EXTREMES OF THE SELF

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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