CYCLE TWELVE

1. God is always metaphysical, whether in the negative context of idealism or in the positive context of transcendentalism, which is to say, whether in relation to the sensuality or sensibility of inorganic primacy on the one hand, or in relation to the sensuality or sensibility of organic supremacy on the other hand.

2. Metaphysics has reference to the time-space axis of noumenal subjectivity, whether in relation to the Sun and Saturn in inorganic primacy or to the ears and the lungs in organic supremacy.

3. Folly can be negative or positive, wisdom likewise. Let us therefore distinguish the foolish God from the wise God on the following comprehensive basis: the most foolish God of an elemental-particle subatomic disposition (scientific) in metaphysical sensuality; the more (relative to most) foolish God of a molecular-particle subatomic disposition (political) in metaphysical sensuality; the less (relative to least) foolish God of a molecular-wavicle subatomic disposition (economic) in metaphysical sensuality; and the least foolish God of an elemental-wavicle subatomic disposition (religious) in metaphysical sensuality: as against the least wise God of an elemental-particle subatomic disposition (scientific) in metaphysical sensibility; the less (relative to least) wise God of a molecular-particle subatomic disposition (political) in metaphysical sensibility; the more (relative to most) wise God of a molecular-wavicle subatomic disposition (economic) in metaphysical sensibility; and the most wise God of an elemental-wavicle subatomic disposition (religious) in metaphysical sensibility.

4. Since metaphysical sensuality is the basis of divine folly and metaphysical sensibility, by contrast, the basis of divine wisdom, it should be evident that folly is the alpha and wisdom the omega of metaphysics, as, in general terms, with reference to metaphysical manifestations of the Father (a secondary God) and the Son (a primary God).

5. Thinking in subatomic terms, I happen to believe that the element of divine folly is the proton, whereas the element, or rather elementino, of divine wisdom is the protino.

6. For it seems to me that if the noumenal objectivity of space-time is divisible between the photon and the photino of metachemical sensuality and sensibility, then the noumenal subjectivity of time-space is divisible between the proton and the protino of metaphysical sensuality and sensibility.

7. Hence foolish Godhead would descend, as it were, from elemental-particle protons to elemental-wavicle protons via molecular-particle protons and molecular-wavicle protons, as from most to least via more and less foolish, whereas wise Godhead would ascend, so to speak, from elemental-particle protinos to elemental-wavicle protinos via molecular-particle protinos and molecular-wavicle protinos, as from least to most via less and more wisdom.

8. Be that as it may - and this is of course speculative philosophy rather than science - it needs to be re-emphasized that since metaphysics is divisible, like any other elemental context, between science, politics, economics, and religion, so it is divisible on both sensual and sensible, as well as both negative and positive, terms.

9. I prefer to distinguish negative metaphysics from its positive counterpart, inorganic primacy from organic supremacy, on the basis of Antigods in both sensual and sensible contexts from Gods in such contexts, with those in the negative modes of time-space having intimate associations with the Sun and Saturn, the arguably most metaphysical bodies of the Solar System, but those in the positive modes of time-space having no-less intimate associations with the ears and the lungs - the Antigods as idealists and the Gods as transcendentalists, whether foolishly or wisely so, depending on the context.

10. Likewise one can distinguish negative Devils from positive Devils, Antidevils from Devils, on the basis of materialism and fundamentalism, with a like-distinction between inorganic primacy and organic supremacy, cosmic and universal noumenal factors on both naturalistic and artificial, or synthetic, terms.

11. But one cannot speak of Devils as foolish or wise according to whether of a predominantly sensual or sensible disposition; only as evil or good on that basis, as germane to the noumenal objectivity of space-time, which is ever metachemical and therefore fiery.

12. If protons and protinos are the alpha and omega of metaphysics, whether inorganically (negative) or organically (positive), then photons and photinos are arguably the alpha and omega of metachemistry, with a like-distinction between the inorganic (cosmic) and organic (universal) manifestations of each.

13. As with Gods, one can distinguish between sensual and sensible Devils on the following comprehensive basis: the most evil Devil of an elemental-particle subatomic disposition (scientific) in metachemical sensuality; the more (relative to most) evil Devil of a molecular-particle subatomic disposition (political) in metachemical sensuality; the less (relative to least) evil Devil of a molecular-wavicle subatomic disposition (economic) in metachemical sensuality; and the least evil Devil of an elemental-wavicle subatomic disposition (religious) in metachemical sensuality: as against the least good Devil of an elemental-particle subatomic disposition (scientific) in metachemical sensibility; the less (relative to least) good Devil of a molecular-particle subatomic disposition (political) in metachemical sensibility; the more (relative to most) good Devil of a molecular-wavicle subatomic disposition (economic) in metachemical sensibility; and the most good Devil of an elemental-wavicle subatomic disposition (religious) in metachemical sensibility.

14. Evil Devils are always sensual and good Devils sensible, whether on the negative terms of inorganic primacy, in which case we are alluding to Antidevils, or on the positive terms of organic supremacy, in which case we are alluding to Devils proper.

15. A distinction, in other words, between a stellar-Venusian axis, as between the central star of the Galaxy and the planet Venus, on the one hand, and an eyes-heart axis on the other hand, the hand of positive as opposed to negative types of evil and good, which, of course, revolve around beauty and love rather than ugliness and hate.

16. As with metaphysics, one has to distinguish, in metachemistry, between the inorganic photons and photinos of negative Devils (Antidevils) and the organic photons and photinos of positive Devils, or those Who have intimate associations with either the eyes or the heart in pursuance, through noumenal objectivity, of some specifically metachemical design.

17. In the subjective/objective distinction between Gods and Devils, we may say that Gods are generally upper-class males and Devils generally upper-class females - at least where organic supremacy is concerned. But then even organic creatures are capable of succumbing, under negative pressures, to inorganic primacy, even if this is usually the exception to the rule.

18. Yet the distinction between materialism and fundamentalism, the negative and positive modes of metachemistry, would suggest, as much as the metaphysical distinction between idealism and transcendentalism, that an opposition between the one and the other can develop in society, as in the world at large, with some people identifiable with materialism and others more identifiable with fundamentalism, not to mention, in relation to metaphysics, with idealism or transcendentalism, as the case may be.

19. It is also possible - and probably preferable - to regard such a distinction in evolutionary or chronological terms, so that the one may be said to lead to the other, whether in metachemistry or in metaphysics, as in the case of a gradual progression from inorganic primacy to organic supremacy and a general amelioration of society in consequence.

20. But this is probably a delusion, since the contemporary growth of an organic alternative to inorganic factors owes not a little to the influence of the East on Western civilization, and would suggest that the coming together of East and West into one universal civilization entails not a complete victory by the East over the West, still less by the West over the East, but a compromise between the inorganic primacy, largely artificial, of the West and the organic supremacy of the East, so that what finally emerges is more a synthetic transmutation of the East/West dialectic than an outright victory for either inorganic primacy or organic supremacy.

21. And what applies to the noumenal alternatives in time and space applies no less, it seems to me, to their phenomenal counterparts in volume and mass, viz. the chemical distinction between realism and nonconformism on the one hand, and the physical distinction between naturalism and humanism on the other hand, with, in all likelihood, subatomic distinctions between electrons and electrinos in relation to volume-mass objectivity, and neutrons and neutrinos in relation to mass-volume subjectivity, whether in inorganic or organic terms.

22. Western history has also shown us, however, that things can lead from the positivity of organic supremacy to the negativity of inorganic primacy, as societies degenerate from personal and universal values to geologic and cosmic ones in the process of secularization.

23. Although environmental standardization is crucial to global ideological uniformity, steps should be taken to ensure that organic supremacy is protected and advanced through recourse to organic methodologies, including both 'garden-city' concepts and the actual interiorization of nature, i.e. trees, flowers, shrubs, etc., within buildings, so that the advantages to sensibility accruing to the environmental interiorization of life are not undermined by negative values stemming from undue artificiality.