!

47. No, there is only one way out of Great Britain, and thus of English dominion, for Scotland and Wales, and that is to join with Ireland in the formation of a Gaelic or, better, Cent(e)rist Federation, a federation of Social Transcendentalist Centres, in which religious sovereignty becomes its principal identity, an identity guaranteeing one the right to religious self-realization in the context of what I call 'the Centre', and where both papal and monarchic traditions would be transcended by recognition of the advocate of this New Order as Messiah, effectively a Second-Coming equivalence whose aim was to liberate the peoples of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales not only from British dominion but from their own State/Church and Protestant/Catholic schismatic relativity, drawing them away from the Liberal/Christian dialectics towards a transcendentalist synthesis in which only the religious sovereignty of the Centre would ultimately prevail. Such a sovereignty, guaranteeing one freedom from worshipful subjection (to tyrannical Godhead), could only come to pass if the peoples of the various Gaelic countries voted for it, and it would be to seek deliverance, as much as anything, from political 'sins of the World' that they would be encouraged so to vote. For as long as politically republican and/or parliamentary 'sins of the (mass/volume) World' continue to prevail, there will be no 'end of the World' and, consequently, no prospect of 'Kingdom Come' ... in a Centrist federation of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales. The Gaelic peoples have a moral interest, as much as anything, to democratically climb out of the 'slough of despondent democracy', in which they are currently bogged down, and onto the higher ground of 'Kingdom Come', from which vantage-point they will glimpse Eternity. But they must first be given the opportunity to make such a decision, to have the option of voting for religious sovereignty within the existing democratic frameworks.

48. One thing the possibility of a Centrist Federation ... would require is compromise by both Irish Nationalists and U.K. Unionists alike, insofar as Irish unification could only be achieved on the basis of the one camp accepting such unification within the wider structure, necessarily supra-national, of a Centrist Federation, and the other camp accepting the truncated loyalism, if you will, of federal unity between Ireland, Scotland, and Wales in what would amount to a Gaelic partnership in which regional autonomy between the component countries was premised upon a unified cultural structure having an emblem distinct from both Nationalist and Unionist traditions alike. Thus we are effectively talking of a new 'country' which is more than Ireland and less than the United Kingdom (of Great Britain and Northern Ireland), the development of which, quite apart from the willingness of Scots and Welsh to join, would require a democratically-expressed majority mandate from Irishmen on both sides of the current border. For there is no other basis for Irish unification than through democratic consent, and neither, it seems to me, is there any basis for optimism regarding the concept of Irish unification except in relation to that supra-national resolve of what I have termed a Centrist Federation. Those who object, whether as Nationalists or Unionists, to this alternative structure would either have to live with the consequences of defeat, following a majority democratic mandate, or leave Ireland - something that would mainly apply, in any case, to Anglo-Irish intransigent Unionists, as well as to their Scottish or Welsh counterparts ... in the event of a democratically-expressed majority mandate for a federation of Social Transcendentalist Centres also transpiring in Scotland and Wales in due course. Doubtless, England would be the preferred country of destination for the majority of such 'British' individuals.

49. Thus I look forward to a time when not only will Ireland be united on the basis of agreement between its two main Christian traditions to compromise with Social Transcendentalism and its prospect of a Centrist Federation, but the remaining hard-line British influence will have withdrawn to return to England and the English nationality that will be common not only to Englishmen but to their Anglo-Irish, Anglo-Scotch, and Anglo-Welsh counterparts, no longer finding any place for themselves in the post-British Gaelic culture of our projected Centrist federation of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales. The decision to quit would, of course, rest with them and them alone. But, although some would elect to stay, the prospect of a Gaelic-speaking Ireland, Scotland, and Wales would not appeal to everyone, and for that reason it is better that those who object to it should leave ... than continue to endure what they would regard as an alien culture.

50. Who are the Gaels? Gaels are anyone who, whether perceptibly Celtic or not, would subscribe to the development of Gaelic culture within the supra-national borders of a Centrist Federation. An 'O' or a 'M(a)c' in front of your surname may be of some assistance in delineating Gaels, but it does not matter if your surname lacks such a prefix, presumably because your family have dropped it at some time or other, or because your surname happens to be of English or Scandinavian or Norman or Dutch or some other descent. The important thing is to identify with the country you happen to have been born in and to remember that the majority of those who, long centuries ago, left Scandinavia or France or Britain or Holland or wherever ... to settle in Ireland, not only left their historical countries, but duly produced offspring who were or became Irish by dint of living in and relating to Ireland. The same of course applies to Scotland and Wales. So the Gael is not invariably an 'O' or a 'M(a)c' or, indeed, a Catholic. The Gael is simply pro-Gaelic.

51. Since I believe that both Protestants and Catholics can be saved to the triadic Beyond of the Centrist Federation, it is not my intention to save Catholics at the expense of Protestants, as though only the former were Gaels, but to offer to people of both denominations the opportunity of progressing beyond their respective religious traditions - something I don't believe they would be too keen on, were it not for the impasse and manifold difficulties which these traditions cause when they come into dialectical conflict and clearly remain an obstacle to political and other progress. The dialectic can be regarded, paradoxically, as a sort of 'blessing in disguise', since it is necessary to transcend it through the conception of a synthetic transmutation ... if there is to be an end to inter-ethnic conflict and rivalry. The democratically expressed option on religious sovereignty would give people just such a way-out of the dialectical dilemma in which they find themselves; for they would cease to be Christians and effectively become Superchristians, cease being either Catholics or Protestants and become Social Transcendentalists. The State/Church relativity would be replaced by the Centre, the context of religious sovereignty, and 'Kingdom Come', in the form, initially, of the Centrist Federation ... would deliver them from 'sins of the World', not least of all with regard to political sovereignty and its parliamentary and/or republican corollary. Such 'sins' would devolve upon the administrative Centre, the 'political' aside to the three tiers of religious praxis, and it would be to serve, predominantly though not of course exclusively, the religiously-sovereign People's spiritual aspirations ... that the Centre would exist, as a sort of benign Devil serving feminine, masculine, and divine manifestations of religious praxis. A kind of final fire allowing water, vegetation, and air to give, take, and be their respective selves, as new orders of humanism, nonconformism, and transcendentalism took root in the triadic Beyond.

52. Now, customarily, I have said that the first (or humanist) tier of this triadic Beyond would be reserved for persons of Anglican descent, the second (or nonconformist) tier for persons of Puritan descent, and the third (or transcendentalist) tier for persons of Catholic descent, and this is still my general belief. What I didn't say before was that each tier would have to be subdivided into mirrors of each of the other tiers, so that, for example, the bottom tier, being humanist in its per se manifestation, would also have quasi-nonconformist and quasi-transcendentalist subdivisions that would mirror, on suitably modified terms, the per se subdivisions of the higher tiers, those reserved, in other words, for persons of Puritan and Catholic descent. These, in turn, would have quasi-humanist and quasi-transcendentalist subdivisions in the case of the nonconformist tier, and quasi-humanist and quasi-nonconformist subdivisions in the case of the transcendentalist tier. And this is important, because it means that each tier, besides having a per se manifestation pertinent to itself, will also be open to a modified form of that which is most applicable to each of the other tiers. No tier would be completely characterized by any one thing, whether feminine, masculine, or divine (supermasculine). And in no tier would it be necessary to mix the genders. In fact, it is important that the genders be kept apart, that all modes of humanism, whether per se down below or 'bovaryized' up above, be reserved for women, all modes of nonconformism, whether per se in between or 'bovaryized' below and above, be reserved for men, and all modes of transcendentalism, whether per se up above or 'bovaryized' down below, reserved for supermen or, at any rate, for that which, in two of the tiers, would be quasi-supermasculine, viz. the quasi-transcendentalism within humanist and nonconformist tiers of certain male persons of Anglican and Puritan descent. Hence women in one of the three subdivisions in each case, men and supermen in the others.

53. There exists a parallel, it seems to me, between visions and dreams on the one hand, and photographs and films on the other - the latter in many ways the more artificial modern equivalents of the former. One can also note a sort of stellar/solar distinction, amounting to the difference between light and fire, between the plane of visions and photographs on the one hand, and that of dreams and films on the other hand. For, like visions, photos are products of light, whereas films are the products, like dreams, of fire, which is to say, of a flickering series of moving images that owe more to solar subjectivity than to stellar objectivity, to male than to female criteria. And, being male or, more exactly, submasculine in their fiery essence, films and dreams share a sort of divine bias that sets them apart from the anterior and, in some sense, higher media of visions and photographs, which are regarded by this writer as diabolic, i.e. characterized by noumenal objectivity as that which precedes, in stellar-over-solar fashion, the noumenal subjectivity of dreams and films.

54. Of course, the Bible gives us a picture of God preceding the Devil, Jehovah preceding Satan, and thus it subscribes to the delusion, as I regard it, of assuming that the higher plane of cosmic Creation is morally superior to the lower plane of cosmic Creation, i.e. that the stellar 'First Mover' is morally superior to the solar 'Fallen Angel', and simply because the higher plane precedes the lower one, as light preceding fire. Hence Jehovah is regarded as God and Satan, corresponding to the 'fallen' context of solar fire, as the Devil. Quite apart from the gross limitation of subscribing to deities who are merely outer and cosmic in their Creative origins, the Bible compounds its shortcomings by adhering to the manifest falsehood of identifying the stellar plane with God and the solar plane with the Devil, so that one could be forgiven for imagining that visions are divine and dreams diabolic, or, equally, that photographs are divine and films diabolic, or even, by gender extrapolation, that females are fundamentally divine and males comparatively diabolic, with the usual correlations of 'good' and 'evil' respectively attaching to each. In reality, however, nothing could be further from the case! Satan is simply the 'fall guy' that gets 'slagged off' by a society that is not prepared or able to 'turn the tables' on Jehovah and admit that the Devil precedes God, not vice versa; that the stellar plane corresponds to the Creatoresque 'First Cause' of the Universe, whether polytheistically or monotheistically, and the solar plane, by contrast, to the 'Fallen-Angel' Effect which emerged from it in due course of cosmic devolution. First there is a light, and then there comes a fire. But it is the light which is diabolic and the fire, by contrast, divine.

55. Therefore to regard, say, photographs as in any way morally superior to films ... would be equivalent to regarding Jehovah as morally superior to Satan or, in personal terms, Moses and/or Saul as morally superior to David. In short, to extrapolate from Biblical falsehood the delusion of God preceding the Devil, and to make-out a divine case, in consequence, for photographs at the expense of films, given their basis in light as opposed to fire, or some fiery parallel. Ditto for visions at the expense of dreams!

56. Nevertheless, we can differentiate, even if we're not prepared to follow Biblical procedure, between black-and-white photographs and colour photos, not to mention between black-and-white films and colour films, conceiving of the black-and-white contexts as closer, by dint of their anterior or earlier manifestations, to what in religious terms one could regard as a Hindu tradition, and the colour contexts, by contrast, as paralleling a Judaic tradition, the sort of religious tradition that derived, in some degree, from the older, Hindu one, but was nonetheless quite distinct from it in terms of its more subjective and even male essence, owing a little more, it seems to me, to the solar plane than to the stellar one, even if still acknowledging the latter in relation to the monotheism of Jehovah-God. Thus not 'turning the tables' on the God-over-Devil delusion but, nevertheless, bringing it down a plane from light to fire, from Kali and Siva, as it were, to Jehovah and Satan, as though more disposed to acknowledge colour visions and dreams than black-and-white ones.

57. Be that as it may, we have to acknowledge a distinction between 'Hinduesque' black-and-white photographs and films, corresponding in some sense to a light-based approach to stellar and solar planes, and 'Judaic' colour photos and films, corresponding, by contrast, to a fire-centred approach to stellar and solar planes. Whether or not a parallel exists with Kali and Siva in the one case or with Jehovah and Satan in the other, this distinction is very real, and would seem to indicate a devolution of perceptual material from a purely optical to an optical/aural synthesis which parallels a shift from light to fire, photographs being purely optical but films increasingly aural, even to the extent of the greater importance attached to music, not least of all in vocal terms!

58. Now although photographs are still fundamentally of the light even when in colour, we can differentiate the noumenal objectivity of black-and-white photographs, corresponding to the superfeminine, from what may be called the noumenal quasi-subjectivity of colour photos, corresponding to the quasi-submasculine (though still fundamentally superfeminine). Conversely, although films are still fundamentally of the fire, even when in black-and-white, we can differentiate the noumenal subjectivity of colour films, corresponding to the submasculine, from what may be called the noumenal quasi-objectivity of black-and-white films, corresponding to the quasi-superfeminine (though still fundamentally submasculine). This allows us to distinguish that which is effectively 'Hinduesque' in superfeminine and quasi-superfeminine light, viz. black-and-white photographs and films, from that which is effectively 'Judaic' in submasculine and quasi-submasculine fire, viz. colour films and photos. The fiery light of black-and-white films, as of Siva, is still fundamentally submasculine, while the lightfire, so to speak, of colour photos, as of Jehovah, is still fundamentally superfeminine.

59. A curious limitation of Western civilization, perhaps more so in Christian times than today, is to view life in terms of light and dark, and to regard the one as good and the other as evil. In reality, however, both light and dark are evil, since associated with fire and water, though the former is arguably absolutely evil and the latter relatively so. What we have here are terms that pertain to the female side of life, the world, etc., in their association with the objective elements of fire and water or, at any rate, with a higher type of fire and a lower type of water. For brightness and darkness are never more recognizably such than in the heights of space and in the depths of the ocean, where their relationship to fire and water is taken to extremes. In fact, in general terms woman is akin to the stars and to the oceanic depths in her ability both to rise above man in brightness and to sink beneath him in darkness, to encompass him, one might say, from the objective 'above' and the objective 'below'. She is both hotter and colder than man, and in hotness and coldness we have the essence of fire and water, of noumenal and phenomenal factors which complement the brightness and darkness of her overall appearance.

60. Thus a society which simply views things in terms of light and dark is displaying a markedly female bias, a sadly lopsided interpretation of life that is likely to result in female domination, as when theology and sexology ruled the Christian West to the detriment, needless to say, of philosophy and theosophy. Latterly, we find psychology and sociology, the secular counterparts of the aforementioned female disciplines, and a similar lopsided view of the world that is further complicated by the delusion of equating the one with good and the other with evil, light and dark, when, in point of fact, they are unequally evil or, at any rate, immoral (objective) in absolute and relative terms.

61. What, then, are the male counterparts to light and dark, the descriptive appearances of fire and water? Appertaining, as already intimated, to philosophy and theosophy, such counterparts are thick and thin, the descriptive appearances of vegetation (earth) and air, and like vegetation and air they are both moral, which is to say, associated with subjective elements in relative (phenomenal) and absolute (noumenal) terms. It is good to be thick or thin, just as it is good to be heavy or light, since heaviness and lightness are the respective essences of vegetation and air, the phenomenal and noumenal factors which males display to a greater extent as a rule than females, given their subjective bias. If, in general terms, women are hotter and colder by turns, then men are heavier and lighter, capable of bogging down in more depression and dejection than women, but equally capable of being gayer and more light-hearted, as we say, when they break free of the 'sloughs of despond' and soar on wings of gladness towards some joyful peak, usually in consequence of having broken free of women or, at any rate, of the female elements in their own make-up. Thus they achieve an airy liberation from the vegetative heaviness and moroseness which is often attributable to the fact of being too much under the influence of female elements, whether with regard to fire or water. Yet there is still an intrinsic degree of heaviness which attaches to vegetation, to the flesh, to the earth, to masculine ideals, and which will always have an association with sin by dint of its phenomenally subjective nature. Still it is relatively good, like the hardness from whence it stems.

62. However, if we can distinguish between quality and essence in this fashion, with regard to vegetation, we can also do so with regard to air, regarding softness in qualitative terms, and seeing it as the next best thing to lightness, the essence of the element in question. Men are qualitatively not only harder than women, they are also, in some sense, softer than them, the respective qualitative concomitants of vegetation and air.

63. Certainly, it could be said, in relative terms, that women are both rougher and smoother than men, since roughness and smoothness are the respective qualitative concomitants of fire and water, whose essence, as we have seen, is hotness and coldness. Thus from an appearance in brightness and darkness, the noumenal and phenomenal antipodes of female experience, women gravitate, via roughness and smoothness, to an essence in hotness and coldness, an essence diametrically antithetical to the heaviness and lightness of men.

64. Strictly speaking, it could be argued that women are usually expected to reflect more brightness and darkness, in relation to fire and water, than either roughness and smoothness or hotness and coldness, whereas men, by contrast, are expected to reflect more hardness and softness or heaviness and lightness, in relation to vegetation and air, than thickness and thinness. In other words, the expectation is that, being primary, women will adhere more closely to the particle aspects of their gender bias, while men, the secondary sex, will endeavour to adhere more closely to the wavicle aspects of a gender bias in which quality and essence should accordingly take precedence over appearance and quantity. Of course, in reality this doesn't always transpire, but it will be found that when men and women are being more resolutely true to themselves, a drift towards the female and male extremes will occur as a matter of course, with appearance and quantity typifying the female gender, and quality and essence the male one, whether in phenomenal or noumenal terms in either case.

65. I have implied a quantitative attribute to each of the elements, whether objective or subjective, so that we think of fire and water, for instance, in quantitative terms. But I do not thereby wish to give the impression that we begin with a quantitative description and then extrapolate descriptions of appearance, quality, and essence from it, as though the quantitative factor was invariably first. Such, in reality, is not the case, and to do adequate justice to each of the elements and their respective attributes we shall have to return to a subatomic framework in which they have their attributive base, whether with regard to the photons/photinos of Space-Time, the protons/protinos of Time-Space, the electrons/electrinos of Volume-Mass, or the neutrons/neutrinos of Mass-Volume.

66. Hence we can define Space-Time, the noumenal axis of photons/photinos, in one of four ways: either in terms of appearance, with regard to light; of quantity, with regard to fire; of quality, with regard to roughness; or of essence, with regard to hotness.

67. Likewise we can define Time-Space, the noumenal axis of protons/protinos, in one of four ways: either in terms of appearance, with regard to thinness; of quantity, with regard to air; of quality, with regard to softness; or of essence, with regard to lightness.

68. Similarly, we can define Volume-Mass, the phenomenal axis of electrons/electrinos, in one of four ways: either in terms of appearance, with regard to darkness; of quantity, with regard to water; of quality, with regard to smoothness; or of essence, with regard to coldness.

69. Finally, we can define Mass-Volume, the phenomenal axis of neutrons/neutrinos, in one of four ways: either in terms of appearance, with regard to thickness; of quantity, with regard to vegetation; of quality, with regard to hardness; or of essence, with regard to heaviness.

70. Thus with the space-time axis of photons/photinos, we descend from light to heat via fire and roughness, whereas with the time-space axis of protons/protinos we ascend from thinness to lightness via air and softness.

71. Thus with the volume-mass axis of electrons/electrinos, we descend from darkness to coldness via water and smoothness, whereas with the mass-volume axis of neutrons/neutrinos we ascend from thickness to heaviness via vegetation and hardness.

72. Fire is accordingly no more than the quantitative description of Space-Time, which also embraces light (brightness), roughness, and heat (hotness) - the light of Space-Time being its appearance, the roughness its quality, and the heat its essence.

73. Air is accordingly no more than the quantitative description of Time-Space, which also embraces thinness, softness, and lightness - the thinness of Time-Space being its appearance, the softness its quality, and the lightness its essence.

74. Water is accordingly no more than the quantitative description of Volume-Mass, which also embraces darkness, smoothness, and coldness - the darkness of Volume-Mass being its appearance, the smoothness its quality, and the coldness its essence.

75. Vegetation is accordingly no more than the quantitative description of Mass-Volume, which also embraces thickness, hardness, and heaviness - the thickness of Mass-Volume being its appearance, the hardness its quality, and the heaviness its essence.

76. Strictly speaking, we cannot say of fire that its essence is hotness, since heat does not derive from a quantity but a quality, viz. the roughness that is its molecular precondition. Roughness and hotness exist as molecular and elemental forms of photon/photino wavicles, whereas light and fire exist as elemental and molecular forms of photon/photino particles. The particle precedes the wavicle, so before there can be roughness or hotness there must first be light or fire, the latter of which derives its quantitative description from the former. Hence light precedes fire, as roughness precedes heat, in the metaphysical or, rather, metachemical unfolding of Space-Time.

77. Likewise, thinness precedes air, as softness precedes lightness, in the metaphysical unfolding of Time-Space, the appearance and quantity of Time-Space appertaining to the elemental and molecular forms of proton/protino particles, with its quality and essence appertaining to the molecular and elemental forms of proton/protino wavicles. Hence we can derive lightness from softness, the essence of Time-Space from its quality, but not from air, since, as a quantitative description, air precludes direct association with essence.

78. Similarly, darkness precedes water, as smoothness precedes coldness, in the chemical unfolding of Volume-Mass, the appearance and quantity of Volume-Mass appertaining to the elemental and molecular forms of electron/electrino particles, with its quality and essence appertaining to the molecular and elemental forms of electron/electrino wavicles. Hence we can derive coldness from smoothness, the essence of Volume-Mass from its quality, but not from water, since, as a quantitative description, water precludes direct association with essence.

79. Finally, thickness precedes vegetation, as hardness precedes heaviness, in the physical unfolding of Mass-Volume, the appearance and quantity of Mass-Volume appertaining to the elemental and molecular forms of neutron/neutrino particles, with its quality and essence appertaining to the molecular and elemental forms of neutron/neutrino wavicles. Hence we can derive heaviness from hardness, the essence of Mass-Volume from its quality, but not from vegetation, since, as a quantitative description, vegetation precludes direct association with essence.

80. It is my belief that Space-Time precedes Volume-Mass, as photons/photinos precede electrons/electrinos, and that Mass-Volume then precedes Time-Space, as neutrons/neutrinos precede protons/protinos. Put in quantitative terms, this would be equivalent to the element of fire preceding water, followed, in due course, by the elements of vegetation (earth) and air, this latter, corresponding to Time-Space, being the last element to arise. Hence, for me, the Devil is what comes first, God last, and woman and man somewhere in between.

81. Now because Space-Time is the first and most basic axis of subatomic elements, it follows that its per se manifestation will be in appearance, the first and most basic subatomic subdivision of photons/photinos. Thus the per se manifestation of Space-Time will be in elemental photon/photino particles, and hence light. Fire, roughness, and hotness, corresponding to quantitative, qualitative and essential modes of Space-Time, will accordingly be its 'bovaryized' manifestations.

82. Likewise, because Volume-Mass is the second and more (relative to most) basic axis of subatomic elements, it follows that its per se manifestation will be in quantity, the second and more (relative to most) basic subatomic subdivision of electrons/electrinos. Thus the per se manifestation of Volume-Mass will be in molecular electron/electrino particles, and hence water. Darkness, smoothness, and coldness, corresponding to apparent, qualitative and essential modes of Volume-Mass, will accordingly be its 'bovaryized' manifestations.

83. Similarly, because Mass-Volume is the third and less (relative to least) basic axis of subatomic elements, it follows that its per se manifestation will be in quality, the third and less (relative to least) basic subatomic subdivision of neutrons/neutrinos. Thus the per se manifestation of Mass-Volume will be in molecular neutron/neutrino wavicles, and hence hardness. Thickness, vegetation, and heaviness, corresponding to apparent, quantitative and essential modes of Mass-Volume, will accordingly be its 'bovaryized' manifestations.

84. Finally, because Time-Space is the fourth and least basic axis of subatomic elements, it follows that its per se manifestation will be in essence, the fourth and least basic subatomic subdivision of protons/protinos. Thus the per se manifestation of Time-Space will be in elemental proton/protino wavicles. Thickness, air, and softness, corresponding to apparent, quantitative and qualitative modes of Time-Space, will accordingly be its 'bovaryized' manifestations.

85. That which, in Space-Time, is chiefly characterized by elemental particles will be the per se manifestation of an axis which is, by definition, materialist, since materialism is deducible to the most basic subdivision of the subatomic (in this case of photons/photinos).

86. That which, in Volume-Mass, is chiefly characterized by molecular particles will be the per se manifestation of an axis which is, by definition, realist, since realism is deducible to the more (relative to most) basic subdivision of the subatomic (in this case of electrons/electrinos).

87. That which, in Mass-Volume, is chiefly characterized by molecular wavicles will be the per se manifestation of an axis which is, by definition, naturalist, since naturalism is deducible to the less (relative to least) basic subdivision of the subatomic (in this case of neutrons/neutrinos).

88. That which, in Time-Space, is chiefly characterized by elemental wavicles will be the per se manifestation of an axis which is, by definition, idealist, since idealism is deducible to the least basic subdivision of the subatomic (in this case of protons/protinos).

89. Hence the space-time axis of photons/photinos manifests, besides materialism per se, quasi-realist, quasi-naturalist, and quasi-idealist forms of materialism, corresponding to the quantitative, qualitative and essential subdivisions of its basic element.

90. Hence the volume-mass axis of electrons/electrinos manifests, besides realism per se, quasi-materialist, quasi-naturalist, and quasi-idealist forms of realism, corresponding to the apparent, qualitative and essential subdivisions of its basic element.

91. Hence the mass-volume axis of neutrons/neutrinos manifests, besides naturalism per se, quasi-materialist, quasi-realist, and quasi-idealist forms of naturalism, corresponding to the apparent, quantitative and essential subdivisions of its basic element.

92. Hence the time-space axis of protons/protinos manifests, besides idealism per se, quasi-materialist, quasi-realist, and quasi-naturalist forms of idealism, corresponding to the apparent, quantitative and qualitative subdivisions of its basic element.

93. Since science corresponds to materialism, politics to realism, economics to naturalism, and religion to idealism, it follows that adherence to Space-Time will always result in materialistic forms of science, politics, economics, and religion; that adherence to Volume-Mass will always result in realistic forms of science, politics, economics, and religion; that adherence to Mass-Volume will always result in naturalistic forms of science, politics, economics, and religion; and, finally, that adherence to Time-Space will always result in idealistic forms of science, politics, economics, and religion.

94. Whereas appearance and quantity are primary attributes, corresponding to elemental and to molecular particles, quality and essence are secondary attributes, corresponding to molecular and to elemental wavicles.

95. The 'primary' does not denote cultural or moral superiority so much as precedence, since it is the base from which the 'secondary' springs.

96. The space-time axis of materialism has reference to a metachemical basis, which is the noumenal antithesis of Time-Space.

97. The volume-mass axis of realism has reference to a chemical basis, which is the phenomenal antithesis of Mass-Volume.

98. The mass-volume axis of naturalism has reference to a physical basis or, rather, centre, which is the phenomenal antithesis of Volume-Mass.

99. The time-space axis of idealism has reference to a metaphysical centre, which is the noumenal antithesis of Space-Time.

100. The secondary, or wavicle, element is an abstraction from the primary, or particle, element. Yet it is the primary element which, in its apparent and quantitative bases, signifies form as against content.