Why Beauty is not Truth and Truth not Beauty. Since nothing is more alpha and omega than beauty and truth, it stands to reason that beauty is no more equivalent to truth than truth to beauty.  But there will still be people who paradoxically prefer to regard beauty in terms of outer truth and truth in terms of inner beauty.  Are they wrong?  I mean, does the concept of 'outer essence' make any more sense than 'inner appearance'?  For appearance and essence are certainly commensurate with alpha and omega on the noumenal planes of space and time.  Why, then, do certain people persist in regarding beauty and truth in such paradoxical terms?  I think part, if not all, of the answer to that question must be: they are endeavouring to compensate for the absence of authentic truth and/or beauty from their lives or social experiences.  And that suggests that the principal kind of people who indulge in such paradoxical estimations of beauty and truth are more likely to be of the upended gender in relation to each antithetical position than of the hegemonic gender.  In other words, they are more likely to be antimales in the case of beauty and antifemales in the case of truth, the former antimetaphysically subordinate to a metachemical hegemony favouring beauty, the latter antimetachemically subordinate to a metaphysical hegemony favouring truth.  Hence those who, in antimetaphysics, are anti-truth (among other related things, including joy) may well prefer to regard beauty as outer truth if not, in plain terms, truth.  Those, on the other hand, who, in antimetachemistry, are anti-beauty (among other related things, including love) may well prefer to regard truth as inner beauty if not, in plain terms, beauty.  For each type of upended position is lacking in either truth proper or beauty proper, neither of which owes anything to beauty or truth.  In fact, beauty is so much outer heat that it is completely incompatible with inner light, which is truth.  Outer light may be a kind of outer truth in the absence of truth proper and inner heat a kind of inner beauty in the absence of beauty proper, but it is as illogical to identify outer heat with the one as inner light with the other, especially since the emphasis will fall somatically on what could, with reservations, be called the outer form of illusion in the one case and psychically on what, with equal reservations, could be called the inner form of ugliness in the other case, the former under hegemonic female pressures in metachemistry and the latter under hegemonic male pressures in metaphysics.  That said, it is precisely the absence of truth from antimetaphysics that makes the hegemonic rule of beauty possible and, conversely, the absence of beauty from antimetachemistry that makes the hegemonic lead of truth possible.  The hegemonic meat of the one gender is the subordinate poison of the other.