TOWARDS THE SUPERNOUMENON
Supernotational Philosophy
Copyright © 1987–2012 John O'Loughlin
_______________
1. Just as, formerly, right-thinking people
opposed slavery and serfdom, so their latter-day counterparts should oppose
work. For work is no
less evil in relation to the contemporary world than slavery and serfdom were
evils in relation to the past.
Work divides and degrades people, sets up artificial barriers between
them which are no less an obstacle to universal harmony than the natural
barriers of race and class which formerly divided them and which, to a certain
extent, still do so today. Where man was
formerly divided by race and class, he is now divided by profession. Only when work is also consigned to the
'rubbish heap of history' will man be truly free - free from division and free for unity. Such unity, it need hardly be said, can only
be achieved through play, albeit play of the most spiritual
order - the order making for universal joy.
2. Decadence is to civilization what cancer
is to the flesh: a degeneration which must be eliminated by the scalpel of
revolutionary change.
3. It is only when and because men generally
symbolize goodness that they look-up to women, as to the Beautiful, from a
worldly point-of-view, propagating truth in the guise of children.
4. Why did Christ say: You must become as
little children in order to enter the
5. Better to suffer for Heaven than to seek
pleasure in the world.
6. To distinguish between small paving stones
as People's democratic and medium-to-large paving stones as bourgeois
democratic, with macadamized 'pavements' corresponding to a People's theocratic
equivalent by dint of their construction within the idealistic context of a wavicle continuum.
Thus, on the one hand, the particle materialism of paving stones while,
on the other hand, the wavicle idealism of
macadamized sidewalks, so-named after their Irish inventor, MacAdam.
7. Stereo speakers as worldly in relation to
stereo headphones, whether of the larger particle-suggesting variety, more
suited to rock, or of the smaller wavicle-suggesting
variety, better suited to jazz.
Conventional and micro, Communist and Fascist equivalents beyond
'democratic' speakers, as especially suited to classical and pop. Certainly, headphones connote with the head in
contrast to the body, with theocracy as opposed to democracy, and can be
distinguished, on the above-mentioned basis of type, as brain from mind,
particles from wavicles.
8. But if we ascribe Communist and Fascist
equivalents to stereo headphones, depending on their type, e.g. conventional or
micro, then it seems not unreasonable to ascribe an Ecological equivalence to
radio headphones, so that we regard them as ideologically situated in between
the alternative kinds of stereo headphones, much as trikes
can be regarded as being ideologically situated in between Communist motorbikes
on the one hand and Fascist scooters on the other ... in a uniquely
middle-ground theocratic position, as befitting Ecological equivalents in
general. Certainly radio headphones are
as distinct, given their individual construction and purpose, from stereo
headphones as trikes from motorbikes or scooters, and
while they may come in a variety of shapes and sizes, it would seem that an
Ecological equivalent is much the most likely and plausible description. Thus whether radio headphones are designed on
a uniquely middle-ground basis or in such a way as to suggest a leaning towards
either of the flanking extremes, it will suit our ideological purposes if we
regard them in the aforementioned light, as a kind of trike-like
extrapolation from or extension beyond small streamlined transistors with microlight headphones, which, by contrast, suggest a
radical Liberal Democratic equivalent.
9. Concerning stereo headphones, we should
distinguish, I believe, not only between Communist conventionals
and Fascist micros, but (to the extent that more radical ideological
equivalents can be derived from these) also between Transcendental Socialist
and Social Transcendentalist stereo headphones, and on the following basis:
namely that while Communist conventionals will be of
a chunky construction with ring- or doughnut-like ear pads, Transcendental
Socialist conventionals will be of a slender
construction with correspondingly more streamlined ear pads, possibly of a
centralized foam design; and that while Fascist micros will be very lightweight
and all-of-a-piece, Social Transcendentalist micros will be of the collapsible
or fold-up variety, with larger centralized ear pads and a stronger overall
construction. Such larger micros,
together with the smaller conventionals (in relation
to Communist headphones) will, I contend, stand to one another as plain
scooters to streamlined motorbikes, both of which may be said to form a closer
parallel that not only overhauls and transcends the more absolute and wider
parallel of Fascist micros and Communist conventionals,
but overhauls and transcends radio headphones as well, just as plain scooters
and streamlined motorbikes overhaul and transcend trikes,
on the basis of a post-superworldly relativity.
10. Clearly ring-padded radio headphones will be
of an Ecological status with a bias towards Communist conventionals;
streamlined centre-padded radio headphones will be of an Ecological status with
a bias towards Fascist micros; streamlined ring-padded radio headphones will be
of a uniquely middle-ground Ecological status.
Parallels may be drawn with rock-blues, jazz-blues, and blues-blues
respectively, not to mention with comparable kinds of trikes.
11. To me, Social Theocracy and Social
Transcendentalism are interchangeable terms for the ideology of what is
potentially, if not actually at this point in time, a true world religion, a
religion capable of genuinely global aspirations. I personally prefer to think of the first
term in connection with political equivalents, since it is closer in appearance
and sound to Social Democracy, and the second term in connection with religious
equivalents, since it better expresses the freedom from alpha-stemming
orientations and correlative freedom for omega-aspiring orientations. For, despite my transcendental use of the
word, 'theocracy' too easily connotes with quasi-autocratic subservience to
alpha-stemming deities, whereas 'transcendentalism' more readily expresses the
freedom that an omega-aspiring religion entails. Thus one can conceive of a Social Theocratic
Party or Movement, but the actual religious realization of the ideology in question
would be better served by the term Social Transcendentalism, which, in any
case, is the term I tend to prefer.
12. Public ownership of the land in relation to
public ownership of industry - a natural/artificial distinction which finds a
parallel between hand-played percussion on the one hand and drums on the other,
as befitting alpha and omega manifestations of decentralization. Thus primitive Communism and contemporary
Communism, each of which are unacceptable from a truly civilized, and therefore
centralized, standpoint. Better than public
ownership of the means of production, whether natural or artificial,
agricultural or industrial, is Centrist trusteeship of those means for the
People-become-Holy-Ghost. Otherwise the
People can never become Holy Ghost, but will remain enslaved to materialism and
be no better than proletarian. A truly
free people are free for the spirit.
Those who elect, under Messianic auspices, to serve the People in this
ultimate freedom must bear the 'sinful' materialisms of the world for them in a
Christ-like sacrifice ... in order that
they may go free of such 'sins' for all time. But trusteeship is not ownership! Trusteeship is social, not Socialism. Ownership is a dirty concept from a divine
standpoint.
13. Purely as a matter of general interest, can
there be ownership of the land, as of anything else, without prior
purchase? Is not ownership dependent
upon one's buying what is offered for sale?
So can there be true ownership where no purchase was involved, as in
primitive communal societies which knew nothing about money and would not have
cared for financial transactions had they done so? No, it seems to me that no ownership could
have existed in those primitive communities, least of all where land was
concerned. Rather did people, whether as
individual clans or tribes, occupy and make use of land for the benefit of the
community, as in ancient
14. A modern example of occupying but now owning
is afforded by squatters, who take over deserted or derelict property and make
use of it for themselves. For to own one
must first buy. No ownership can be said
to exist where a purchase has not been made.
The Irish were once beneath ownership, but hopefully one day they will be
beyond it, even in the collective sense advocated by Socialists. Yet while public ownership may be preferable
to, because more evolved than, private ownership, it is still ownership, and
thus rather more on the diabolic than the divine side of life. It can only truly exist where the State,
acting on behalf of the community, buys out the private owners of their land,
industry, or whatever, which is then nationalized. Thus the State, having first bought in the
collective interest, owns what it has bought.
Yet such ownership can only exist in a
15. Transcendental Socialism is one-party
Socialism, in which the proletariat own the means of production through the
State. Social Transcendentalism is
one-party trusteeship of the means of production for the People through the
Centre. Hence whereas the former implies
ownership, the latter implies trusteeship.
16. Re-evaluation (in relation to evaluations
carried out in, for example, From Materialism to Idealism) of different
types of People's discs in relation to ideological equivalents: Democratic
Socialist long-playing album; pure Socialist large single; Communist small
single; Transcendental Socialist compact disc.
Thus from the democratically large-scale disc to the theocratically
small-scale disc.
17. No-one who is familiar with contemporary
modes of motorized transportation will have failed to notice a distinction
between cars on the one hand, and motorbikes and scooters on the other, which
can be inferred to parallel the distinction I have already drawn between the
body and head, as regarding worldly democracy and otherworldly theocracy, the
latter divisible into brain and mind, with particular reference (in relation to
motorbikes and scooters) to the new brain and the superconscious
mind. By which I mean that whereas cars
connote, on account of their extensive bodywork, with the body and thus may be
ascribed a democratic significance, motorbikes connote, on account of their
engine bias, with the brain or, more accurately, the new brain, while scooters
connote, on account of their preponderant panelling, with the superconscious, i.e. mind of a post-worldly and hence
transcendent order. Consequently a
dichotomy in the first place between body-oriented cars and head-oriented
motorbikes/scooters, with a further dichotomy between brain-oriented motorbikes
and mind-oriented scooters.
World-Devil-God distinctions on democratic and transcendent terms.
18. Certainly we need not doubt that cars will
appeal more to worldly, democratic people than to those of a post-worldly or
otherworldly disposition, who will doubtless prefer motorbikes or scooters, as
befitting 'heads'. But in a democratic
society such more ideologically-advanced individuals are rather the exception
to the rule, as can be confirmed by the preponderance of four-wheel over
two-wheel motor vehicles on today's roads.
Of course, distinctions between Fascist streamlined scooters and Social
Transcendentalist plain scooters do not
alter the fact that scooters are essentially mind orientated, any more than
streamlined motorbikes cease to be brain orientated in relation to plain, or
conventional, motorbikes just because they signify a Transcendental Socialist
extrapolation from Communist purism.
Certainly a latter-day plain scooter will be less idealistic and mind
orientated than a streamlined scooter, but it will still be more a phenomenon
of the superconscious than of the new brain. Similarly a latter-day streamlined motorbike
will be less materialistic and brain orientated than a plain motorbike, yet
still be more a phenomenon of the new brain than of the superconscious. For scooters are ever scooters, no less than
motorbikes remain motorbikes whatever modifications are introduced. They pertain to separate ideological spectra.
19. However, it is my unshakeable conviction
that scooters and motorbikes are more relevant to post-worldly intellectuals
than ever cars would be, given their inherently bodily construction. Cars for the democratic masses, scooters and
motorbikes for the transcendental elites, whether divine or diabolic, fascistic
or communistic. For it is incontestable
that two-wheeled motor vehicles are as much beyond the world ... of the
democratic masses ... as ponies and horses may be said to have preceded it,
with scooters as a kind of antithetical equivalent to ponies and motorbikes as
a kind of antithetical equivalent to horses - a difference, in part, of scale
and, in part, of design. Certainly
ponies are smaller and slower than horses, and the same is generally true of
scooters in relation to motorbikes; shorter legs in the case of ponies and
smaller wheels in the case of scooters, making for a slower overall
performance. Doubtless the type of
person who would have preferred a pony to a horse in the pre-worldly age of
pagan antiquity will have his antithetical equivalent in the type of person
who, in this incipiently post-worldly age of transcendent futurity, prefers a
scooter to a motorbike - the difference, in other words, between alpha-stemming
idealism (the Father) and omega-oriented idealism (the Holy Ghost). And doubtless, too, the type of person who,
in an alpha-stemming age, would have preferred a horse to a pony has his antithetical
equivalent in the typical motorcyclist for whom scooters are inadequate or
unacceptable, as the case may be.
20. But what of those who come in-between each
of the extreme choices? For we can no
more ignore the reality of a mid-position in between scooters and motorbikes
than in between ponies and horses, and if the former has to do with trikes, then it seems not unreasonable to contend that the
latter had to do with donkeys, quadrupeds which were no less distinct from (and
slower than) ponies and horses than trikes (are) from
scooters and motorbikes. Thus if we are
to consider trikes as the antithetical equivalent to
donkeys, it will be partly on account of the slow pace at which each mode of
transportation moves, neither of them a match for their immediate rivals. Yet just as trikes
are rather more a scaling-down of the body than truly correlative with the
head, so we may believe that donkeys were less suitable modes of conveyance for
'heads', or head types, prior to the world (of carriages and cars) than for
'bodies', or mass types, in that pre-dualistic context, thereby rating lower in
the alpha-stemming estimation of pagans than either ponies or horses. Just as, in the omega-oriented estimation of
post-dualistic transcendentalists, trikes rate lower
than either scooters or motorbikes, being no less bodily or populist, in
relation to these latter modes of conveyance, than donkeys were in relation to
the former modes.
21. So from natural modes of conveyance to
artificial modes via carriages and cars, which is to say, from alpha-stemming
God/Devil dichotomies (excluding the subworldly
donkey) to omega-oriented God/Devil dichotomies (excluding the supra-worldly trike) via the world.
Certainly, the head is making a comeback, but on diametrically
antithetical terms to its first appearance, when subconscious and old brain
were predominant. We may be some way
from a society in which scooters and motorbikes, not to mention trikes, are the rule rather than the exception, but if the
world is not to last for ever, then such a society must surely arise ...
whether with a bias for scooters over motorbikes, or vice versa.
22. Possibility of tanks as the antithetical
equivalent of chariots, particularly those of the martial variety. For are not tanks designed both to protect
their occupants from enemy fire and enable them to train projectiles on an
enemy - the very things which chariots were intended to do, albeit from a
relatively naturalistic point-of-view?
Tanks may have displaced cavalry in the evolution of warfare, but their
role is more akin to that of chariots, which were evidently displaced by
cavalry.
23. Evolutionary theory of lettering from
autocratic Block Capitals to centrist lower-case writing via theocratic
mixed-case writing, democratic mixed-case printing, socialist lower-case
printing, and transcendental socialist lower-case italics. Consequently, lettering may be assumed to
evolve from a materialistic inception in BLOCK CAPITALS to an idealistic
culmination in lower-case writing via writerly and printerly compromises in between. From the separate to the joined, as from the
large to the small, strength to truth, the particular to the general. Or, put in nuclear terms, from proton
particles to wavicles, atomic particles to wavicles, and electron particles to wavicles
- pre-worldly, worldly, and post-worldly alternatives, with diabolic/divine
implications on the extreme levels, which, however you regard them, tend to be
mutually exclusive. Thus lower-case
printing excludes both the autocratic possibility of upper-case printing and
the transcendental possibility of lower-case writing; lower-case writing
excludes both the theocratic possibility of mixed-case writing and the
socialist possibility of lower-case printing.
Spectra remain distinct, and alpha and omega manifestations thereof
cancel out the possibility of an antithetical option. Unfortunately the age of lower-case writing
is still some way off, though we are seeing more lower-case printing these
days, particularly where consciously socialist or proletarian publications are
concerned. (Supplementary to the above distinctions, I should like to add the
theory that mixed-case italics correspond to a Nazi equivalent, in contrast to
lower-case italics.)
24. I have never been particularly happy with
Schopenhauer's The
World as Will and Representation, and now, for the first time, I realize
exactly why. It is as though it were the
philosophical equivalent of the
25. But if we can distinguish between an
alpha-stemming and an omega-oriented will on the above basis, with latitudinal
implications, one should also be careful to distinguish longitudinally, as it
were, between divine, diabolic, and worldly types of will on each of the extreme
positions, and to a certain extent Schopenhauer did in fact do so - at any
rate, with regard to the alpha-stemming types of will. For he fully admitted to a distinction
between conscious will, or will of which the subject is fully conscious, and unconscious
or subliminal will, which rises up of its own accord from the instinctual
depths of the organism, a testimony to the automotive. Clearly this distinction is between diabolic
will in the case of the conscious, and worldly will in the case of the
unconscious; for the former would seem to owe more to the old brain than to the
subconscious, about which Schopenhauer had relatively little to say, and may
therefore be accorded a diabolic origin, in contrast not only to worldly
instinctual will but to divine will, which, on the alpha-stemming level,
manifests itself in imagination, whether as dreams or consciously-willed
fantasies, images, and so on, that do not impinge on or lead to bodily
actions. For the essence of divine will
is unconnected with bodily actions, which depend on conscious or subliminal
types of will, and is accordingly complete in itself. Whether in dreams or fantasies or the even
rarer instance of natural visions, divine will pertains to the subconscious as
a kind of psychic extrapolation from the central star of the Galaxy, which
corresponds to the Creator by dint of its centralized uniqueness and almost
transcendent aloofness from planetary revolutions, a star seemingly wrapped-up
in itself rather than directly responsible for the motions of planets, in
contrast to the myriad suns which circle around it (as monarchs around a pope)
in the rest of the Galaxy, of which our sun is but a minute component. And yet, if dreams can be regarded, in some
basic metaphysical sense, as extrapolations from the central star of the
Galaxy, then we need not hesitate in ascribing to consciously-willed activity
an extrapolation from the sun, as though it corresponded to the influence of
the sun on the earth's motions, while reserving to the unconscious or
instinctual will a parallel with the influence of the earth's molten core on
the planet itself, as though that, too, were but an extrapolation from some
more fundamental principle acting upon the cosmic head. Consequently while the central star of the Galaxy
would connote with mind, being a kind of cosmic foreshadowing of the
subconscious, the sun would assume, in this context, a connotation with the
brain, being a kind of cosmic foreshadowing of the old brain, from which all
conscious willing proceeds, leaving the planet itself to foreshadow the
instinctual, subliminal manifestation of will in the body. Needless to say, each kind of will is to be
found in everyone, although not, I shall argue, to the same extent, since we
can generalize people into divine, diabolic, and worldly dispositions,
according to both racial and class factors, about which the reader will already
be familiar from earlier sections of my work.
26. So we have three levels or types of will in
the sense of action - one primarily mental, one arising in the mind but
intended to activate the body, and one primarily physical, residing in the
body. All three types of will discussed
above pertain to an alpha-stemming orientation, which is to say, they are of a
naturalistic, proton-based constitution.
Schopenhauer, as we have seen, was particularly mindful of two of them,
viz. the diabolic, or conscious, will, and the worldly, or subliminal, will,
and so far as he was concerned no alternative will existed, nor could ever
exist, these two types of will being extrapolated from a single primal source
and returning to it, in the context of noumenon, once
their phenomenal manifestations had passed away. Yet, as I have already argued, an omega
orientation is also possible and presupposes a different order of will, as well
as parallel types or levels of will within that omega-oriented context. In other words, just as there are divine,
diabolic, and worldly types of alpha-stemming will, so there must be divine,
diabolic, and worldly types of omega-aspiring will, which constitute
antithetical equivalents to the former.
Such omega-aspiring types of will should be of an electron-based supernaturalistic constitution and may alternatively be
regarded as levels of superwill. Consequently the antithetical equivalent of
imaginative will on the plane of dreams or fantasies or visions, as the case
may be, will be imaginative superwill, which should
take the forms, in an ascending order of importance, of film-viewing,
video-making, and LSD-tripping. Similarly,
the antithetical equivalent of conscious will on the plane of bodily actions
will be conscious superwill, which should have to do
not with natural actions in relation to nature but with artificial actions in
relation to artificial phenomena such as machines, computers, synthesizers,
motorized vehicles, and so on. Finally,
the antithetical equivalent of subliminal or instinctual will with regard to
bodily functions will be instinctual superwill which,
as in the case of the higher levels of omega-oriented will, should have to do
with an instinctual response to external artificial stimuli, whether in the
guise of music or sport or any other artificial inducements. Thus in complete contrast to the
alpha-stemming types of will, whether on the divine or diabolic or worldly
planes, the omega-aspiring types of will are dependent upon and stimulated by
artificial phenomena, without which they would cease to exist. Rather than being behind all natural
phenomena, like Schopenhauer's noumenon, artificial
phenomena are, in a very real sense, behind all supernoumena,
a precondition for the emergence of whichever type of superwill. It is the disco that creates the dance, not
vice versa. And, by a like-token, it is
the machine which conditions the response of conscious superwill,
no less than LSD which creates the trip.
The former is a precondition of the latter.
27. Thus in complete contrast to Schopenhauer,
we have a will which is the effect of artificial causes rather than the cause
of natural effects, a will which, far from being the means to a higher end,
namely the creation of phenomena, is an end-in-itself, and therefore the
transcendence of all phenomena through self-realization, or realization of the superwill. Such
self-realization can be bodily or intellectual or spiritual, although the
long-term goal of evolutionary progress must be the utmost divine type of superwill, in spiritual transcendence, and not the utmost
worldly or diabolic types of superwill in connection
with, and hence enslavement to, artificial phenomena. Even if the latter are preferable to the
different types of alpha-stemming will, they are inherently inferior to the
highest omega-aspiring type of superwill and must
eventually be eclipsed by it, as spirit triumphs over both brain and body in
the attainment not only of salvation from the world but, more importantly, of
heavenly bliss. Such a heavenly
culmination to evolution may not have been envisaged by Schopenhauer but it was
by Nietzsche, whose 'great noontide' would seem to correspond with the ultimate
fulfilment of Christian aspirations in the heavenly Beyond - a Beyond which is
no mere return to the pre-worldly noumenon but an
advancement beyond the world to Paradise.
If Schopenhauer was the culmination of one philosophical tradition, then
Nietzsche can at least in part be regarded as the inception of another. It is my belief that I am the culmination of
that alternative tradition, necessarily antithetical to the first.
28. Can one have been noumenon,
in the sense of will as expounded by Schopenhauer, before birth in the
phenomenal world as a particular individual, and, if so, is one destined to
become noumenon again, following death? I do not believe so! Such a noumenon is
equivalent to cosmic energy or force ... in the context of suns and stars, and
it seems rather unlikely that before birth one was a star or component thereof,
since one's entry into the world came via one's parents and is inconceivable on
any other basis than parental procreation.
Similarly, after death one will simply cease to exist as a person and
become nothing, particularly if, instead of being exposed to the organic cycle
through burial, one's corpse is incinerated and thereby reduced to a few pounds
of common ash. One is no more likely to
become pure will after death than to have been it before birth. Such will is solely cosmic, existing on
primitive divine, diabolic, and worldly levels, which is to say, in the central
star of the Galaxy (as of any galaxy); in the circling stars of the Galaxy (as
of any galaxy); and in the circling planets of the Galaxy (as of any galaxy),
where molten cores may be presumed to exist.
In such alpha-stemming contexts we have a gradual scaling-down or
reduction of proton energy from the comparatively pure level of the central
star of the Galaxy to the cruder level of the earth's core, as the noumenon descends towards the phenomenal world. Beyond it there is nothing or, rather, only
the possibility of supernoumenal electron-electron
attractions. Yet such pure spirit would
not have emerged from man, and hence the world, but from a more evolved life
form, corresponding to a new-brain collectivization, elsewhere in the Universe
- it being assumed, for the sake of argument, that the Universe does in fact
contain such a life form.
29. Concerning will on the alpha-stemming
worldly and omega-aspiring worldly levels, it seems to me that dance is to sex
what sport is to war - namely a kind of antithetical equivalent wherein
electron-biased criteria, as germane to worldly superwill,
are preponderant. Thus from sex on the wavicle level of proton-biased atomic will to dance on the wavicle level of electron-biased atomic will; and from war
on the particle level of proton-biased atomic will to sport on the particle
level of electron-biased atomic will. In
a primitive, or pagan, society it follows that sex and war preponderate over
dance and sport, whereas in an advanced, or transcendental, society ... dance
and sport will be preponderant over sex and war, and possibly to the complete
exclusion of the latter. Only in a
worldly, or Christian, society will a balance exist between sex and war on the
one hand and dance and sport on the other, as befitting atomic criteria. Thus from sex and war at one end of the
evolutionary scale to dance and sport at the other end, the former presupposing
alpha-stemming atomic will and the latter, by contrast, presupposing
omega-aspiring atomic will. Wavicle construction (self-indulgence) and particle
destruction (self-sacrifice) on the proton-biased levels; wavicle
co-operation (self-transcendence) and particle competition (self-assertion) on
the electron-biased levels, with all due gradations and compromises coming
in-between.
30. Certainly, contemporary society testifies to
a preponderance of dance and sport over sex and war, and I venture to suggest
that disco-dancing, wherein people dance freely in the collective, is the
antithetical equivalent of the pagan orgy, wherein people copulated freely in
the collective, choosing whomsoever they pleased. Of course, orgiastic behaviour was not
unheard of in the late-twentieth century, but it was more an expression of
bourgeois decadence within a pseudo-modern context than a reflection of truly
contemporary trends. The genuinely
modern man, a proletarian, will rather be found free-dancing in a disco than
free-fucking at an orgy. And what
applies to the male sex applies no less to the female, whose commitment to the
dance should leave one in no doubt that what is happening isn't so much sexual
as an antithetical equivalent of sex with superior moral implications -
certainly when judged in relation to orgiastic behaviour! For it is the consequence of a different kind of will, one
dependent on artificial, though in this case musical, motivation. Transcendent rather than mundane.
31. Consequently we may distinguish not merely
dance from sex, but collective sex at one end of the wavicle-atomic
spectrum from collective dance at the other end, with alpha and omega, proton
and electron, implications ... as pertaining to the noumenal
within a worldly, and hence bodily, context.
For the noumenal, as pure will, is
characterized by its indivisibility, and such indivisibility manifests itself
within the collective, whether on the alpha-stemming levels of a proton-biased
atomicity or on the omega-oriented levels of an electron-biased atomicity, that
is to say whether as noumenon or supernoumenon. It is only in the phenomenal as such, which
comes in between these antithetical kinds of noumena
as a manifestation of worldly individualism, that individualized sex and dance
have their rightful place and are properly intelligible, with individualized
sex, or sex between man and wife, succeeding orgiastic sex as atomic wavicles succeed proton-biased atomic wavicles,
while, from the converse viewpoint, individualized dancing, or dancing between
couples, precedes the more collectivized free-dancing one would associate with
the disco. Thus from pre-worldly sexual noumenon to worldly sexual phenomenon, and from worldly
dancing phenomenon to post-worldly dancing noumenon.
32. Likewise, we can distinguish between the
particle equivalents of sex and dance, namely war and sport, on alpha and omega
worldly levels, reserving a collective (noumenal)
status for tribal war, or warfare between various tribes, clans, etc., and an
individualized (phenomenal) status for national war, or warfare between two
rival rulers, a kind of war which may be regarded as having succeeded the
tribal kind to the degree and in the sense that individualized sex succeeded
orgiastic sex. Conversely, we should
reserve an individualized (phenomenal) status for national sports, or sporting
contexts involving two competitors or teams, and a collectivized (noumenal) status for international sports, or sporting
contexts which involve a number of competitors or teams from a variety of
countries ... such as cycling, motor racing, motorcycle racing, speedboat
racing, and so on, which are not only more transcendental in relation to
national sports but, as a rule, more artificial as well. Indeed, a distinction should be drawn between
these truly modern or artificial sports on the one hand, and athletics on the
other which, although fulfilling some of the criteria we have laid down for
international sports, presupposes strong naturalistic bodily exertions
suggestive of a form of neo-pagan behaviour.
Could it be that athletics, despite its unquestioned contemporary
significance and popularity, is less truly modern than pseudo-modern, standing
to cycling as sunbathing to solariums or hand percussion to drums?
33. However that may be, we have before us an
atomic-particle spectrum stretching from pre-worldly martial noumenon to worldly martial phenomenon, and from worldly
sporting phenomenon to post-worldly sporting noumenon,
a spectrum which can be seen to parallel the sex/dance one outlined above. Such relativity is germane to the world, and
not only implies two opposite kinds of noumenon or
will, viz. alpha-stemming noumenon on the sex/war
levels and omega-aspiring noumenon on the sport/dance
levels, but two opposite manifestations of each kind of will, viz. the will to
survive on the war and sport spectrum, and the will to live on the sex and
dance spectrum. For is it not the case
that war and sport call forth the will to survive, to vanquish opposition,
whereas sex and dance entail the will to live, to enjoy and fulfil
oneself? No mean distinction, and the
co-existence of each type of will at both ends of the worldly spectra is, it
seems to me, an indisputable fact, even if one or other of the opposite types
of will tends to preponderate in any given individual, making for a sports bias
or a dance bias, as the case may be.
Certainly such opposite types of will correspond to the particle/wavicle dichotomy, which is a characteristic of atomic
structures ... whether pre-worldly and of a proton bias, worldly and atomically
balanced between protons and electrons, or post-worldly and of an electron
bias, and this dichotomy is to be found not only within the bodily, or worldly,
context but is originally and even more characteristic of the head, or
divine/diabolic, context, since germane to the basic distinction between the
Devil and God, whether on the traditional proton levels of the alpha duality
between old brain and subconscious, which finds its cosmic analogue in the
distinction between the central star of the Galaxy and the sun, or on the
contemporary electron levels of the omega duality between new brain and superconscious, the latter of which should lead to the transcendental
culmination of evolution. Consequently
we may characterize the will to survive as a particle-biased, and therefore
diabolical, atomic disposition, in contrast to the will to live, which pertains
to the wavicle side of the atom and is accordingly of
a divine bias. War and sport are alike
of a diabolic bias, since expressions of the will to survive, whereas sex and
dance are of a divine bias, since expressions of the will to live. In the cases of war and sex, we have an
alpha-stemming proton-biased dichotomy within the worldly context. In the cases of sport and dance, by contrast,
an omega-oriented electron-biased worldly dichotomy. Self-sacrifice and self-indulgence on the one
hand, self-assertion and self-transcendence on the other hand. Two diametrically opposite kinds of will
manifesting on two diametrically opposite planes.
34. But if the bodily, or mass, level of will is
subject to such divisions, then so too, as already intimated, is the head, or
elite, level, with similar divisions on both alpha/omega and wavicle/particle terms.
Taking the alpha-stemming old brain and subconscious first, we can
attribute a divine bias to self-indulgent dreaming and/or fantasizing, while
reserving a diabolic bias for self-sacrificing consciously-determined actions,
of which the most purely diabolical would be suicide, since that takes effect
with regard to the self and is accordingly not diluted, as it were, through
worldly relativity in the form of war.
Conversely, we should attribute a divine bias to self-transcending
tripping and/or the viewing of films, videos, etc., and a diabolic bias to
self-assertive consciously-determined actions, of which cultural commitments in
the form of playing a musical instrument or typing a book or painting a picture
will be more representative than anything connected with the body and directly
involving other people, like competitive sport.
These latter options will of course pertain to the superconscious
and new brain in an omega-oriented context, and therefore be morally
antithetical to the former, or self-transcending, options.
35. However, now that I have written all this, I
can imagine a number of objections, not least of all concerning the simple
division of will - far more though it is than anything Schopenhauer or
Nietzsche ever contemplated - into 'will to survive' on the one hand and 'will
to live' on the other. How, for
instance, can one categorize suicide or a particularly reckless and virtually
self-destructive act of war under the rubric 'will to survive'? Is it not rather the case that such acts
follow from a will to die and that we must accordingly allow for such a will in
our overall calculations, mindful of Freud's distinction between Thanatos and Eros, or death-urge and life-urge, which are
clearly antithetical postulates either side of an alpha/omega division, much as
Freud equated them with the id and the superego respectively, which is to say
with the old brain and the superconscious. How, then, can we settle for an
alpha-stemming will to survive on the one hand and a no-less alpha-stemming
will to live on the other, reserving the notion of self-sacrifice for the
former and self-indulgence for the latter?
Can the will to survive co-exist with the will to live? Doubtless it can on the omega-oriented level,
where we have distinguished between sport and dance. But one must reserve some doubts about such a
co-existence on the alpha-stemming level of war and sex. In fact, I incline to think that the will to
die and the will to love would be more applicable to that distinction, thereby
adding not one but two extra types of alpha-stemming will to our overall
picture.... Or, alternatively, it could transpire that the will to survive is a
kind of half-way house between the will to die and the will to live, and that
we should accordingly be thinking in tripartite terms, with, say, the will to
die corresponding to a proton-biased particle atomicity, the will to survive
corresponding to a proton-biased particle/wavicle
atomicity, and the will to live corresponding to a proton-biased wavicle atomicity.
36. Obviously what applies with regard to the
alpha-stemming noumenal levels would also have to
apply to the omega-oriented noumenal levels, with
similar tripartite distinctions. But
then death, in the electron-biased particle atomicity, would be rather
different from and certainly less lethal than its alpha-stemming
counterpart. More like wishing to lose
in a sports competition or purposely throwing away one's chances of
survival. A sort of self-willed defeat
that, by no stretch of the imagination, could be equated with the will to
survive! However, we can be under no
doubt that limiting will to either survival or living, as both Nietzsche and
Schopenhauer did (though with greater reference to survival), is totally
inadequate for explaining the complexity of will, as is the no-less one-sided
limitation of the noumenon to an alpha-stemming
status, even when such a primal noumenon is
occasionally invested with attributes more correctly belonging to what I have called
the supernoumenon, which is, in reality, radically
antithetical to it. Indeed, I doubt that
the use of the singular is really correct; for whilst I will not argue with the
professed indivisibility of will, as employed in the aforementioned sense, I most
certainly believe that distinctions between divine, diabolic, and worldly
levels of will, whether at the alpha or omega poles of their respective
spectra, justify one in speaking of noumena, and that
use of the plural more accords with an objectively valid recognition of such
distinctions than would the singular, it being remembered that wavicle, particle, and atomic distinctions are the ones
primarily at stake, as between the central star of the Galaxy, the sun, and the
earth. And yet, irrespective of whether
or not one prefers to be pedantically exacting, the indivisibility of will on
the alpha levels is neither the same nor as pure as its indivisibility on the
omega levels. For the indivisibility of
the former is merely apparent, as pertaining to proton-proton reactions,
whereas the indivisibility of the latter is essential, as pertaining to
electron-electron attractions, and therefore is much more truly indivisible, as
befitting the Holy Ghost. Proton-proton
reactions may be indivisible to the extent that we are concerned with a
subatomic absolute, but such an indivisibility is really very frictional in
character, calling to mind the difference between an orgy and a disco dance,
self-indulgence and self-transcendence or, alternatively, between tribal war
and international sport, self-sacrifice and self-assertion. There can be no question that indivisibility
is not being truly manifested on the alpha plane but is merely apparent, as
between conflicting protons.
37. Which leads us to another contention about
the alpha noumenon, namely that it is
perceptible. By which I mean that the
basic pre-phenomenal 'thing-in-itself' can be seen or known by dint of its
frictional constitution, which is nothing less than the proton-proton reactions
of solar fission and all fiery manifestations thereof. Yes, the stars are the alpha noumenon or, as I should say ... to distinguish between the
central star of any galaxy and sun-like revolving stars, noumena,
which not only precede worldly phenomena, including the earth, but are a
precondition of the phenomenal, since atomic cohesion derives from solar
cooling and the consequent formation of core and crust which, certainly in the
case of the core, are more noumenal than properly
phenomenal. It is only with the organic
that the phenomenal is truly born, whether in nature, animals, or man, and this
is because only in the organic do we get a proton-electron fusion to a degree
which transcends the noumenal absolutism of the
stars. In other words, nature is more
than solidified protons; it is fully atomic and no more can be described as the
objectification of the will, or alpha noumenon, than
the sun can be described as organic.
There is more to it than proton-proton reactions! And yet, the fact that stars can be seen, i.e.
are perceptible, does not preclude them from being noumenal. For the alpha noumenon
is, like flame, apparent, and does not become phenomenal on that account. All I have to do to perceive the noumenon of or in a piece of wood is to set fire to it,
with spectacular if diabolical results!
And what applies to a piece of wood applies no less to a chair or a
table or a cupboard made from wood, the atomic constitution of which is well
stocked with protons!
38. Why, then, did philosophers like Hume and
Kant stress the unknowability of the thing-in-itself,
or noumenon?
Surely because they made the mistake of investing it with attributes
better reserved for the omega noumenon, the supernoumenal thing-in-itself which is the end-product of
evolution rather than its precondition, while simultaneously regarding stars,
and by implication flame, as phenomenal because of their apparent nature, so
that there was nothing to fall back on except some hypothetical rudimentary noumenon behind all appearances. Alas, the truth is more complex than
that! The noumenon
they were alluding to most certainly can be known as well as experienced, if
one is unfortunate enough to get burnt alive and so drop, as it were, from the
phenomenal plane of the organic to the noumenal plane
of proton-proton reactions. We can both
feel and see (and therefore have knowledge of) the alpha noumenon
... to the extent that we are brought into contact with flame. What we cannot see (though feeling and
knowledge cannot be ruled out, the latter dependent on the former) is the omega
noumenon, which is a spiritual antithesis to the
alpha noumenon, essential rather than apparent,
blissful as opposed to agonized, centripetal as opposed to centrifugal, and
only embryonic in human life to the extent that we cultivate pure spirit in the
superconscious mind and accordingly aspire towards
the supernoumenal culmination of evolution. Such a culmination will of course be Heaven,
a condition of perfect essence, in complete contrast to the perfect appearance
of the stars. With the phenomenal,
whether in nature, animals, or man, both appearance and essence are imperfect
... by dint of the fact that the one has fallen away from proton absolutism
into an atomic relativity, whereas the other, trapped in such relativity, is
somewhat short of the electron absolutism which is commensurate with the Holy
Ghost. Now obviously, no-one who values
Christian teachings and the notion of evolutionary progress is going to want
perfect appearances or wish to resurrect a proton-biased idealism, as if the
'fall' from proton purism into worldly atomicity was a cause for regret! Only a madman or a neo-pagan barbarian could
possibly want a world governed by fire and equivalent to Hell! But neither is turning away from the alpha noumenon sufficient for salvation, since it merely entails
a worldly stasis or death-in-life which falls woefully short of a heavenly
aspiration. Only through the cultivation
of pure spirit can man begin to change the imperfect essence of his
intellectually-polluted spirit into the perfect essence of transcendent spirit,
and so aspire towards and eventually achieve salvation from the world, not just
the world of imperfect appearances but, no less importantly, the world of
imperfect essences, which is thought.
Doubtless there are degrees and stages of evolving towards this supernoumenal perfection, both within and beyond the human
context, as well as different means of cultivating pure spirit, both visionary
and post-visionary. But whether the
means employed is the relatively humble ones of television or the more advanced
ones of artificially-induced internal visionary experience or, indeed,
something in between ... like video, the outcome can only be a diminution of
impure essence and an expansion of pure essence towards an omega culmination in
undifferentiated spirit, which is ultimate divinity. Oh, how different that omega noumenon beyond the phenomenal would be from the alpha noumenon behind it!
All the difference, in a word, between Heaven and Hell, electron-electron
attractions on the one hand and proton-proton reactions on the other,
irrespective of the quality of these reactions, i.e. wavicle,
particle, or a planetary compromise between the two.
39. Consequently we have an evolutionary
progression, as it were, which stretches from the alpha noumenon
in perfect appearance to the phenomenal world and from the artificial superphenomenal world (a precondition of anything higher)
to the supernoumenal culmination of evolution in
perfect essence. From the central star
of the Galaxy (as of any galaxy) to the natural world via suns and planets, and
from the synthetic world of progressive humanity to the ultimate globe of pure
spirit via intermediate transcendences.
In relation to man, such transcendences are still a long way into the
future. Yet we who relate not to the
phenomenal world but to supernoumenal aspirations
raised on the back, so to speak, of superphenomenalism
... are in the chain of progress that leads in their direction. We can have no truck with any alpha-stemming
chain, which finds its culmination in the world. Bourgeois criteria are beneath us!
40. As regards Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, it
could be argued that, in seeing through and spurning the alpha noumenon, Schopenhauer was a wise fool, or a man who was
wise enough not to advocate its furtherance in life but too foolish to perceive
the possibility of an alternative noumenon which
pertained not to Hell but to an omega Heaven lying in the distant future. In this respect he was certainly superior to
Nietzsche, who foolishly affirmed the very will that Schopenhauer spurned and
so prepared the way for the worst excesses of neo-paganism which were to follow
in the twentieth century. To coin a
Jungian distinction, Nietzsche was less modern than pseudo-modern, and
consequently he fell woefully short of genuine transcendentalism. We cannot entirely blame such philosophers
for their failings, since they were as much victims of their times as of their
class and, in all probability, their race.
For it does seem that, no less than class and time, race has to be taken
into account when we assess a philosopher's work, the better to understand it,
and on the basis of the God-Devil-world divisions which find approximate
European parallels in the Celtic-Slavic-Nordic distinctions touched upon
elsewhere in my work. Clearly,
Schopenhauer and Nietzsche were not just philosophers; they were Germanic
philosophers, and this fact should not be ignored when we assess their work in
relation to the truth. Neither can we
appraise it in isolation from the civilization to which they belonged, nor in
isolation from the age in which it was written and the nature of their social
class. There is much difference between
alpha-stemming philosophy and the omega-oriented philosophy or, rather, superphilosophy to which I relate - all the difference, in
effect, between a pony and a scooter.
41. Dresses pertain to the alpha noumenal in and of the world, which is to say, they reflect
proton absolutism on the bodily level, whether with a wavicle
bias, a particle bias, or something in between ... according to the texture and
quality of the fabric employed. Beyond
the noumenal dress we find, in the context of worldly
phenomena, skirts on the one hand and trousers on the other, each of which
reflects an atomic heterosexual compromise between protons and electrons,
female and male. Suits, whether feminine
or masculine, are quintessentially phenomenal ... in the sense of a worldly
atomicity, and beyond trouser suits we find jeans of one description or another
which, whether worn independently of short matching jackets or in conjunction
with them, suggest a superphenomenalism, a
socialistic post-worldly norm pending supernoumenal
leathers and/or PVCs, particularly in terms of
one-piece zipper suits. Such zipper
suits will become the supernoumenal norm of the
future, an antithetical equivalent to dresses.
Thus from an apparent, centrifugal noumenal
absolutism to an essential, centripetal noumenal
absolutism via worldly phenomenalism and superphenomenalism.
A sartorial progression from alpha to omega within a bodily
context. For it should not be forgotten
that what covers the body is one thing, what also covers the head quite another,
so that shroud-like dresses or hooded gowns stand to dresses as God or the
Devil to the world, which is to say symbolic of a divine and/or diabolic alpha-noumenal absolutism, depending on the texture and quality
of the hooded garment. Smooth or silky
and we have a proton-wavicle equivalent; coarse or
thick and we have a proton-particle equivalent.
Alpha God and Devil as distinct from and superior to the alpha-biased
world ... of hoodless dresses.
Conversely, an omega-oriented distinction should also be drawn between
hoodless one-piece zipper suits and hooded one-piece zipper suits, with a superdivine and/or superdiabolic
implication beyond - and above - superworldly
equivalents, depending whether the one-piece zipper suits in question be made
from leather or PVC, the former thicker and coarser than the latter, and
therefore standing to them in an inferior moral relationship - as, for example,
electron particles to wavicles. Such hooded one-piece zipper suits should not
be confounded, however, with hooded anoraks or waist-length zipper jackets,
which pertain rather more to the superphenomenal than
to the supernoumenal, apart, in any case, from being
primarily intended for protection against rain.
Yet the state of the weather would no more condition the wearing of
one-piece hooded zipper suits in the future ... than it did the wearing of
hooded dresses or gowns in the past.
Moral considerations alone would obtain, and doubtless some people(s)
would have a moral advantage over others in this regard - certainly in the
short term!
42. Strictly speaking, one should distinguish
between alpha devolution and omega evolution, since there is no overall
evolution from alpha to omega but, rather, a gradual devolution from the Alpha
Absolute accompanied, at an approximately midway point in phenomenal time, by a
gradual evolution towards the Omega Absolute.
Evolution therefore begins where devolution ends: within the phenomenal
context of worldly dualism. Dresses to
skirts signify proton devolution; trousers to one-piece zipper suits signify
electron evolution. However, skirts and
trousers are alike atomic, so that we are dealing not so much with the noumenal as with the phenomenal, which is both more and
less than the noumenal extremes; more than the alpha
and less than the omega. A strictly noumenal devolution from the Alpha Absolute in regard to
clothing would be evinced by the distinction between long dresses and minidresses.
Conversely, a strictly noumenal evolution
towards the Omega Absolute would be evinced by the distinction between, say,
PVC pants and PVC one-piece zipper suits.
In the one case, contraction; in the other case, expansion. Skirts and trousers form a phenomenal balance
in between these two extremes, though skirts can also be regarded as devolving
from full-length phenomenalism in a radically
proton-biased atomicity to mini-length phenomenalism
in a moderately proton-biased atomicity.
Conversely, trousers can be regarded as having evolved, within the
phenomenal context of worldly dualism, from a knee-length moderately
electron-biased atomicity (breeches) to an ankle-length radically
electron-biased atomicity. Jeans,
whether worn separately or with a matching jean-jacket, are rather less an
electron-biased atomicity than an electron atomicity, superworldly
rather than worldly, and a precondition of free-electron supernoumenal
pants, whether in the electron-particle guise of leathers or in the electron-wavicle guise of PVCs - superdiabolic and superdivine
distinctions beyond the superworld.
43. Shorts are socialistic and/or communistic,
depending on the type. Rather as I have
elsewhere distinguished between socialist chips and communist chips, with
Democratic Socialist, pure Socialist, Communist, and Transcendental Socialist
distinctions, I shall here divide shorts into similar categories, contending that
cotton shorts with turn-ups are Democratic Socialist; cotton shorts without
turn-ups pure Socialist; nylon shorts Communist; and nylon shorts with sown-in
underpants Transcendental Socialist.
Furthermore, I should like to distinguish between socialistic Nazi
shorts and fascistic Nazi shorts on the basis of a denim/cord dichotomy,
reserving a possible liberal status for knee-length shorts, such as are often
worn by elderly or academic-looking males.
44. My reason for regarding shorts as broadly
socialist is that they suggest a particle bias ... by dint of being so short
and compact, and are therefore materialistic rather than idealistic. Being masculine, or of a phallic connotation,
they are obviously on the electron side of the atom and may accordingly be
regarded in an electron-particle light, as suitable for sports. As a rule, Democratic Socialist shorts will
be longer than pure Socialist shorts, while Communist shorts will be shorter
than Transcendental Socialist shorts.
Made from cotton, Socialist shorts, whether democratic or pure, may be
described as superworldly, since connected with the
natural (cotton) and therefore retaining a superphenomenal
status - as, incidentally, do Nazi shorts.
By contrast, Communist and Transcendental Socialist shorts, being
fashioned from nylon, which is synthetic, appertain to the artificial, and are
accordingly of a supernoumenal status.
45. Objects presuppose subjects. There can be no objects unless there is first
a subject who perceives them. My table
does not exist for me until I look at it.
And yet, that is not to say that until I look at my table it does not
exist. On the contrary, my table exists
whether or not I or anyone else is there to look at it, though not as an object
but as a phenomenal thing-in-itself, which is to say, as a nondescript 'thing',
neither more nor less. Obviously one can
argue that if I am not present to perceive my table the table still exists, and
certainly it would for me by dint of my recollection of what a table is and
that I happen to possess one in my room, etc.
But if I were to die tomorrow, then that would not apply. For in death I would have no recollection of
tables, whether in general or in particular, as applying to myself. Now if no-one else connected with me in life
knew that I had such-and-such a table in such-and-such a room, then that table
would not exist as a table but solely as a phenomenal thing-in-itself. For there would be no consciousness of it as
table. I and others like me (fellow
human beings) create the category 'table', just as I create objects by being
their subject, the mind that perceives them.
Take away all perceiving subjects and not only would all perceived
objects cease to exist, but their function and status along with them. Only phenomenal things-in-themselves would
remain, and they would differ from noumenal
things-in-themselves as matter differs from flame. Absence of mind, whether literally or through
madness, is the precondition for objects being reduced from intelligible
phenomena to unintelligible phenomena, which is thing-in-itself. Berkeley's argument no longer passes muster,
since we no longer believe in an all-seeing and all-knowing God. (Probably the nearest cosmic equivalent to
such a theological postulate is the sun, and yet the sun does not literally
see, since it has no eyes. Neither is it
strictly divine!)
46. Both Hume's and Kant's admission of the unknowability of the thing-in-itself has to do with the noumenal thing-in-itself rather than with the phenomenal
one which I have just been discussing, and is true up to a point, that is to
say, when applied to objects considered as phenomena. As I have already argued, however, it ceases
to apply to a flammable object, like a wooden chair or table, once that object
has been set alight and is burning extensively.
For the resulting flame would be as close to the noumenal
thing-in-itself as one could get ... short of setting oneself alight and
thereby subjectively experiencing noumenal
thing-in-itself in the guise of fire, which is nothing less than the creation
of proton-proton reactions out of atomic cohesion. But there is another reason why these and
other such philosophers, including Schopenhauer, denied the possibility of
direct knowledge of the noumenal thing-in-itself,
which is that the society and age in which they lived was too phenomenal to
permit of identification with the noumenal. In short, we have the seeds of modern atheism
in the eighteenth century, which gave birth, after all, to the Age of
Enlightenment, and in an age when God, in the primitive sense of Creator, was
being denied, it is virtually inconceivable that philosophy could have
acknowledged the knowability of the noumenal thing-in-itself.
We are so used to regarding the Cosmos from a phenomenal point-of-view -
as stars, suns, planets, etc., - that the concept of a noumenal
Cosmos composed of gods and devils is totally alien to us and explains, in some
degree, why both Hume and Kant were indisposed to crediting man with an ability
to directly know and experience the noumenal
thing-in-itself, which is nothing less, after all, than stellar and/or solar
flame. The ancients of course had a
different view, living at a time when stars were gods and the noumenal view of the Cosmos, as of life in general,
accordingly prevailed. But Hume and Kant
lived in a more evolved, albeit worldly society and, being Protestant, neither
of them could be expected to give the alpha noumenal
its papal due. Once again, one is made
conscious of the degree to which a particular philosopher's thinking is
conditioned not only by the age and society in which he lives, but by his race
and class. If the truth is graspable, as
I happen to believe, then it is more likely to be grasped by someone of
idealistic racial disposition living in an age conducive to its realization ...
than by a Germanic philosopher living in the thick of worldly phenomenalism and regarding everything, including the
Cosmos, in a phenomenal light!
47. However, one has to admit that if, from a
relatively evolved viewpoint, the alpha noumenal is
not directly accessible to human knowledge or is not regarded as being directly
knowable, then the resulting materialism and phenomenalism
will nonetheless be tinged with a quasi-noumenal
significance, and a kind of false mysticism of the phenomenal, as upheld by the
aforementioned philosophers (though criticized by Schopenhauer), will prevail
in which, for example, a discrepancy between object and subject, on the basis of
the former's being inherently different from how the
latter sees it, will be postulated at the expense of an exact correlation
between the two. Such worldly mysticism
is rather more Protestant than Catholic, and its subsequent rejection by more
evolved, or superphenomenal, philosophers is a
precondition of advancement towards an admission of the possibility of direct
experience of a thing-in-itself which is not so much noumenal
as supernoumenal, and consequently of an omega
orientation. Such an admission is in
fact made by me, and made, I should add, less in defiance of anti-philosophy
than from the truly revolutionary standpoint of theosophy, which stands to
philosophy as omega to alpha, completely beyond all phenomenal middle-grounds. Direct knowledge of the omega
thing-in-itself, which is pure spirit, comes through transcendental meditation,
and that is the path to God ... the Holy Spirit. Here we are beyond not only Hume and Kant,
but the entire civilization to which they belonged, with its worldly phenomenalism. We
are beyond both philosophy and anti-philosophy alike, the Father and the Son,
love of the external and love of the phenomenal self. We love only the eternal, which is internal
and therefore psychic.
48. One should distinguish not only between
philosophy and theosophy on an alpha/omega basis, as regarding the centrifugal
and the centripetal, but also between anti-philosophy and proto-theosophy,
which pertain to the phenomenal middle-ground in between noumenal
and supernoumenal extremes. Indeed, the strictly phenomenal mode of
idealistic writing is both anti-philosophical and proto-theosophical at once,
and therefore uniquely Christian in a worldly, or Protestant, sense. Yet because of this it is neither properly
philosophical nor theosophical, but a cross between the two. Only proto-theosophical writings prepare the
ground for theosophy as such.
49. Similarly, if the above distinctions apply
to a divine spectrum stretching from alpha to omega, as from the subconscious
to the superconscious, then we need not doubt that
their diabolic counterparts, which may be regarded as applicable to a spectrum
stretching from the old brain to the new brain, will be theology on the one
hand and psychology on the other, so that knowledge of God ... the Father in
the one case and of the psyche in the other ... constitute the extreme poles of
a spectrum rather more naturalistic than idealistic in character. For the brain stands in a diabolic relation
to the mind, and in using the former to study the latter one is looking-in at
it from outside, not so much as subject to object as ... object to subject,
particle naturalism to wavicle idealism, whether at
the alpha or omega pole of the brain, with reference to the subconscious or to
the superconscious, to the Father or to the Holy
Ghost. Hence, on the one hand,
philosophy and theology, with the former standing in a superior relation to the
latter, and, on the other hand, theosophy and psychology, the former of which
likewise stands in a superior relation to the latter - love to knowledge,
direct experience to analytical observation.
50. But if both philosophy and theosophy treat
of how best to live life from a divine standpoint, whether of the Father in the
one case or of the Holy Ghost in the other, and, by contrast, both theology and
psychology treat of understanding either the Father or the psychical Holy Ghost
from a diabolic, because external, standpoint, then sexology and sociology are
the twin disciplines which treat of man from a physical and, hence, worldly
standpoint, having reference to man as a reproductive animal on the one hand
and as a social animal on the other, with alpha and omega implications within a
mass, or bodily, context. Of course,
such a standpoint is not rooted in the body but in the brain, and so we should
distinguish between brain activity which looks down to the body, as in the
cases of sexology and sociology, and brain activity which looks up to the mind,
as in the cases of theology and psychology, reserving a superior status for the
latter than the former, as though a higher part of the brain, or
old-brain/new-brain symbiosis, was being exercised in each case. Doubtless a theologian is a morally superior
kind of man to a sexologist, and what applies on the alpha-stemming level of
the old brain ... must also apply on the omega-oriented level of the new one,
so that we may regard a psychologist as a morally superior kind of man to a
sociologist - diabolic rather than worldly, looking up towards the mind as
opposed to down towards the body.
51. However, such divine, diabolic, and worldly
antitheses as I have named, viz. philosophy and theosophy, theology and
psychology, sexology and sociology, form only the extremes of a picture which,
if it is to lay claim to a more comprehensive perspective, must also include a
middle-ground position, so to speak, in between each of the aforementioned
antitheses. For such a middle-ground
position does of course exist, and more so over the past few centuries than
have either of the respective extremes, if we recall the inevitability of a
phenomenal divisibility coming in-between alpha-stemming noumenal
indivisibility on the one hand and omega-aspiring supernoumenal
indivisibility on the other hand.
Consequently such a phenomenal middle-ground is relative to and
symptomatic of a kind of compromise, or cross, between what precedes it in the
history of the particular spectrum to which it pertains and the discipline that
is destined, sooner or later, to succeed it, about which, however, it will be
largely if not entirely ignorant. In the
case of the philosophy/theosophy spectrum, which is that which most closely
approximates to the Divine, we are alluding to anthroposophy, or a love of man
considered in its humanistic context, and such a discipline corresponds to a
Christian position in between Creator-stemming philosophy and theosophical
aspirations towards the Holy Ghost, with particular reference to idealistic
Protestantism. Not how best to conduct
one's life in the light of philosophical wisdom, nor how best to conduct
oneself in the light of theosophical idealism, but how best to love one's
fellow man in the light of anthroposophical
humanism. 'The happiness of the greatest
number' follows from an anthroposophical premise ...
that the chief concern of life is neither personally practical nor impersonally
theoretical, active nor passive, but both active and passive, practical and theoretical, in
relation to the interests of humanity generally. What one might call worldly idealism or, as I
have elsewhere termed it, a wavicle atomicity, which
corresponds to phenomenal religion. In
the case of the theology/psychology spectrum, however, we are obliged to posit
an epistemological middle-ground in between knowledge of God (the Father) and knowledge
of the psyche, which takes the form of knowledge of knowledge, or knowledge of
how we know what we know - the origin, nature, and limitations of knowledge as
such, a discipline that focuses attention on man's knowledge-forming faculty
rather than on either theological anterior knowledge in relation to the Father
or psychological posterior knowledge in relation to the psyche and such bearing
as it may have on the future development of transcendent spirit. If epistemology fits in between these two
extremes, then so, it seems to me, does ontology, or the science of being, and
philology, or the science of the structure and development of language, with
the latter preceding epistemology and the former succeeding it, pretty much as
grand- and petty-bourgeois disciplines flanking a specifically bourgeois
discipline on the diabolic spectrum.
Finally, it will be necessary to posit an anthropological middle-ground
in between sexology and sociology on the third, or worldly, spectrum, so that
the study of man as such is seen as taking a phenomenal position in between the
study of his sexual habits on the one hand and (the study) of his social habits
on the other, that is to say as a humanistic concern coming in-between
reproductive and productive extremes, sex and society.
52. Thus our three spectra should read as
follows:-
1. philosophy
anthroposophy theosophy
2. theology epistemology psychology
3. sexology anthropology sociology
with Father - Son - and
Holy Ghost implications stretching through divine, diabolic, and worldly
distinctions. Clearly the three major
contemporary disciplines are theosophy, psychology, and sociology, since they
alone pertain to the omega poles of their respective spectra ... and things can
only become more omega orientated as time goes by, doubtless even to the point
where, firstly, sociology and, then, psychology will be left behind as both
worldly and diabolic biases are eclipsed by the divine bias of a truly supernoumenal indivisibility in Transcendentalism. At present, however, open-society criteria
tend to prevail in the world and, consequently, a seemingly timeless
juxtaposition of one discipline with another - philosophy with theosophy,
theology with psychology, sexology with sociology - is not uncommon. Yet, strictly speaking, each of the extremes
is mutually exclusive. Philosophy
excludes the possibility of theosophy and vice versa. One is a philosopher or a theosophist, a
theologian or a psychologist, a sexologist or a sociologist, not both at
once! Although appearances of being
'three in one', like Christ, will accrue to the anthroposophical,
epistemological, and anthropological middle-grounds, as befitting a worldly
phenomenal compromise in-between alpha and omega, proton and electron
antitheses. Where philosophy ends,
anthroposophy begins. And where
anthroposophy ends, there begins theosophy.
The same of course applies to the disciplines on each of the other
spectra.
53. Correct doing in relation to God ... the
Father; correct doing/being in relation to God ... the Son (of Man); correct
being in relation to God ... the Holy Ghost: philosophy - anthroposophy -
theosophy. The more doing the less being
and, conversely, the more being the less doing.
A theosophist is not only atheistic with regard to the Father; he is
indifferent to philosophy. A stoical or
hedonistic theosophist would be as paradoxical or, rather, self-contradictory
as a meditating philosopher.
54. Many of the things that pass for philosophy are
less philosophical than ontological or epistemological or philological or
psychological or even theological.
Genuine philosophy, by which is meant classical philosophy, is concerned
rather more with the practical conduct of life than with theories about life as
such. In that respect, Jean-Jacques
Rousseau and John Cowper Powys are somewhat closer to the classical ideal than,
say, Kant or Schopenhauer. So, in The Conquest of
Happiness, is Bertrand Russell.
Worldly, or phenomenal, philosophy, on the other hand, is far more
conceptual than perceptual.
55. In music, the distinction between alpha-noumenal, phenomenal, superphenomenal,
and supernoumenal can be recognized on the basis of a
percussive absolutism in the first case, an orchestral relativity in the
second, an electronic relativity in the third, and synthesizer absolutism in
the fourth. Thus in the case of the
alpha noumenal, we are dealing with a reactive
indivisibility between a variety of, for the most part, hand-played percussion
instruments, the musical equivalent to proton-proton reactions. With the ensuing phenomenal stage of music,
however, percussion is reduced and transmuted, played rather more with
drumsticks or some similar artificial means, and it takes on a subordinate role
to stringed and wind instruments, as in the classical orchestra, so that an
atomic integrity between protons and electrons is the musical result, with
correspondingly relativistic implications.
Similar implications accrue to the compromise between percussive and
electric instruments - as, for example, guitars, keyboards, etc. - which
characterizes superphenomenal music, whether in terms
of pop, rock, modern jazz, or any combination of the three; though, as a rule,
percussion is rather more persistent on this level of music than on the
classical, if slightly less forceful, diversified, and (except in rare
instances) obtrusive, serving merely to accompany the lead instruments rather
than to rival or dominate them. Yet if
some kind of electron-biased atomicity may be elicited in connection with superphenomenal music, then the ensuing supernoumenal
music would suggest an attractive indivisibility symptomatic of free-electron
criteria ... in which several synthesizers co-operate in the production of a
totally synthesizer-derived sound, as in the cases of Jean-Michel Jarre and Tangerine Dream traditionally. Such synthesizer indivisibility is the
ultimate musical format and, if progress is to come, it can only be in terms of
how the synthesizers are played, that is to say with regard to increasing the
pitch-biased, and hence idealistic, element at the expense of rhythm, so that
even synthesizer-derived percussion 'withers away' in the course of supernoumenal time, as music approximates ever more closely
to the pure electron indivisibility of the Omega Absolute. Such truly divine music will be as far
removed from the percussive inception of music in alpha-noumenal
rhythms ... as one-piece zipper suits of a PVC construction from ankle-length
cotton dresses. Only with the transcendence
of rhythm will music become entirely free.
56. It is not by mere chance that coital sex is
rhythmic, that man makes love to the opposite sex on a rhythmical basis. Such coital rhythms amount to a deference, on
the part of men, to the proton-biased alpha-noumenal
nature of the vagina. Like music, sex
can only become free, from a male standpoint, once it is released from coital
enslavement and elevated above the rhythmic to a masturbatory status in
pornographic sublimation, albeit with the long-term aim of transcending the
masturbatory element altogether - an aim comparable to synthesizer music or,
rather, supermusic that transcends percussive
rhythms. Hence supersex,
which is supernoumenal in character, permits of
sexual salvation to the extent that the rhythmic element is left behind, or
transcended, as 'sex' becomes increasingly mind-biased. Such supernoumenal
sex is to phenomenal sex what the Centre is/will be to the State - the only
terms on which the State can 'wither' ... as the Centre expands. When, however, the State becomes an
end-in-itself, as in communist countries, there can be no withering of sex in
regard to its rhythmic roots but, rather, a continuation of sex on artificial
terms, with particular regard to the use of plastic inflatables
and/or vibrators, depending on the individual's gender. In other words, sex is superphenomenal
in the context of the
57. But the Socialist State will not properly understand
the nature and status of pornography (although I use the term with regard to
erotic as opposed to sadistic material, and especially within a lawfully
teenage context), in consequence of which it is improbable that
pornographically-dependent sex will flourish wherever Socialism prevails. Only in the Centre, and thus with reference
to Social Transcendentalism, can proper justice be done to this ultimate mode
of sexuality. However, if the Socialist
State is incapable of coming to terms with supernoumenal
criteria, whether with regard to sex, music, art, or anything else (and
primarily because its naturalistic bias will dispose it to superphenomenal
criteria), then there should be no doubt as to the place of inflatable and
vibrator sexuality in such a State; for this alone is truly commensurate with
the superphenomenal.
On the other hand, homosexuality will be frowned upon and its
practitioners penalized within the context in question, since it is symptomatic
of sexual decadence within a phenomenal, or democratic, context, having strong
socialist implications from a Western, and hence Germanic, point-of-view, which
makes it not so much superphenomenal as
anti-phenomenal and therefore somewhat more antinatural
than supernatural. Such antinatural sexuality - and all modes and degrees of
anally-biased intercourse come under this category - could not be countenanced
within a superphenomenal society, such as Communism
strives to realize. For the antinatural is but a degeneration of the natural and
accordingly fails to meet the artificial criteria required in and by a superphenomenal context.
Plastic inflatables are no less beyond
homosexuality than straight heterosexuality is before it. Homosexuality is the end of phenomenal
civilization, not the beginning of superphenomenal
civilization! And even homosexual
pornography, or pornographic material involving male models, would be
irrelevant in a superphenomenal society, since a form
of sexual Nazism in which materialism is idealized through the medium of photography. An idealistic decadence is no less
unacceptable to a new civilization than decadence in all of its materialistic
baseness. Nazism and Socialism are alike
beneath the superphenomenal pale.... Of course, what
applies to the superphenomenal applies even more to
the supernoumenal, where even inflatable and vibrator
sexuality would be to a certain extent taboo, the emphasis being on mature
juvenile erotica.
58. Probable antithetical equivalents to be
found between (a) erotic paintings and/or drawings on the one hand and
pornographic erotica on the other, as regarding alpha and omega idealistic
extremes, e.g. ancient Indian or Persian drawings/paintings in relation to
latter-day photographic pornography; (b) erotic sculptures or carvings on the
one hand and 'sex dolls' or vibrators on the other, as regarding alpha and
omega naturalistic extremes, e.g. ancient Greek nude statues in relation to
plastic inflatables; (c) cunnilingus in relation to
fellatio, as regarding worldly idealistic extremes; (d) lesbianism in relation
to homosexuality, as regarding worldly materialistic extremes. Thus, treating heterosexuality as a worldly
and therefore realistic mode of sexuality, one could speak of cunnilingus and
fellatio as flanking it above ... in the realms of pre- and post-worldly sexual
idealism, but of lesbianism and homosexuality as flanking it beneath ... in the
realms of pre- and post-worldly sexual materialism. Flanking these extremes, however, will be the
alpha and omega idealistic extremes cited in (a) above, and the alpha and omega
naturalistic extremes cited in (b) above, so that we may speak of erotic
drawings, for instance, as preceding cunnilingus and of pornographic erotica as
succeeding fellatio on the one hand, but of erotic sculptures as preceding
lesbianism and of plastic inflatables as succeeding
homosexuality on the other hand. An
atomic breakdown of each mode of sexuality would read as follows: alpha
idealistic extreme: proton wavicles; omega idealistic
extreme: electron wavicles; alpha naturalistic
extreme: proton particles; omega naturalistic extreme: electron particles;
pre-worldly idealistic extreme: proton-biased atomic wavicles;
post-worldly idealistic extreme: electron-biased atomic wavicles;
pre-worldly materialistic extreme: proton-biased atomic particles; post-worldly
materialistic extreme: electron-biased atomic particles; worldly realistic
middle-ground: atomic balance.
59. Treating cunnilingus and fellatio as
antithetical on this pre- and post-worldly basis seems to me the most
objectively credible interpretation of these modes of sexual behaviour, which
reflect diametrically opposite attitudes - the former an attitude of deference
and even obeisance towards the female sex, the latter an attitude of deference
towards the male sex, as appropriate to the moral and social standing of each
of the sexes during the pre- and post-worldly epochs in question. By which I mean that until the properly
worldly epoch of Western civilization, as pertaining to the 17-19th centuries,
men were inferior to women and, accordingly, would have been more disposed to
practising sexual deference towards them in the form of cunnilingus, whereas
ever since the first decades of the twentieth century women have been losing
ground to men and thus becoming less feminine than masculine in their outlook
on life, more disposed, in consequence, to practise sexual deference towards
men in the form of fellatio, in which the woman is the sexually active partner
within a context that places her in a quasi-obeisant position, acknowledging
the phallic ascendancy of male-biased post-worldly society. For whereas women were once the exemplars of
everything good and noble, the balance has increasingly tipped, during the past
hundred years, towards men, and women now continue to prostrate themselves
before men as the exemplars of everything good and noble - in a word, of
triumphant male progress! Yet such a
view is of course relative and therefore pertinent to the world, or worldly
sexuality, rather than to the divine and diabolic modes of sexuality which
exist at a proletarian remove, as it were, from bourgeois modes, including the
aforementioned, and which presuppose a free-electron orientation, not merely
atomic sexuality with either a proton or an electron bias, depending on the
mode or context in question.
Consequently we could speak of cunnilingus as grand-bourgeois idealistic
sexuality, in contrast to petty-bourgeois fellatio. And by a similar token it should be feasible
to regard lesbianism in a grand-bourgeois materialistic light, in contrast to
petty-bourgeois homosexuality - treating each mode of sexuality on an
alpha/omega basis within the worldly framework of fleshy realism, so that, on
the one hand, we are able to distinguish between alpha and omega modes of realistic
idealism, whilst, on the other hand, we are distinguishing rather more between
alpha and omega modes of realistic materialism.
60. But why do I distinguish, in such fashion,
between idealism and materialism anyway?
What is it about cunnilingus and fellatio that justifies me in applying
the term 'idealism'? Well, the answer to
that question is: because each mode of sexuality requires the use of the head
and entails a quasi-absolutist sexual commitment ... either to the vagina or to
the penis, rather than - except in the case of dualistic oral sex, which ought
to be described as idealistic realism - to both at once. Thus in the case of cunnilingus, the male
applies his mouth and tongue to the female's vagina ... in an idealistic
deference towards her sexual femininity, which makes for an alpha-stemming
orientation, whereas in the case of fellatio the female applies her mouth and
tongue to the male's penis ... in an idealistic deference towards his
masculinity, which makes for an omega-oriented sexuality, albeit within the
worldly context. Such idealism is in
marked contrast to the sexual materialism of lesbians and homosexuals, since
the head is not here at stake and two sexually identical bodies pleasuring each
other on a rather more down-to-earth basis are somewhat less idealistic than
materialistic (on account of their sexual identity). For realism is precisely the compromise
between male and female, penis and vagina, which constitutes the heterosexual
norm as the world's sexual fulcrum, so to speak. There can be idealistic realism, as in the
case of a dualistic oral experience, but never materialistic realism ... except
to the extent that sodomy takes place between the sexes. Straight heterosexuality is realistic on
account of this sexual compromise between opposites. Only on the pre- or post-worldly flanks, as
it were, can one speak of realistic materialism - realistic to the extent that
two bodies are involved, materialistic to the much greater extent that both of
them are sexually identical. Yet if both
materialism and idealism flank realism in its strictly coital context, it
should not be forgotten that such pre- and post-worldly manifestations of
sexual extremism are also flanked, on both alpha and omega levels, by more
extreme manifestations of sexuality, with noumenal
and supernoumenal, subphenomenal
and superphenomenal implications ... as discussed
above. In point of fact, we have already
distinguished between superphenomenal and supernoumenal on the omega plane, with specific reference to
plastic inflatables and pornography respectively, and
should categorize the former in terms of idealistic naturalism, or
supernaturalism, and the latter in terms of idealistic idealism, or superidealism.
Contrast this with the naturalistic idealism of the divine alpha-noumenal and the materialistic naturalism of the diabolic
alpha-noumenal, or subphenomenal,
and you have a complete picture of sexual evolution, both civilized and
natural, from the dawn of civilization to the present day and even into the next
and ultimate civilization, which, being transcendental, will place especial
emphasis on the superidealistic modes of sexuality in
preference to anything natural or, for that matter, antinatural
(without, however, unduly encouraging sex of any description).
61. Interestingly, a further distinction could
be drawn between the superphenomenal and a crude supernoumenal mode of sexuality. For there is a sense in which, contrary to
what I maintained earlier with regard to the Socialist State effectively being
a plastic-inflatable dead-end, extrapolations from Communist purism to a
Transcendental Socialist order suggest the possibility of a video alternative
to inflatable sex which might be defined as crudely supernoumenal
... insofar as motion is involved with regard to actual participants. There are other analogies with what I am
attempting to express here - for example, the superphenomenal/crude
supernoumenal distinctions between, say, light-blue
denims and leather pants (in contrast to the smooth supernoumenal
status of PVC pants), which suggest a Communist/Transcendental Socialist
option. Doubtless, what applies on the supernaturalistic plane also applies, in a converse kind of
way, on the superidealistic plane, where a
distinction between Fascism and Social Transcendentalism would be in order, so
that the supernoumenal mode of sexuality, which
requires erotic pornography, may be regarded as being less pure on the Social
Transcendentalist level than on the strictly Fascist level - less pure to the
extent of being more actively heterosexual than passively erotic in character,
i.e. pornography rather than erotica, though always on a non-sadistic and
non-sensational basis. Of course, there
are other applications of video than the purely sexual, and our theorizing has
to account for them if a more comprehensive and possibly accurate perspective
is to emerge. One could even distinguish
between videos on the basis of a Transcendental Socialist/Social
Transcendentalist dichotomy, with those on the former side being linked to
television, i.e. projected onto a television screen, but those on the latter
side being relatively free-standing in the context of a video screen. Clearly, if televideo
is Transcendental Socialist, then a colour portable of streamlined construction,
like a monitor-style TV, can be regarded in a Communist light, given its purist
implications. Similarly if free-standing
video is Social Transcendentalist, then colour slides projected onto a screen
would be Fascist, and we could regard the video as a 'fall' from Fascist purism
to the extent that it entailed pictorial movement, i.e. action, and therefore
stood closer to the Transcendental Socialist ideological plane in terms of
doing at the expense of being, or doing-being as opposed to being-doing - a
distinction, within relative terms, between the Divine and the Diabolic.
62. Taking a wider view of being and doing, we
may contend that sleep or, rather, dreaming signifies doing-being on the alpha
level of subconscious self-indulgence, whether for good or bad, with regard to
pleasant dreams or nightmares, whereas consciously-determined activity
signifies being-doing, whether for good or ill, with regard to life or death,
sex or war. Sublimated actions, or those
which proceed instinctively from the body, are the closest to pure doing, since
they lack conscious determination and accordingly may be described as worldly,
in the strict bodily sense of that term.
Instinctive sexual actions come within this category, as do involuntary
movements, scratchings, jerks, etc. But all of this is natural or, at any rate,
has reference to natural behaviour, which is why I used the word 'alpha' a
moment ago, in order to distinguish it from those artificial or supernatural
modes of behaviour that would be better defined in terms of 'omega', whether on
divine, diabolic, or worldly levels - in other words, with regard to
artificially-motivated doing-being, such as watching television, video, or,
more inherently, experiencing LSD visions; artificially-motivated being-doing,
such as dancing (particularly within a disco context), playing a musical
instrument, or competing in some engrossing sports context, like motorcycle
racing; and, finally, artificially-motivated doing, whether in a sports or a
dance or some other context, where what happens at the time is more automatic
than consciously determined. Such
distinctions hold true, then, at both ends of the evolutionary spectra, and
while supernatural doing-being and being-doing are preferable, from an
evolutionary standpoint, to their natural counterparts (the same should be said
of automatically-motivated doing in relation to instinctively-motivated doing),
we must not forget that the goal of human striving is pure superconscious
being, and that such being is as much above artificially-motivated doing-being
as the unconscious being of pure unconsciousness is beneath the
subconsciously-motivated doing-being of dreams.
63. Just as we spoke of being or doing-being on
alpha and omega levels, with regard to natural and supernatural distinctions,
so we can speak of natural truth on the alpha divine level and of supernatural
truth on the omega divine level or, to be more precise, of a continuum of
truths stretching from subnatural alpha beginnings to
a supernatural omega end via a natural worldly compromise. Thus we have truth in relation to the Father,
the Son, and the Holy Ghost, or protons, atoms, and electrons, with
centrifugal/centripetal implications.
But I shall simplify matters by speaking of natural-to-supernatural, including
within the scope of the former term subnatural
truth. Hence truth in relation to nature
and the Cosmos on the one hand, and truth in relation to man's aspirations
towards the Holy Ghost on the other.
Outer truth and inner truth, centrifugal truth and centripetal truth,
natural religion and supernatural religion.
Similarly, we can speak of two opposite kinds of beauty, viz. natural
beauty (including the cosmic subnatural variety) and
supernatural, or artificial, beauty - the former outer and centrifugal, the
latter inner and centripetal; natural aesthetics and supernatural
aesthetics. Doubtless race horses come
within the former category and streamlined motorbikes within the latter. Or beautiful women on the one hand and
plastic inflatables on the other hand. Or perhaps even natural flowers in relation
to artificial flowers - for example, plastic roses? Indeed, the more disposed a person is to
artificial beauty the less he will be disposed to its natural counterpart....
Now what applies to beauty applies just as much to truth, that is to say, to
supernatural truth in relation to natural truth. 'The more a man cultivates the
arts, the less he fornicates', wrote Baudelaire in regard to beauty, and the
more mindful a man is of inner truth in relation to the Holy Ghost, the less he
will care for outer truth in relation to either the Cosmos or nature.
64. But if truth and beauty are the divine and
diabolic alternatives with which life presents us on very antithetical terms,
then strength and goodness are their worldly counterparts, and we can just as
readily distinguish between natural strength and artificial, or mechanical,
strength ... as between natural goodness and artificial goodness, reserving for
ourselves the right to a specific bias either way. Doubtless natural strength applies to
truncheons, fists, feet, and hands used in an aggressive way, while bullets,
bombs, missiles, and torpedoes are all manifestations of artificial strength
when launched from their mechanical platforms.
So are tractors when used to clear away or lift something that would
have required three or four times as many horses or even ten times as many men
all exerting their muscles at once.
Strength is the power of force exerted against something else and,
although it is of the world, it has a diabolic bias, in contrast to goodness
which, while being worldly in character, smacks of the Divine, whether in terms
of the natural or the artificial, with reference, say, to fruit on the one hand
and to flavoured yoghurts on the other, or to water as opposed to cola, or
potatoes as opposed to chips. The Good
is always useful, particularly to human wellbeing, and doing well to others is
only intelligible within the framework of what is good for them. If strength is fundamentally autocratic, then
goodness is essentially democratic.
Apples are good so long as one needs to eat and even after one has
eaten, though rotten apples are bad. The
absence of all apples, or of any food, is also bad, especially if one is
starving to death in consequence. Yet it
isn't bad in the same concrete way as a rotten apple, but in an abstract way,
which is rather less evil than unfortunate.
65. Similarly, the absence of truth isn't
necessarily falsity, though falsity can exist alongside truth and even be taken
for truth until it is 'seen through'.
Falsity is, rather, the negation of truth, just as ugliness is the
negation of beauty, weakness the negation of strength, and evil the negation of
good. Whatever conduces towards
happiness is true, whatever conduces towards love is beautiful, whatever
conduces towards pride is strong, and whatever conduces towards pleasure is
good. Conversely, whatever results in
grief is false, whatever results in hate is ugly, whatever results in
humiliation is weak, and whatever results in pain is evil. And this whether we are considering the alpha
or omega poles of any given experience-spectrum, the natural or the
supernatural. There is natural truth and
supernatural truth, natural happiness and supernatural happiness. Pleasant dreams are an example of the former,
pleasant trips an instance of the latter.
Conversely, there is natural falsity and supernatural falsity, natural
sadness and supernatural sadness.
Unpleasant dreams are an example of the former, unpleasant trips an
instance of the latter. Likewise, there
is natural beauty and supernatural beauty, natural love and supernatural
love. Good-looking women are an example
of the former, well-made 'sex dolls' an instance of the latter. Conversely, there is natural ugliness and
supernatural ugliness, natural hate and supernatural hate. Bad-looking women are an example of the
former, badly-made 'sex dolls' an instance of the latter. Similarly, we may speak of natural goodness
and supernatural goodness, natural pleasure and supernatural pleasure, with
natural food an example of the former and synthetic food an instance of the
latter. Conversely, we may speak of
natural evil and supernatural evil, natural pain and supernatural pain, with
rotten or mouldy food an example of the former but rotten or poisonous
synthetic food an instance of the latter.
Finally, we may speak of natural strength and supernatural strength,
natural pride and supernatural pride, with athletic ability an example of the
former and Grand-Prix ability an instance of the latter. Conversely, we can speak of natural weakness
and supernatural weakness, natural humiliation and supernatural humiliation,
with athletic inability an example of the former and Grand-Prix inability,
whether for personal or mechanical reasons, an instance of the latter. Examples could be multiplied, but each
category is to a large extent independent of the others and should only be
evaluated in relation to itself.
66. Speaking of any given spectrum in terms of
another is both morally wrong and patently absurd. A person isn't necessarily weak because he
lacks the appearance of strength, since he may well be primarily good or
beautiful or true and, accordingly, entitled to evaluation on one or other of
these alternative terms, with the possibility of an alternative negative
evaluation if appropriate. Also we must
bear in mind the nature of the quality - or absence thereof - we select in
regard to any given person or thing, since there is an antithetical distinction
between the natural and the supernatural and/or artificial, and what is
entitled to evaluation in terms of the one should never be evaluated according
to the other! Of course, no man is
entirely any one thing. All men are a
combination, in different degrees, of a variety of qualities and
quantities. Yet this need not prevent us
from ascribing a leading or principal characteristic to any given person, since
no man is everything in equal degrees either.
Some men are predominantly divine and, hence, truthful or false; some
men are predominantly diabolic and, hence, beautiful or ugly; some men are
predominantly worldly in an autocratic way and, hence, strong or weak; some men
are predominantly worldly in a democratic way and, hence, good or evil, with
all due gradations of quality in accompaniment.
Thus sadness with the false and happiness with the true; hate with the
ugly and love with the beautiful; humiliation with the weak and pride with the
strong; and, finally, pain with the evil and pleasure with the good. Basically, men are divisible along these
essentially tripartite lines, with divine, diabolic, and worldly
implications. It is only in a democracy
that this fact can be lost sight of, the more so in proportion as worldly, and
hence bodily, criteria obtain. For there
can be no doubt that societies differ from one another in evolutionary terms,
and the ideal of one society may differ considerably from that of another,
especially when the societies in question are not only diametrically
antithetical in terms of, say, to what pole of a given spectrum they may
pertain but pertain, moreover, to different spectra, with the possibility -
certainly in the case of a divine/worldly distinction - of no real cultural or
social contiguity whatsoever.
67. Thus whilst a materialistic society will
make strength its principal ideal, beauty will be the principal ideal of
naturalistic societies, goodness the principal ideal of realistic societies,
and truth the principal ideal of idealistic societies. There may also be periods in any given
society when not strength but weakness will be the prevailing norm, not beauty
but ugliness, not goodness but evil, not truth but falsity, irrespective of
whether or not such negative quantities and their respective qualitative
attributes are elevated to the status of an ideal. Certainly there is ample evidence to show
that the negative attribute tends to precede the positive one in any given type
of society, so that before truth can get an airing, even in relatively
rudimentary terms, there must first be falsity; for falsity is ever the alpha
roots of the Divine from which the flower of truth must eventually spring. One might even say that falsity is a
precondition of truth, since without it there can be no revolt in favour of
truth. Without paganism there would have
been no Christianity, without the Creator no Christ. And what applies to the alpha-stemming half
of the divine spectrum applies just as much to its omega-aspiring half; for no
less than natural falsity is superseded by natural truth ... must supernatural
falsity, or Fascism, be superseded by supernatural truth, or Social
Transcendentalism. Fascism is as much a
precondition of theocratic Centrism as paganism ... of Christianity,
particularly in its Catholic manifestation.
Truth, whether natural or supernatural, is not possible without
reference to a falsity against which it is in revolt. You cannot conjure truth out of thin
air. Falsity is the ground of truth. Similarly, ugliness is the ground and
precondition of beauty. Beauty, whether
natural or artificial, cannot materialize where there has not first been
ugliness. You do not start from beauty
and work down to ugliness, since evolution proceeds forwards, and as much
within the diabolic spectrum as within the divine spectrum or, for that matter,
each of the worldly spectra. Beauty is
perfect form, which is perfect appearance, and should be regarded in terms of
the maturation of the Diabolic rather than as a refutation of or antithesis to it. Thus ugliness and beauty are both diabolic,
the only difference being that whereas ugliness is the root, or primitive,
manifestation of the Diabolic, beauty is its flowering into full maturity, a
more evolved manifestation of the Diabolic which stands to the original
manifestation as the blossom of a flower to its roots, just as Christ stands to
the Creator as Son to Father, natural divinity to subnatural
divinity - the one true and the other false.
Doubtless, the same may be held of artificial beauty in relation to
artificial ugliness, a modern skyscraper city, say, in relation to the slum- or
ghetto-type city that may have preceded it - assuming the new-style city was
not built from scratch (though obviously in relation to other cities, both
contemporary and past).
68. Imperfect form precedes perfect form no less
on the artificial plane than on the natural one, which stands to it as alpha to
omega, even though they may overlap and co-exist, which is usually the case
within contemporary open societies where, more often than not, the natural
takes precedence over the supernatural, as though in deference to a traditional
hierarchical pattern. Obviously my chief
intellectual interest is with the latter, or artificial, modes of ugliness/beauty,
and I wager that, ideologically considered, Communism and Western Socialism
stand to Transcendental Socialism as Fascism to Social Transcendentalism, which
is to say, as ugly preconditions of a more beautiful, and hence ideologically
mature, extrapolation. For it has to be
admitted that Transcendental Socialism is more concerned with beauty than
truth, even when it boasts of connections with the latter, and that such beauty
testifies to a revolt against Western ugliness.
The artificial beauty of the
69. Alpha-stemming diabolic evolution can be
regarded as a struggle from the formless to the formful,
as from the sun to the most beautiful men, which entails a progression from
protons to electrons, albeit with reference to a particle as opposed to a wavicle bias ... contrary to what appertains to the
Divine. And yet, if we are talking, in
effect, of two different levels of the Diabolic, viz. ugly and
beautiful, with qualitative implications of hate and love, we are also talking
of two different types of the Diabolic, with Satanic and Antichristic implications respectively. For if natural ugliness is characterized by a
particle-biased formlessness with regard to protons, then the particle-biased
form which characterizes the Beautiful has regard to electrons, and therefore
to a more atomically-evolved manifestation of the Diabolic. Just as Christ stands to the Creator in the
manner of natural truth to natural falsity, or wavicle-biased
electrons to wavicle-biased protons, so natural
beauty stands to natural ugliness in the manner of Antichrist to Satan. But if this is true of the alpha-stemming
part of each spectrum, it is no less true of its omega-aspiring part, since, as
we have noted, artificial ugliness tends to precede artificial beauty, and artificial
falsity to precede artificial truth.
70. Thus we have two types of the Diabolic, or Superdiabolic, on the artificial plane no less than on the
natural one, together with two types of the Divine, which may be characterized
in terms of the Supersatanic and the Super-antichristic on the one hand, and the Superfatheristic
and the Superchristic on the other, with proton and
electron distinctions - protons tending to predominate on the planes of falsity
and ugliness, electrons on the planes of truth and beauty, though always with
the aforementioned wavicle and particle distinctions
... as applying to the Divine and to the Diabolic respectively. For whereas a wavicle
bias makes for essence, a particle bias makes for appearance, whether in terms
of ugliness or beauty. Hence proton-wavicle artificial or supernatural falsity and
proton-particle artificial or supernatural ugliness on the one hand, but
electron-wavicle artificial truth and
electron-particle artificial beauty on the other hand. Alternatively, one could speak of superfalsity and supertruth with
regard to the omega part of the divine spectrum, and of super-ugliness and superbeauty with regard to the omega part of the diabolic
spectrum. These would contrast to both
natural falsity and truth in the one case, and to natural ugliness and beauty
in the other - as relative to the alpha part of each spectrum.
71. Thus there is a progression from the Father
to Christ with regard to the natural part of the divine spectrum, and from the Superfather to Superchrist with
regard to its artificial, or supernatural, part. Such alternatives are of course more
characteristic of the head than of the body, and oblige us to posit analogies
with mind and brain on a tripartite basis, as between subconscious, conscious,
and superconscious in the one case, with old brain,
mid-brain, and new brain in the other, the subconscious correlative of the
Father, the conscious correlative of Christ, and the superconscious
correlative of Superchrist; although a correlation
between the lower part of the superconscious and the Superfather also has to be considered, which accords with
the superfalse and therefore with an artificial,
external precondition of the supertrue ... in pure superconsciousness.
Doubtless the Jungian distinction between the personal unconscious and collective
unconscious is correlative of the Father and the Superfather
respectively, while leaving Christ and Superchrist to
the conscious and superconscious. With regard to the brain, however, we shall
posit a correlation between the old brain and Satan, the mid-brain and
Antichrist, the lower part of the new brain and Supersatan,
and the upper part of the new brain and Super-antichrist, though such
correlations are not of course to be taken literally but merely regarded as an
approximate guide to the true nature of both mind and brain in their tripartite
entirety. Certainly, analogies with
political or religious figures could be inferred, and few people would doubt an
argument to the effect that Hitler more accords with the superfalse
collective unconscious than with the supertrue superconscious, whereas if Marx is as credible a candidate
as any for the role of Supersatan in relation to
socialist super-ugliness, then no better candidate than Lenin could be found to
fill the role of the Super-antichrist in relation to communist or, rather,
Soviet superbeauty.
I shall say nothing, however, about the best candidate for the Superchristic role in relation to supertruth! For as surely as the Diabolic proceeds from
the lower new-brain to the higher new-brain, so the Divine proceeds from the
lower superconscious to the higher superconscious.
Indeed, we should really be speaking of superdiabolic
and superdivine in connection with the omega pole of
each spectrum, since that is what, in effect, the roles of the Superfather and Superchrist on
the one hand and of Supersatan and the
Super-antichrist on the other hand actually amount to, in contrast with the
alpha-stemming equivalents which precede them.
72. Certainly this distinction we have drawn
between one type of divinity and another, as also between one type of diabolism
and another, could be further defined in terms of negative and positive, with
the Father and Superfather corresponding to the
negative Divine on natural and supernatural levels, but Christ and Superchrist corresponding to the positive Divine on natural
and supernatural levels. Just so, Satan
and Supersatan would correspond to the negative
Diabolic on natural and supernatural levels, with the Antichrist and the
Super-antichrist corresponding to the positive Diabolic on these same levels,
which are equivalent and yet antithetical in evolutionary terms. Thus the negative divine and diabolic levels
would correspond to proton wavicles and particles
respectively, while the positive divine and diabolic levels would likewise
correspond to electron wavicles and particles. As already noted, the false is not diabolic
and the true alone divine; it is simply a lower, i.e. negative, mode of the
Divine. And, by a similar if converse token,
beauty is not divine because ugliness is diabolic; it is simply a higher, i.e.
positive, mode of the Diabolic. Hence
Baudelaire, no less than
73. However that may be, the distinctions we
have drawn between falsity and truth, ugliness and beauty, etc., appertain to
the head, both psychologically and physiologically, more than to the body,
which, not altogether surprisingly, has a different order of distinctions which
are less divine or diabolic than worldly.
I have already noted the body's basic distinctions in terms of weakness
and strength on the one hand and evil and goodness on the other, with the
former options appertaining to what may be called an autocratic spectrum, and
the latter options appertaining to a democratic one, whether with regard to the
natural or to the artificial, that is, whether on alpha-stemming or
omega-aspiring terms. Sticking to our
physical analogue, it will come as no surprise to most people that broken bones
are symbolic of weakness, whereas muscles, particularly when developed beyond
the normal scale, serve to symbolize strength.
In the first case, humiliation; in the second case, pride. Similarly, spilt blood all-too-readily
connotes with evil and, hence, pain, whereas sensual gratification,
particularly when of the flesh, connotes with goodness and, hence,
pleasure. Taking our analogies a step
further, one could argue that bones and muscles connote with autocratic
weakness and strength respectively, while blood and flesh connote, by contrast,
with democratic evil and good. Certainly
we have adequate reason to equate broken bones with weakness and spilt blood
with evil, since in both cases violence is usually responsible, and violence is
the product of ugliness and thus of hate.
The body isn't usually the motive of its own actions, neither on the
negative planes of weakness and evil nor on the positive planes of strength and
goodness, which, likewise, may require some motive from 'On High', so to speak,
such as beauty and love if, for example, the gratification of the flesh is to
acquire diabolic sanction. The more
democratic the society, however, the less importance such a motive will be and
the more purely carnal the bodily satisfactions. Mindless self-assertion and mindless
self-indulgence become equally indicative of worldly purism.
74. However, even in the world there are
diabolic and divine leanings, with the particle-biased atomic spectrum of
weakness and strength, negative and positive autocratic worldliness, leaning
towards the former and, by contrast, the wavicle-biased
atomic spectrum of evil and good, negative and positive democratic worldliness,
leaning towards the latter. In other
words, each spectrum has a bias towards either the Diabolic or the Divine
within the context of its own worldly integrity. Consequently the weakness/strength spectrum
is the worldly parallel to the ugliness/beauty spectrum above, whereas the
evil/goodness spectrum is the worldly parallel to the falsity/truth spectrum
above, the former diabolic and the latter divine. Now just as we distinguished between negative
and positive in regard to the atomicity of each of the 'head' spectra, so the
negative worldly attribute within each of the 'bodily' spectra has a proton
bias, the positive worldly attribute, by contrast, an electron bias. Thus proton-biased weakness and evil,
electron-biased strength and goodness.
Particles and wavicles within an atomic
cohesion.
75. Speaking more generally of each of the
spectra, whether 'head' or 'bodily', we have to satisfy ourselves as to whether
the qualitative attribute precedes and is a precondition of the quantitative
attribute, or vice
versa. In other words, does sadness
precede falsity or is falsity a precondition of sadness? Or, to take the negative diabolic equivalent
of falsity, does hate precede ugliness or is ugliness a precondition of
hate? Similarly, within the positive
side of each spectrum, does joy precede truth or is truth a precondition of
joy? And does love precede beauty or is
beauty a precondition of love? Obviously
a commonsensical, merely physical answer to these questions will assert that
the quantitative precedes and is therefore a precondition of the qualitative,
viz. falsity a precondition of sadness, truth a precondition of joy, and so
on. But while this would be the most
apparent answer, the essential, or metaphysical, answer is to the contrary;
namely that sadness precedes and is the necessary precondition of falsity, just
as joy precedes and is the necessary precondition of truth. Likewise, within the diabolic spectrum, hate
is the precondition of ugliness, love the precondition of beauty. And, taking the worldly spectra to complete
the picture, it will transpire that humiliation is the precondition of
weakness, pride the precondition of strength; pain the precondition of evil,
pleasure the precondition of good. For
it must be admitted that the noumenal precedes the
phenomenal, and what is qualitative is inherently noumenal,
in contrast to the quantitative, and therefore phenomenal, attribute that stems
from it. Contrary to superficial
appearances, hate precedes ugliness, not vice versa, and, conversely, no
woman is more beautiful than when she is loved.
Indeed, love is what renders her beautiful or, if that sounds too
sweeping, let us rather say that without love there is no essential beauty
but merely an apparent, or superficial, beauty such that merely pertains
to the physical. With love, her beauty
becomes metaphysical and accordingly acquires soul.
76. Thus we concur with Schopenhauer in positing
a noumenal precondition of phenomenal quantities,
although such a qualitative precondition extends beyond the negative attributes
to the positive ones as well, which are not so much Cosmos-derived as ...
nature-derived, and therefore more worldly, since appertaining to the electron
side of the atom, whether on wavicle or particle,
divine or diabolic terms. Unlike hate,
love cannot be derived in any degree from a cosmic noumenal
source, for instance the particle-biased proton-proton reactions of the sun,
since it requires an electron-particle bias, and such a bias will not be found,
as a rule, on the subatomic plane but only within a worldly and, in particular,
organic context, with especial reference to man. Even animals would seem incapable of love as
we understand it, since of a psychic constitution which is too rudimentary and,
hence, biased towards protons for all but the most primitive expressions of
love, as for example in loyalty and trust, to materialize. Yet, in man, love can be so intense as to
completely transform his world-view, and this manifestation of the Diabolic
must be subsumed under the general rubric of Antichristic
emotionalism, in contrast to the satanic emotionalism of hate, which may be
said to derive from a pre-worldly and therefore genuinely noumenal
source. Of course, what applies to hate
and love will apply to each of the other pairs of attributes as well, the
negative preceding the positive and the qualitative the quantitative, so that we
may trace the original negative experience to one of three noumenal
roots, viz. divine, diabolic, or planetary, while reserving for the positive
experience a comparatively worldly noumenal
extrapolation, as in the case of joy as a precondition of truth. As the reader may have surmised, falsity is
everywhere the root divine condition, though, before falsity can arise in the
phenomenal, there must first of all be sadness, or something analogous, in the noumenal, which is to say, in the central star of the
Galaxy, for which a wavicle proton-proton reaction is
the most apposite definition, as befitting the Creator. Thus falsity is the expression of sadness no
less than truth the expression of joy.
Truth cannot be achieved on the basis of sadness, and neither will
falsity arise from joy.
77. Yet if the qualitative precedes the
quantitative on the alpha-stemming levels of the divine, diabolic, and worldly
spectra, so that we have a noumenal precondition of a
phenomenal outcome, it is completely the converse where the omega-aspiring
levels of these same spectra are concerned!
For, as I have elsewhere argued, the superphenomenal
is a precondition of the supernoumenal, and
consequently before there can be any qualitative attribute of a given
negative/positive polarity, there must firstly be a quantitative attribute that
precedes it. Thus before there can be supersadness, a superfalsity such
as Fascism must arise, and, likewise, before superjoy
can become a reality, there must firstly be supertruth. In each case, whether of the negative or
positive Divine, Superfather or Superchrist,
the quantitative is a precondition of the qualitative. And what applies to the divine spectrum is
just as applicable to the diabolic one, where, taking the negative pole first,
super-ugliness will precede superhate and be no less
its precondition than superbeauty in relation to superlove - the positive diabolic pole on both quantitative
and qualitative terms. An example of
super-ugliness would be heavy rhythmic rock music, whereas light, pitch-biased
modern jazz will serve as an example of superbeauty. Thus if superhate,
or hate which springs from and is inspired by artificial ugliness, accords with
the qualitative attribute of the negative Superdiabolic,
in which a proton-particle bias will preponderate, then superlove,
or love inspired by artificial beauty, accords with the qualitative attribute
of the positive Superdiabolic, in which an
electron-particle bias will be preponderant.
Both of which contrast with the wavicle bias,
whether on proton or electron terms, of the negative and positive Superdivine - in other words with supersadness
and superjoy, as appertaining to the superfalse and to the supertrue
respectively. Generally speaking, it
will be found that whereas the Divine is optical the Diabolic is aural, and
that purer feelings accrue to the former than to the latter. But more about that later! Here I wish to stress the superphenomenal
precondition of supernoumenal experience, and this
applies as much to the 'bodily' spectra within an omega-aspiring context as to
the 'head' spectra, whether mind or brain, divine or diabolic (or, as I should
say, superconscious or new brain/superdivine
or superdiabolic).
78. Thus superweakness
will be a precondition of superhumiliation, or
humiliation attendant upon artificial weakness, i.e. a mechanical breakdown or
technical malfunctioning in some artificial context on which one is dependent,
while superstrength will be the precondition of superpride, or pride attendant upon the powerful and
efficient functioning of some machine or mechanical apparatus with which one is
associated - a racing car, say, or a high-speed powerboat. Clearly, there will be quite a difference of
feeling between someone whose racing car malfunctions early-on in a race and
the driver whose machine is performing at peak levels, leading him to eventual
victory over his remaining rivals. In
the first instance, superhumiliation attendant upon superweakness; in the second instance, superpride
attendant upon superstrength. A proton-biased particle atomicity in the one
case, an electron-biased particle atomicity in the other. Negative and positive modes of superworldliness respectively.
79. Similarly, in turning from the superautocratic to the superdemocratic,
we shall find that superevil is a precondition of superpain, or pain attendant upon the reception of
artificial evil, whether through violence or electric shock or some accident
involving mechanical or automotive means, while supergood
is a precondition of superpleasure, or pleasure
attendant upon the use of some artificial good, whether in the realms of food,
drink, sex, drugs, or whatever. Thus superpain attendant upon superevil,
for instance a bullet wound, and superpleasure
attendant upon supergoodness, for instance a (drink
of) cola. In the one case, a
proton-biased wavicle atomicity; in the other case,
an electron-biased wavicle atomicity. Negative and positive modes of superworldliness within superdemocratic
terms. Thus here, no less than elsewhere
in the other spectra, the superphenomenal is
effectively a precondition of the supernoumenal.
80. My philosophy can accordingly be regarded as
the antithetical equivalent of Schopenhauer's, since he is concerned with the
alpha, where noumenon precedes phenomenon, whereas I
am primarily concerned with the omega, where superphenomenon
precedes supernoumenon. Before one can be 'turned on' at any given supernoumenal level, one must firstly be 'wired up',
'plugged in', 'geared up', etc., to the relevant superphenomenal
precondition. A new world is thereby
established which is the converse of the old one. And, increasingly, the more this new and
artificial world takes hold of the 'turned-on' individual, the less will the
old and natural world have any meaning for him.
Beyond a certain point, one has no use for the noumenal
or phenomenal in the alpha-stemming contexts propounded by Schopenhauer. One denies them. For the Father is irrelevant to anyone set
upon attaining to the Holy Ghost. He
must be atheist with regard to the former before he can become truly theist or,
rather, deist with regard to the latter.
A true re-evaluation or, rather, 'transvaluation
of all values' is required here, and this presupposes the adoption of the superphenomenal as a means to the supernoumenal. Such is the real implication of being 'born
again'.
81. We have agreed, therefore, that the negative
precedes the positive, whether in terms of the Divine, the Diabolic, or the
world. The further back in alpha-stemming
time we go (at least in imagination), the more will falsity predominate over
truth, ugliness over beauty, weakness over strength, and evil over good ...
though not to the same extent everywhere or in every early pagan society. Some societies, which may be accorded a
divine bias, will have more falsity than ugliness; other early societies, the
converse of divine, will have more ugliness than falsity; and yet others, which
we may regard as predominantly worldly, will have more weakness than ugliness
or more evil than falsity, as the case may be.
In other words, identical criteria cannot be applied right across the
global board irrespective of racial factors, no more than all men can be judged
according to criteria only applicable to one class or type of man - say,
worldly and, hence, bodily criteria, as in a democratic society. For the world - and here I use the term in
its most general sense - is a much more complex place than some people(s) would
have us believe, and while divine, diabolic, and worldly factors will be found
in virtually all societies, they will not be found to the same degree, neither
on a caste nor a racial basis. Early
Irish society was no less divine because falsity generally prevailed than when
truth subsequently emerged victorious in the guise of Catholic
Christianity. It was simply divine in a
negative way. And, doubtless, early
English society, while having a divine dimension, was if not more diabolical in
a negative way, as relative to a predominating ugliness, then almost certainly
more worldly in terms, for example, of weakness or, to a lesser extent,
evil. Therefore we cannot categorically
argue that ugliness predominated over beauty in every early society,
since that would be to judge them all according to only diabolic criteria, but
should rather maintain that while some societies were dominated by ugliness,
others, though still subject to a degree of ugliness, were dominated by falsity
or weakness or evil, depending on the type of society in question. Now since, paradoxically, the Divine takes
precedence over both the Diabolic and the world, a predominantly false society
would have been morally superior to each of the other types, whether ugly,
weak, or evil. Similarly, a
predominantly ugly society, whilst inferior to a false one, would have been
morally superior to both predominantly weak and evil societies. For the Diabolic takes precedence over the
world, since aligned with the head as opposed to the body, if, in relation to
the Divine, as brain rather than mind.
Thus in
82. However that may be, it is perhaps one of
life's supreme ironies that the society or caste which is most false or ugly or
weak in an early phase of its existence is the one destined to become most true
or beautiful or strong at a subsequent phase of it, when the positive pole has
come to the fore at the expense of the negative one and electron-biased norms
accordingly preponderate. Provided the
racial structure of any given type of society remains relatively unchanged,
then positive counterbalances to the earlier negative preconditions will duly
emerge ... to usher in a better age for the peoples concerned. A predominantly false society will thus
become a predominantly true, or Catholic, one.
A predominantly ugly society will become a predominantly beautiful, or
Orthodox, one. And, finally, a predominantly
weak society will acquire new strength and emerge in a Protestant guise, just
as a predominantly evil society will cast of its painful constraints and become
good - in a word, democratic and equalitarian, serving the happiness of the
greatest number. Such swings from one
extreme to another are shared by all societies, and we may characterize the
negative pole and approximations to it in terms of devolution, in contrast to
the evolutionary nature of progress towards and approximations to the positive
pole. Devolution from the alpha,
evolution towards the omega. This in
both natural, i.e. noumenal/phenomenal, and
supernatural, i.e. superphenomenal/supernoumenal,
societies ... whether divine, diabolic, or worldly. And in all three cases, at whichever pole of
their respective spectra, we have devolution from protons, evolution towards
electrons. Devolution from falsity,
evolution towards truth; devolution from ugliness, evolution towards beauty ...
and so on, with the same of course applying to the super-manifestations of each
quantity and its qualitative attribute - as, for example, in the case of superhate and superlove, which
are conditional upon the prior existence of super-ugliness and superbeauty respectively.
Thus there is devolution from super-ugliness and evolution towards superbeauty, each of which pertains to the artificial part,
so to speak, of the diabolic spectrum, with Supersatanic
and Super-antichristic implications. Generally speaking, devolution at this level
is commensurate with the superphenomenal, whereas
evolution at such a level is commensurate with the supernoumenal.
83. Likewise, in relation to the naturalistic
part of each spectrum, we can speak of devolution from the noumenal
and of evolution towards the phenomenal, with mainly proton and electron
implications ... such as find a moral analogue in the distinction between
centrifugal and centripetal. But if
progress towards the centripetal is evolutionary, it is only so on a rather
limited, centrifugal-dominated basis within the noumenal-to-phenomenal
part of any given spectrum, where the proton element preponderates overall, and
moral progress is accordingly subordinate to the root centrifugal element and
has its existence within the umbrella, so to speak, of that element, as where
trousers or breeches are worn under or in conjunction with jackets and coats,
creating a paradoxically amoral impression.
It is only with the artificial part of each spectrum that the
centripetal element can break increasingly free of the centrifugal element and
thereby achieve supernoumenal salvation. For here it is not the centripetal which
exists in the centrifugal but,
on the contrary, the latter which exists in the former, since the electron element
is preponderant overall. Hence not coats
or jackets over trousers or breeches, but trousers or, rather, jeans and pants
over T-shirt and vest, which are the last refuge, so to speak, of the
centrifugal within an omega-aspiring context.
A transvaluation beyond the phenomenon has
taken place, and therefore the centripetal element has become truly ascendant
and capable of encroaching ever further upon what remains of the centrifugal,
until, with supernoumenal salvation, nothing
demonstrably centrifugal remains, since one-piece zipper suits have eclipsed
pants/vest relativity, the pants having paved the way, as it were, for the
suits in question, which are not so much pants and vest in one as expanded
pants ... symptomatic of a centripetal absolutism.
84. Yet if there is devolution from dresses to
skirts, and evolution from pants to one-piece zipper suits, there is also co-existence
within the phenomenal and superphenomenal contexts of
skirts and trousers, as relative to a worldly compromise in atomic
cohesion. There is a second femininity
within the alpha-stemming context of the artificial part of each spectrum, and
this is the femininity of skirts made from synthetic materials like PVC and
co-existing with pants of an equally synthetic construction. For one cannot limit skirts to the phenomenal
when they are made from synthetics, and therefore it follows that such skirts encroach
upon the superphenomenal as a devolution from
phenomenal skirts, or those made from naturalistic materials like cotton and
silk, and are accordingly of shorter length, i.e. mini. Devolution presupposes a reduction of scale,
particularly in terms of length ... which connotes with sexual status, or the
social standing of the feminine element in life at any given point in time, and
short skirts are certainly devolved in relation to long or medium-length
ones. Therefore just as devolution of
the dress, that inherently noumenal parallel,
proceeds from full-length to mini via intermediate lengths, so devolution of
the skirt, that inherently phenomenal parallel, proceeds from full-length to
mini via intermediate lengths, with its optimum devolution occurring within the
superphenomenal context of PVC minis - at any rate,
with regard to length; though the shift from natural to synthetic materials is,
of course, rather more evolutionary than devolutionary in character, and may be
regarded as the evolutionary ingredient par excellence within a superphenomenal
context - a context, however, where jeans and pants will always predominate,
since a masculine bias is more characteristic of the superphenomenal
than of the phenomenal. Indeed, so much is
this so ... that the more positive and progressive it becomes, the closer it
will draw to the centripetal indivisibility of the supernoumenal,
as, for example, with regard to one-piece zipper suits of a synthetic
construction. Accordingly, it is my
belief that while skirts of a synthetic and devolved order are permissible
within the negative pole of the superphenomenal (the
quantitative pole, which may be described in terms of super-ugliness), dresses
would be quite anomalous there, even when made from synthetic materials and of
a highly devolved, i.e. mini-length, order.
For dresses and skirts are not identical or interchangeable but pertain
to different civilizations, one might almost say to different ages and classes,
and while the dress is perfectly at home in an alpha-stemming noumenal context, it would be completely out-of-place in a superphenomenal one, since far too feminine for the context
in question. Only the half- or
quarter-femininity, so to speak, of a miniskirt could have any place there, and
then in a rather subordinate way to jeans or pants. For if the centrifugal dominates the noumenal and, to a lesser extent, the phenomenal, then the
centripetal is the dominating factor of the superphenomenal
and, to a greater extent, of the supernoumenal.
85. I have digressed at some length from my
original devolutionary/evolutionary theme, although not altogether without good
reason, since the sartorial parallels drawn above indicate, in no uncertain
terms, that the ratio of negative to positive within a naturalistic context is
more in favour of the negative than of the positive, whereas in an artificial
context, by contrast, it is the positive pole that comes out on top. Let us take the naturalistic context of any
given spectrum first - say, falsity and truth in the case of the Divine. Now if we equate falsity with the noumenon and truth with the phenomenon, our sartorial
parallel will show that falsity is equivalent to the dress, any dress, and
truth to trousers. Therefore falsity is
indivisible and truth divisible. Falsity
is whole, truth merely a half-measure; falsity accords with proton absolutism,
truth merely corresponds to relativity with an electron bias. The one outweighs the other and, accordingly,
the imbalance is always in favour of falsity or, what amounts to the same
thing, the noumenal indivisibility of the negative
pole. In other words, the Father
outweighs Christ, and even when truth has come to the fore, as in Christianity,
there is always more falsity to be reckoned with. Again, to revert to our sartorial parallel,
we may have all males in trousers, but not all females will be in skirts. Many will still prefer dresses, whether long
or short, and even those who usually wear skirts may also at certain times
favour a dress, so that any possible balance between trousers and skirts is
countered by the number of females wearing dresses which, when added to the
number of skirts being worn in society, creates or, rather, maintains an
imbalance in favour of the negative and, hence, of alpha-stemming domination. Had men the possibility, during a phenomenal
age, of one-piece zipper suits, they could balance-out the negative, feminine
element of dresses ... and thereby achieve or maintain a comparable degree of positivity, bringing their own masculinity to the
full. But this they cannot of course do,
since no such possibility then exists, and so their existence is that of a male
half-measure vis-à-vis female half-measures, i.e. skirts, and female
whole-measures, i.e. dresses, in consequence of which truth is accordingly a
half-measure in relation to alpha-noumenal
falsity. And not only Christian truth in
relation to pagan falsity (not to mention Christian falsity, as paralleled by
skirts), but Antichristian beauty in relation to Satanic ugliness, worldly strength
in relation to worldly weakness, worldly good in relation to worldly evil.
86. Thus, taking the qualitative attributes of
each of the above-mentioned dichotomies, joy is a half-measure in relation to
sadness, love a half-measure in relation to hate, pride a half-measure in
relation to humiliation, and pleasure a half-measure in relation to pain. No matter how earnest the endeavour to
establish the True on the basis of joy, or the Beautiful on the basis of love,
or the Strong on the basis of pride, or the Good on the basis of pleasure, the
negative correlations of these virtues always preponderate, and the result is a
world in which truth, beauty, strength, and goodness are outweighed by falsity,
ugliness, weakness, and evil; a world in which sadness, hate, humiliation, and
pain predominate because they are always the whole measure, or capable of
becoming such, while the others remain merely the half. They are the dress while the others are
merely the trousers. Small wonder if men
of a certain progressive stamp grow weary of natural virtue and instead turn
towards the possibility of supernatural, or supernoumenal,
virtue, which requires a superphenomenal
precondition! Better to fall into a new
and therefore artificial falsity, ugliness, weakness, or evil ... if in due
course that will pave the way towards a new and higher type of truth, beauty,
strength, or goodness which, in contrast to the natural types, will be a whole
measure rather than merely a half. Better
that the negative poles should be half- or quarter-measures on the artificial
part of each spectrum ... than that one should remain a perpetual victim of
negative whole-measures on their natural part.
Better PVC miniskirts than full-length cotton dresses. Better jeans than half-measure cotton
trousers, particularly if they lead to boiler suits in due course. Or, better still, PVC pants leading to
one-piece zipper suits of an equally synthetic construction, since jeans are
merely worldly whereas PVC pants, being synthetic, are of a divine orientation.
87. Indeed, one should distinguish between cords
and denims on the one hand, as alternative types of worldly masculine-biased
attire, and leather and PVC pants on the other, as alternative types of
post-worldly (diabolic and divine) attire which are not so much masculine as supermasculine - certainly on the supernoumenal
levels of one-piece zipper suits! Be
that as it may, there is no guarantee of strength or goodness or beauty or
truth, not to mention their qualitative concomitants (which, on the
omega-oriented artificial part of each spectrum, derive from them), except from
a superphenomenal base which, even when a
half-measure or, more correctly, less than a whole-measure, is a precondition
of supernoumenal whole-measures thereafter, and hence
of full-blown positivity. Now, obviously, while full-blown strength,
symbolized by a denim boiler suit, is preferable to the half-measure strength
which obtains in the naturalistic context, it is not the ultimate positivity but merely a worldly or, rather, superworldly positivity that
complements, on a superautocratic plane, full-blown
goodness ... as relative to superdemocratic
worldliness, which can be symbolized by a one-piece cord suit - a sort of cord
boiler suit. Both kinds of one-piece
suit - rare though they were in the late-twentieth century - are only really
relevant to a superworldly supernoumenon
and, hence, to a supernoumenon of the body as opposed
to the head. One might define them in
terms of Western supernoumenalism ... insofar as the West,
being largely a Germanic phenomenon, is nothing if not bodily, and therefore
values strength and goodness above beauty and truth. A higher supernoumenon,
namely that of the head, would have to be given the 'go ahead' elsewhere ... by
peoples more inherently disposed to diabolic or to divine criteria, i.e. beauty
or truth, and such post-worldly peoples would eventually eclipse the worldly
... as demanded by evolutionary progress, which, in this day and age, tends
away from the body (and thus the world) towards the head (and thus the Antichristic Diabolic in relation to the new brain, and the
Superchristic Divine in relation to the superconscious).
Higher than worldly supernoumenalism would be
the diabolic supernoumenalism of leather or rubber
one-piece zipper suits, as especially relevant to the Slavic East, and higher
again would be the divine supernoumenalism of PVC
one-piece zipper suits, as especially relevant to the Third World and to
theocracy-biased countries like Ireland and Iran.
88. Thus whilst all kinds of supernoumenalism
are preferable to their respective superphenomenal
preconditions, because significant of full-blown positivity,
evolution will demand that only the highest supernoumenalism
eventually prevails. Since this is
commensurate with the Divine, and hence with the (electron-wavicle)
Holy Ghost, so the ultimate indivisibility must be of a PVC-type construction,
and therefore a reflection of truth rather than of beauty, goodness, or
strength. Or, more correctly, a
reflection of supertruth rather than of superbeauty, supergoodness, or superstrength. Such supertruth, whether in sartorial or other terms, is the
goal of all evolutionary striving. For
true world unity can only be achieved on the basis of spiritual homogeneity,
not on the basis of co-existence between incompatible ideals. Even superbeauty
will eventually have to be consigned to obsolescence ... if supertruth
is ultimately to prevail.
89. Some pages ago I briefly referred to a kind
of divine/diabolic distinction between the optical and the aural, and now I
wish to expand on that reference on the basis of distinguishing between optical
perception, which is linked rather more closely to the mind than to the brain,
and aural perception which, by contrast, is linked rather more closely to the
brain than to the mind. For it will not
have failed to dawn on the reader that, through the agencies of seeing and
hearing, the eyes and the ears are two modes of perceiving the world - the
former optical and the latter aural.
Using the term 'perception' in the general sense of understanding and
noting, it is indisputable that perception of the world is no less aural than
optical, and that while people may differ from one another in terms of the
degree to which their perception of the world is either optical or aural, all
would agree, I think, that hearing is as much a mode of perception as seeing,
the only real difference being that in the one case the emotions are more
deeply involved than in the other case because, as already remarked, hearing
connects more directly to the brain than to the mind, and the brain is nothing
if not emotional. This being the case,
it is right that we should regard it in a diabolic rather than a divine light -
indeed, to switch metaphors, as heat rather than light, since emotions,
passions, etc., are of a deeper and less-elevated order of noumenal
experience than feelings, using that term in the narrow sense of abstract
emotions like sadness, joy, and happiness which, by contrast, are not only more
refined but of an altogether higher order of noumenal
experience, an order pertaining to spirit as opposed to soul. Thus if we associate emotion with the brain,
and hence the Diabolic, it is only proper that we should equate feelings with
the mind, and hence the Divine.
Accordingly, in the one case we shall have concrete noumenal
experience and in the other case abstract noumenal
experience, as befitting the respective natures of hearing and seeing, aural
perception and optical perception.
90. But of course we cannot limit perception to
the pre-worldly, and hence natural, context that may be regarded as preceding
worldly concepts and conceptions.
Perception does precede conception, as
Schopenhauer correctly maintained, but it is no less the case, in this day and age,
that there are modes of perception which succeed the conceptual, and we should
be careful to distinguish them from the pre-conceptual varieties. Accordingly I use the term 'superperceptual' for all modes of perception, whether aural
or optical, that relate to and are dependent upon artificial phenomena such as
television, radio, record-player, video-recorder, etc., and I maintain that
they relate to the natural modes of perception as omega to alpha or as the supernoumenal to the noumenal,
with an antithetical status in consequence.
Yet such supernoumenal perceptions, or superperceptions, are only relative, not absolute. For there is a sense in which, say, optical
perception of television differs only in degree rather than kind from optical
perception of natural phenomena like trees and flowers. Admittedly, we should distinguish perception
of the artificial from perception of the natural, and many people, me included,
would hold the view that the perception of flowers on television, where in a
sense they become artificial, is superior than and preferable to the perception
of flowers in
naturalis, and therefore is a mode of superperception.
However, such 'superperception' is relative,
in contrast to the use of artificial modes of perception, whether optical or
aural, which may be regarded as constituting a direct, or absolute, antithesis
to the natural modes, and the chief examples of which are the camera and the
microphone, the former functioning as an artificial eye and the latter as an
artificial ear, albeit in a more radical sense than is achieved by corrective
lenses on the one hand or by hearing aids on the other, each of which may be
described as intermediary between natural modes of perception and their
artificial, and hence mechanical, counterparts - at any rate, to the extent
that they serve to correct a natural defect rather than to take the place of
natural modes of perception as such.
Consequently we may define the camera as an artificial eye, or optical
recorder of phenomena external to itself, while reserving to microphones,
including those which are used in bugging operations, the status of an
artificial ear, or aural recorder of phenomena external to itself. (Although
the glass eye is artificial and intended to replace the loss of a natural eye,
it has no perceptive function and therefore cannot be accorded an antithetical
status to the natural eye in the functional sense we are elucidating here.)
91. Interestingly enough, while we increasingly
use our natural modes of perception in connection with artificial phenomena
such as television and radio, the artificial modes of perception are more often
used in connection with natural phenomena, including people, conversation, and
singing, a fact which cannot be without some significance in throwing light
upon the paradoxical and transitional nature of the age. For it does seem that most people have what
borders on an aversion to photographing or recording artificial phenomena,
preferring to concentrate on subjects which the natural eye or ear has grown
out of, in their preference for artificial phenomena. Doubtless, this ironic situation will be
transcended in the course of time ... as artificial modes of perception become
increasingly important and the world becomes correspondingly more transcendental. In the future, people will cease to be
interested in natural phenomena perceived through artificial means, but will
increasingly turn towards the artificial perception of artificial phenomena. Even the natural perception of artificial
phenomena, as, for example, on and through cinema films, television, and
videos, will be transcended by and through artificially-induced visionary
experience, thereby opening-up new worlds of internal perception as required by
the progression of divine, or visionary, experience from superfalse
to supertrue levels, in conjunction with the
correlative progression of the diabolic, or auditory, experience from
super-ugly to superbeautiful levels.
92. Indeed, now that I have returned to my
initial divine/diabolic theme, it is incumbent upon me to distinguish divine
from diabolic progressions in terms of an optical/aural dichotomy, and to
regard the following options as constituting parallel progressions, viz. films
and records, television and radio, videos and compact discs, and, finally, LSD
trips and cassettes, with, in the one case, divine and, in the other, diabolic
implications. Thus, with this
dichotomous view of artificial visionary and auditory phenomena, we have a
divine progression, on the one hand, from films to trips via television and
videos, which is paralleled by a diabolic (aural as opposed to optical, heat as
opposed to light) progression, on the other hand, from records to cassettes via
radio and compact discs. Now, obviously,
films in the context of cinema must precede the showing of films - TV films
excepted - on television, just as records in the context of LPs must precede
the playing of records on the radio, and therefore we can categorically
maintain that there is a sequential and, in a limitedly literal sense,
evolutionary progression from the one to the other, since without prior films
or records there could be no television or radio transmission of films and
records, which may consequently be regarded as a precondition of the media in
question. Furthermore, both television
and radio are alike in that they are multimedia modes of transmission, with a
variety of channels broadcasting an even greater variety of programmes, some of
which will be literary and theatrical, some of which musical and operatic,
others of which documentary, sports, current affairs, and so on. Thus there exists a definite parallel between
radio and television, irrespective of the type of radio or television we have
in mind. A parallel of sorts, although
of a different order, may also be said to exist between videos and compact
discs, insofar as they are extrapolations from and evolutionary improvements on
films and records or, as we could alternatively argue with qualified
justification, the equivalent of films and records in a post-television and
post-radio age, society, mentality, or whatever, while further along our
evolutionary spectrum we find ourselves positing a like-parallel between
artificially-induced visionary experience and cassettes only on the basis that
there would seem to be little else - at any rate on such a radically extreme
level, a level which suggests an outright supernoumenal
indivisibility in each case (not forgetting our divine/diabolic distinctions
between visionary and auditory modes of perception). Here the Divine truly attains, as only it can,
to an internal level of visionary perception, while the Diabolic, though not
capable of such internalization itself, at least becomes less external to the
degree that cassettes increasingly depend upon microlight
headphones - indeed, as in the case of portable minicassette-players,
can only be listened to with the aid of such headphones, there being no speaker
option.
93. Until now we have been considering the
perceptual beyond the world, i.e. the conceptual, on both optical and aural
terms, which we have called superperceptions. Now we must consider artificial levels of the
conceptual beyond the world, which likewise may be called superconceptions,
and which, like the superperceptual, can be divided
into relative and absolute distinctions.
In the first category we shall find pocket calculators and other
portable modes of computation which serve as a correction to or substitute for
the brain, and which stand to it rather as spectacles and hearing-aids to the eyes
and ears respectively, having a direct connection with their user. In the second and more absolute category,
however, we shall find computers ... from the smallest to the largest, the
least complex to the most sophisticated, which exist not merely in relation to
the brain, and hence in an intermediate position, but as completely artificial
brains antithetical in every way to it, and therefore no less independent of
natural intelligence than cameras in relation to the eye or microphones in
relation to the ear. Such 'artificial
brains' assume a superworldly conceptual status
analogous to the superdivine status of artificial
optical perception and to the superdiabolic status of
artificial aural perception, and accordingly complement these latter modes of
perception within the artificial context of an omega orientation, in contrast
to natural thought, which stands to the computer as natural sight to the camera
and as natural hearing to the microphone.
Nevertheless, natural thought, or the conceptual capability and
employment of the human brain, can be used in conjunction with artificial
phenomena, i.e. as thought about the man-made world, just as the eye can be
used to see and the ear to hear artificial phenomena, and we should distinguish
such thought from purely natural thought, or thought about nature and
naturalistic phenomena generally, including people, animals, etc., in the same
way and to the same extent that we have distinguished optical and aural
perceptions in relation to artificial phenomena such as television and radio
from their more naturalistic counterparts.
In such fashion, we shall be able to distinguish thought of a new-brain
order from its old-brain counterpart, as well as from any mid-brain compromise
between or conjunction of the two, so that a relatively superconceptual
status will accrue to the former, thereby allowing for the varieties of
thoughts, some of which are antithetical to others, that fall to the human
brain, itself divisible in the aforementioned ways.
94. Consequently an omega-oriented order of the
conceptual will be antithetical to the alpha-stemming order of conceptual
thought to the degree that the new brain is antithetical to the old brain. One cannot think on both levels at once,
since there are evolutionary and class distinctions between the two contexts
and those who most approximate to a dual integrity in their thinking are
neither specific to the one nor to the other but pertain to an intermediate,
bourgeois level situated in between.
Traditionally such a level has found its religious embodiment in prayer,
as relative to Christianity or some such 'worldly' religion, and we may regard
the conceptual, contrary to Schopenhauer, as truly appertaining to the Divine
... in contrast to the perceptual, which can only pertain to it indirectly,
that is to say through the medium of appearances. For true divinity is essential, not apparent,
and therefore centripetal as opposed to centrifugal in character, a turning in
upon oneself, whether in pagan and, hence, sensual terms, as in sleep, or in
Christian and, hence, intellectual terms, as in prayer, or, beyond both of
these, in transcendent and, hence, spiritual terms, as in meditation.
95. Thus one can distinguish, on a tripartite basis,
between the subconceptual, the conceptual, and the superconceptual, where the above-mentioned modes of
conceiving are concerned, and there should be no doubt that progress tends from
the first to the third, though not without apparent levels of the Divine coming
in-between, so that we may allow, to take a single example, for a
television-to-video-to-LSD progression in between mid-brain cognitive
conceptions on the one hand and new-brain meditative conceptions on the other,
which constitutes ascending levels of artificial perception ... from the
external to the internal, and so from the false to the true or, more correctly,
quasi-true. For it must be admitted that
film, whether on television, video, or at the cinema, pertains to divine superfalsity to the extent that we are dealing with
appearances external to ourselves which come to us via mechanical means,
whereas artificially-induced visionary experience of an hallucinogenic order is
closer to divine supertruth by dint of taking place within the psyche in a
context rather more chemical than material, and therefore more directly
spiritual. If it is less than truly superconceptual, it is at any rate more than merely superperceptual. One
might distinguish this ultimate mode of visionary experience from the
mechanically-derived modes like television or video in terms of a
perceptual-conceptual integrity ... in contrast to the conceptual-perceptual
integrity of the latter, which I accordingly equate with the superfalse. For the
closer one draws to the Holy Ghost, the more superconceptual
things become, since ultimate divinity is not apparent but essential and
therefore can only be approached, i.e. evolved towards, from within ... on the
basis of superconceptual freedom. Such freedom paves the way for the pure
meditative experience to follow, and is its necessary precondition.
96. But such a meditative experience shouldn't
be confounded with the petty-bourgeois meditative experiences so prevalent in
the West in the late-twentieth century.
These latter were more akin to 'prayer without words' - decadent modes
of Christian religious observance analogous to abstract paintings, which call
to mind a denial of the will in the negative and merely relative sense
advocated by Schopenhauer. The decline
and extinction of bourgeois civilization is one thing, the rise and expansion
of proletarian civilization quite another, and those who demand the Truth
should never rest content with the half-measures and subterfuges of a
civilization in partial eclipse! The
ultimate meditation, when it becomes possible, will as little resemble 'prayer
without words' as laser light art the painting without subject-matter which is
but the Schopenhaurian/Sartrian decline into the
nothingness, or neant, of decadent bourgeois civilization. It will be dynamic, like the Tao-te-Ching mode of meditation assisted by deep-breathing
exercises. But if that admirable form of
yoga corresponds to the positive pole of a divine integrity within a
naturalistic context, i.e. the Eastern equivalent to Western truth as embodied in the person of
Christ, then the supermeditation I have in mind for
the future will correspond to the positive divine pole within an artificial, or
supernaturalistic, context and be relatively
artificial - indeed, assisted not by breaths of natural air but by inhalations
of chemically-manufactured air stored in oxygen containers and requiring the
use of special oxygen masks. Such
dynamic supermeditation will, I believe, greatly
facilitate upward self-transcendence, particularly in contexts simulating,
through recourse to special body harnesses, the gravity-defying miracle of
levitation. The result will not only be
higher than could be achieved via natural meditation but purer as well, since
such impurities as cling to natural air would not exist within the
comparatively artificial context of oxygen containers.
97. However, in returning to the distinction we
were making between perception and conception, it should be re-emphasised that
the Divine would be rather more conceptual than perceptual; for that which is
above appearances is essential and therefore beyond sight, or the possibility
of optical perception. Being in the Holy Spirit would
be to feel
the
bliss of electron-electron attractions, not to see them. For where there are no eyes, there is no
sight. Of course, one should distinguish
between sensory perception, which depends upon the use of sight, and spiritual
perception, which, like the artificially-induced visions of an LSD trip, is
less a matter of external vision than of internal vision ... as germane to the
mind's eye, that elusive capacity of the imagination to 'visualize' its
contents. Such spiritual perception
extends down to the dream contents of the subconscious, as well as to daydreams
or fantasies, and, as I have argued, can also embrace natural visions, or
hallucinations; though these will have the appearance of being outside the
psyche and accordingly border on sensory perception, especially when motivated
by external phenomena. Conversely, it
may be argued that films, whether at the cinema or elsewhere, primarily appeal
to sensory perception ... to the extent that they are external to the psyche
and have to be watched, in contrast to the artificially-induced visionary
experience of LSD trips which, as already noted, transcend sensory perception
and accordingly enter the realm of supertruth. For here we touch upon the crucial
distinction between the superfalse and the supertrue - a distinction between sensory perception of
artificially-produced visionary phenomena, i.e. films, and the spiritual
perception of artificially-induced visions which are not so much phenomenal as noumenal or, rather, supernoumenal
... as pertaining to the superconscious part of the
psyche. Here we move from the realm of
the superphenomenal to the much higher and therefore
more genuinely divine realm of the supernoumenal. It is a progression, in other words, from
appearance to essence, from sensory perception to spiritual conception or, at
any rate, to a realm of spiritual perception which borders on the superconceptual. For
me, it signifies a Superchristic prelude to properly
transcendental essence.
98. Since I began, some pages ago, by contending
that the eyes, and hence the sense of sight, were of divine origin in relation
to the ears, and that there exists, in consequence, a kind of divine/diabolic
distinction between optical perception and aural perception, I had better
qualify my original statement by words to the effect that such a distinction is
merely apparent and relative in relation to spiritual perception of either a
visionary or an auditory order, since no sensory perception, whether optical or
aural, can be truly divine or diabolic.
Rather, it is superficially so in relation to dreams, visions, voices,
whisperings, etc., which correspond to the inner eye and to the inner ear in
their various hallucinatory manifestations - more usually as manifestations of
subconscious activity than of conscious activity as such, which, except in the
context of fantasies or daydreams, corresponds to the conceptual, and hence to
abstract thought.
99. Yet we are just as susceptible to auditory
perceptions in our dreams as to visionary perceptions, and the ratio of the one
to the other will indicate the nature of the dream, i.e. divine or diabolic,
whether on negative or positive terms, which is to say with reference to the
false and/or ugly on the one hand, or to the true and/or beautiful on the other
hand. Some people's dreams are
predominantly visionary and therefore 'quiet', as befitting the Divine, whether
negative or positive. Other people's
dreams, by contrast, are predominantly auditory, as befitting the Diabolic,
again whether negative or positive. Yet
others experience an approximate balance between the two poles of the subconscious
or, as I should say, the subconscious-proper and the old brain. Just so, some people are more susceptible to
auditory hallucinations than to visionary ones and may accordingly be regarded
as having a relatively diabolic psychic bias, in contrast to those for whom
visionary hallucinations are the norm.
There is no reason why auditory hallucinations should be regarded as any
stranger than visionary ones, nor need we discount the possibility of a psychic
balance between the two, as germane to a worldly integrity. Probably most people's autonomous psychic
activity outside dreams is so faint and distant, these days, that they are
unaware of its existence, particularly since so much time is now spent in front
of televisions, radios, and other such mechanically autonomous devices. Doubtless in the future, LSD trips will
open-up further autonomous regions of the psyche and duly eclipse natural
hallucinations with artificially-induced hallucinatory experience either of a
predominantly visionary or of a predominantly auditory nature, depending on the
type of hallucinogen and the character of the tripping recipient. A 'good' trip will almost invariably be
predominantly visionary; a 'bum' trip will be less visionary than auditory. Yet whatever the psychic nature of the trip,
the positive will generally preponderate over the negative, to the extent that
we are referring to a supernoumenal and, hence,
full-blown positivity as opposed to a phenomenal or,
rather, superphenomenal half-measure ... as relative
to films, which, as everyone knows, can be good or bad or good and bad,
depending on the type of film in question.
100. Thus trips have this further advantage over
films, in that not only are they internal rather than external, but almost
invariably 'good'. A 'bad' as opposed to
an audibly-biased 'bum' trip is indeed the exception to the rule, and so much
so that one would have cause to suspect the quality of the recipient rather
than that of the LSD, in the event of persistently 'bad' tripping. Conversely, with dreams it is more usually
the bad dream, or nightmare, that is a full-measure and the good dream a half
one, particularly in the case of the very young and of people who are
psychically backward. For dreams are predominantly
noumenal by nature, and the noumenal
is nothing if not negative. Even good
dreams, which are comparatively rare, are less good than bad dreams are bad,
owing to the predominantly negative constitution of the subconscious. Either the Father gets the better of Christ,
so to speak, or Satan the better of the Antichrist, depending on the type of
dream to which one is usually partial.
And even persons whose dream life is predominantly truthful or
beautiful, which should include most well-constituted males, will only
experience the Christic or the Antichristic
on the basis of a half-measure, as relative to natural truth or beauty. For a full-blown positivity,
one must turn to the superconscious and to the
experience, therein, of artificially-induced visions. Doubtless the future will in fact encourage
such a procedure, in accordance with the transcendental requirements of an
omega-oriented society - the only possible society in which true salvation can
be achieved.
101. Having spoken of the senses of sight and
hearing, of eyes and ears in relation to superficially divine and diabolic
parallels, I should now like to expatiate on the senses of smell and taste, of
nose and tongue in relation to the world, since, in contrast to the
aforementioned ones, these senses overlap with the body - indeed, are connected
to bodily organs in the form of the lungs and the stomach respectively. Whereas sight and hearing solely have
reference to the head and are therefore comparatively transcendent senses,
indirectly connected via eyes and ears to the Divine and to the Diabolic (which
find their true parallels in mind and brain), smell and taste, although
situated in the head, have reference to the body, since whatever is smelled as
scent or perfume soon passes, if inhaled, into the lungs with air, while whatever
is tasted as food or drink soon passes, if swallowed, into the stomach with
saliva. Thus although the senses of
smell and taste only have effect with regard to the nose and the tongue
respectively, these latter organs lead, via bronchial tubes and throat, to the
lungs and the stomach, and thereby compromise the senses in question, rendering
them less transcendental than mundane, and hence comparatively worldly. Indeed, just as sight may be identified with
sadness and happiness, depending on the nature of what is seen, and hearing
likewise be identified with hate and love, depending on the nature of what is
heard, so smell and taste can be ascribed a qualitative dichotomy on the basis
of what is smelt or tasted, whether negative or positive. Now if humiliation and pride are the twin
poles around which the former revolves, then we shall have to ascribe to the
latter the poles of disgust and pleasure, as befitting such a worldly and,
indeed, democratic sense as taste. A
sweet scent causes one to feel pride; no less than a savoury meal gives one
pleasure. Conversely, a bad smell, like
B.O. or halitosis, will cause its perpetrator humiliation, no less than rotten
or stale food will bring him disgust.
Disgust at other people's bad smells is the converse of humiliation at
one's own, and to disgust with bad food can be added humiliation at the
prospect of having to eat it!
Nevertheless, whilst emotional reactions do overlap, depending on the
context and the relation of subject to object or vice versa, it seems feasible
to attribute an autocratic axis to smell and a democratic axis to taste, so
that the one is perceived as worldly with a diabolic bias, whether negative
(humiliation) or positive (pride), whereas the other is perceived as worldly
with a divine bias, whether negative (disgust) or positive (pleasure).
102. However, in between we shall find the
uniquely worldly, and hence middle-ground, sense of touch, which pertains to
the body and, in particular, to the hands, that focal-point of the will to touch. Now if a qualitative dichotomy is to be
reserved for this last and most basic sense, then I can think of none better
than fear on the one hand and hope on the other, the latter of which may also
embrace trust and mutual goodwill, as between one handshaker
and another. Touch, then, is not so much
autocratic or democratic as plutocratic, one might even say parliamentarian,
taking that term to signify something coming in-between authoritarianism and
republicanism, and I define the quantitative attributes of this sense in terms
of war and peace, which strike me as constituting a quintessentially worldly
dichotomy - the phenomenal consequences of fear and hope respectively.
103. Anyone who is conscious of a distinction
between the body and the head, who doesn't treat the head as a part of the body
but perceives it in relation to divine and diabolic realities above the world,
of which the body is a microcosm, will have noticed that whereas the body is
basically rectilinear in shape, the head, by contrast, is usually of a
curvilinear design, and that this is relative to the fundamental distinction
between the world on the one hand, and the Divine and/or Diabolic on the other
hand. Thus even when caste and racial
exceptions have been taken into account, the fundamental dichotomy between body
and head is generally based on a rectilinear/curvilinear distinction. We see this distinction clearly enough when
comparing stereo speakers with headphones, whether of the ring-like
conventional design or of the centralized micro design. For speakers are rectilinear and therefore
bodily, whereas headphones are curvilinear and thus of the head ... in more
than an obvious sense. I have discussed
this subject elsewhere, so will now proceed to analogous distinctions between
cars, which are usually rectilinear in design (the old-style, or 'Beetle',
Volkswagen being a paradoxical exception to the rule), and motorbikes and/or
scooters, where we are conscious of a predominantly curvilinear impression
which is partly attributable to the wheels and partly to the engine and/or
panelling. Likewise between paintings in
the rectilinear case and light art, whether relatively materialistic or
spiritualistic, in that of the curvilinear.
And, most especially, between modern rectilinear architecture on the one
hand and modern curvilinear architecture on the other - a conspicuous instance
of our basic body/head dichotomy, and no small indication as to the nature of
any given contemporary society - the rectilinear variety preponderating in the
democratic West where, not surprisingly, bodily criteria take precedence over
those of the head, especially in cities like New York and Chicago, which abound
in rectilinear skyscrapers of a superworldly order, a
blatant testimony to the body's rule even when, as often transpires, the
architecture concerned is so towering and stylistically indivisible as to
appear highly idealistic in character.
Such a paradoxical idealism of the body is particularly characteristic
of
104. However that may be, ring-like curvilinear
architecture is, by contrast, communistic and therefore comparatively
naturalistic in character; though we should take pains to distinguish between
the relatively low, pure Communist architecture and the higher, less
naturalistic architecture which, while still of a ring-like design, may be
described as Transcendental Socialist.
For the reader will be aware that such a Communist/Transcendental
Socialist distinction has been encountered in my work before, and has its
divine counterpart in the Fascist/Social Transcendentalist one which, in
architecture, takes the form of tall, highly centralized, and hence idealistic,
curvilinear buildings on the one hand, and of less tall and highly centralized,
though still idealistic, curvilinear buildings on the other hand, this latter
option directly paralleling the taller, less ring-like, and therefore
naturalistic, curvilinear buildings of a Transcendental Socialist design. Consequently, with 'head' architecture our
basic distinction, already noted with regard to motorbikes and scooters, not to
mention conventional and micro headphones, between a ring-like and a
centralized design also holds true, and is precisely that which distinguishes
the Diabolic from the Divine, or curvilinear naturalism from its idealistic
counterpart. Doubtless in the future,
most if not all buildings will be curvilinear, since the head alone will count
... as the body, and hence the world, is overcome. But it is to be hoped that, ultimately, the
centralized variety of curvilinear architecture will preponderate over the
ring-like variety, as divine criteria displace the diabolic in a world tending
ever more closely towards the heavenly Beyond.
We may not yet have seen the last of the rectilinear mode of
architecture, but the future belongs to the curvilinear - of that there can be
little doubt!
105. Smoking, which involves the sense of smell
and possibility of inhalation into the lungs, corresponds to the
diabolic-in-the-world and is therefore a relatively autocratic habit, having
strong overtones with both weakness and strength, humiliation and pride,
depending on the smoker and his mode of smoking, viz. pipe, cigar, or
cigarette, with class and even evolutionary implications between them. By contrast, drinking, which involves the
sense of taste and necessarily has reference to the stomach, corresponds to the
divine-in-the-world and is therefore a relatively democratic habit, having
strong overtones with both evil and good, pain and pleasure, depending, once
again, on the drinker and his mode of drinking, viz. bottle, glass, or can,
with class and evolutionary implications between them, as before. Generally speaking, the pipe is to the bottle
what the cigar is to the glass, and we may regard them as constituting a
negative/positive dichotomy on the basis of noumenal
and phenomenal distinctions. Thus pipe
to cigar on the one hand, and bottle to glass on the other - at any rate, such
is the case with regard to the natural part of each spectrum. For when it comes to the artificial, or
supernatural, part ... we have a dichotomy between small cigars (cheroots) and
cigarettes on the one hand, and between small glasses (half-pints) and cans on
the other hand, which constitutes a superphenomenal/supernoumenal
distinction, albeit within a strictly worldly framework. For it should be emphasized that smoking and
drinking are essentially bodily habits, and that 'heads', whether divine or
diabolic, will either smoke or drink only in moderation or, more usually, not
smoke or drink at all. Those, on the
other hand, who both drink and smoke regularly … are worldly on both democratic
and autocratic terms, whether or not they are also disposed to the sense of
touch and therefore highly sensual.
Considered politically, if bottles and pipes correspond to the
autocratic and cans and cigarettes to the democratic, then glasses and cigars
should correspond to the plutocratic, and so be more strictly of the
world. One might say, using a
perceptual-conceptual axis, that whereas bottles and pipes, together with cans
and cigarettes, are perceptual and therefore noumenal,
albeit in diametrically opposite ways, glasses and cigars are conceptual, and
therefore relatively phenomenal. From
worldly alpha to worldly omega via the world.
106. A similar tripartite distinction to the above
is to be found in the progression from umbrellas to hooded jackets via
raincoats, with umbrellas corresponding to pipes and bottles, hooded jackets to
cigarettes and cans, and raincoats to cigars and glasses. Head - body - head.
107. Since we have ascertained that, in relation
to eyes, cameras are an artificial mode of optical perception and that, in
relation to ears, microphones are an artificial mode of aural perception, both
of which stand as artificial senses to the natural senses of seeing and
hearing, we should now take our investigation a stage further and contend that,
in relation to internal visionary perception, i.e. dreams, televisions are an
artificial mode of visionary perception and therefore antithetical to natural
dreams, whereas in relation to internal auditory perception, i.e. audible
hallucinations, radios are an artificial mode of auditory perception and
therefore antithetical to natural thoughts, or thoughts which occur on an
hallucinatory or dream-like basis, as though spontaneously generated. In other words, televisions and radios are to
the psyche what cameras and microphones are to the senses - their antithetical
equivalents, which lead an autonomous, or quasi-autonomous, existence of their
own and, in a certain sense, take the place of natural autonomous psychic
experience. Thus televisions are
dreaming artificial brains, just as radios are artificial brains that render
the auditory equivalent of visionary dreaming, which is a kind of artificial
audible hallucination - an audible dreaming.
Not that I wish to imply this is all radios and televisions
amount to - since there is obviously a great deal more to them than that! - but
simply that when they are employed in a literary or a dramatic way, as with the
transmission of plays, stories, serials, etc., their function is rather more
analogous to dreaming than to thinking, to fantasy than to fact. Thus if they are the artificial equivalents
of internal modes of perception, whether visionary or auditory, and cameras and
microphones are the artificial equivalents of external modes of perception,
both optical and aural, then computers are the artificial equivalent of
conceptual thinking, which stands in between the sensory external and the
psychic internal modes of perception as a bridge and link from the one to the
other. Hence for the full complement to
the natural head, with its senses and psyche, it is necessary to be in
possession not only of camera and microphone but of computer, radio, and
television as well, all of which, taken together, constitute an artificial head
whose parts function on an equivalent, if antithetical, basis to what we are
all, or at any rate most of us, endowed with by nature. Add to fantasies and natural visions the
artificial fantasies of video, particularly of the home-made variety, and the
artificial visions, or artificially-induced visionary experience, of
hallucinogens like LSD, and one has an even fuller antithetical complement to
the natural psyche - a complement stretching into the truly divine realms of
the supertrue.
108. 'In the beginning was the Word and the Word
was God'. - Such a claim is not so much pagan as proto-Christian or simply
Judaic. For it places God in the conceptual
and therefore attests to a relatively worldly approach to divinity which finds
its Christian complement in the New Testament.
But before the conceptual there was the perceptual, and after the
conceptual there is, or will be, the perceptual again, albeit on artificial
rather than naturalistic terms. Hence a
more comprehensive account of divinity, which would in some measure correspond
to the Blessed Trinity of divinities ... from the Father to the Holy Ghost via
Christ, would read as follows: In the beginning was the Star and the Star was
God; in the beginning was the Word and the Word was God; in the beginning was
the Film and the Film was God (at any rate, on a somewhat rudimentary
basis). Thus pagan - Judeo-Christian -
transcendental. However, for the modern
post-Christian age, God's origin can neither be traced to the Star nor to the
Word but simply to the Film, Video, Trip, etc., in increasing degrees of
spiritual refinement. To the extent that
we watch the Film or, rather, films ... we partake of and become God (Superfather). Such a
crude level and manifestation of divinity will gradually be transmuted into
higher and more genuine levels (Superchristic) as the
contemplating head progresses, over the decades, from films to trips via videos,
and so draws ever closer to the ultimate level of divinity (Supertranscendent)
in pure contemplation achieved through dynamic meditation. In the meantime, film stars (as opposed to
cosmic ones) will be the Superfatheristic norm for
most contemplating heads. The Superchristic can only come later, as the Son followed the
Father and truth eclipsed falsity. Those
of us who prefer the positive Divine to the negative Divine, and hence truth to
falsity, will welcome the inevitable eclipse of the mechanical, external, superfalse divinity by the chemical, internal, supertrue divinity, and thus the real coming of the
'Kingdom of Heaven' under Social Transcendentalist auspices. For the Superpagan
must be superseded by the Superchristian, if
salvation is truly to be achieved. To
the extent that video paves the way for the Superchristic
... it should be encouraged, even though it pertains, as film, to the Superfather and, hence, to superfalsity.
109. To the extent that a wavicle/particle
and, hence, divine/diabolic distinction can be drawn, on the level of what may
be called theocratic smoking, between cannabis and hashish ('grass' and
'shit'), we should also distinguish between capsule vision-engendering LSD and
tablet audio-engendering LSD on a similar basis, which, taken in conjunction
with 'dope', will furnish us with the basis of a working dichotomy between
Social Transcendentalism and Transcendental Socialism. Thus in the one case a cannabis/capsule LSD
integrity, with cannabis corresponding to the 'Social' and capsule LSD to the
'Transcendentalism', whilst, in the other case, a tablet LSD/hashish integrity,
with tablet LSD corresponding to the 'Transcendental' and hashish to the
'Socialism'. In the case of Social Transcendentalism,
the emphasis would be on capsule LSD; in the case of Transcendental Socialism,
by contrast, the emphasis would be on hashish.
That follows, needless to say, from the divine/diabolic distinction
between the two ideologies which, though not absolutely divisible, yet maintain
a relative bias one way or the other, depending on the ideology in
question. Thus a lesser emphasis on
cannabis and a greater one on capsule LSD would be juxtaposed with a lesser
emphasis on tablet LSD and a greater one on hashish. Accordingly, capsule LSD and hashish are the
two main adversaries or, as I should say, parallel alternatives, with cannabis
and tablet LSD constituting subordinate options within the overall framework of
each ideology. Yet if cannabis is subordinate
to capsule LSD within the Social Transcendentalist context, and to the extent,
I wager, of being confined to particular rather than general use, then tablet
LSD should be no less subordinate to hashish within the Transcendental
Socialist context, and to the extent, once again, of being confined to
particular rather than general use.
Should time or circumstances prove me wrong, then so be it! But as the principal architect of Social
Transcendentalism, I reserve the right to define ideological priorities as I
see fit. For how else can a divine/diabolic
distinction be maintained?
Transcendental Socialist tendencies may be unquestionably bad, or
immoral, in relation to Social Transcendentalist ones, though this fact would
not render the latter ideology perfect - least of all where the subordinate
possibility of cannabis was concerned.
Were men capable of only the divine, we could ban or eliminate the
'dope' element outright. But even where
and when they have a divine bias, the capacity for the diabolic will still
exist, albeit in a transmuted and relatively innocuous guise. And yet, if cannabis is paradoxically
preferable to hashish from a moral, or divine, standpoint, it can hardly be
deemed superior to tablet LSD. Certainly
it is better to be an 'acid head' than a 'shit head'; but if a 'shit head' is
all one can be, there will at least be the consolation, within a Transcendental
Socialist context, that one is not a tobacco head or, rather, body, insofar as
tobacco is arguably to the body what hashish and cannabis are to the head - the
relatively diabolic, or smoking, side of a worldly dichotomy which finds its
relatively divine, or drinking, side in alcohol.
110. Of course the world opposes what threatens
its own tobacco/ alcohol integrity, whether such a threat comes from beyond ...
in the forms of 'dope' and 'acid', or from behind ... in the neo-pagan forms of
hard drugs like heroin, opium, morphine, etc., which, whether smoked or
injected, threaten to resurrect the alpha-stemming (old-brain/subconscious)
head at the expense not only of the body but, from an omega-oriented
standpoint, the (new-brain/superconscious) head as
well. For in a transitional age, when
body civilization is in decline but the ultimate head civilization hasn't yet
officially arisen, it is all too easy for neo-pagan tendencies associated with
the old-brain/subconscious mind to come out of hibernation, as it were, and
seek to gain a footing at the expense of traditional worldly norms, including
alcohol and tobacco. Such traditional
hard drugs correspond, in their own context, to neo-royalism
in politics, and will be vigorously opposed - and rightly - by those bent on
defending the worldly status quo.
Whether, however, such people have as much justification in opposing
post-worldly drugs like LSD ... is another thing - at any rate, from a
new-brain/superconscious standpoint, though they
doubtless act correctly from a worldly standpoint and, hence, in opposition not
only to the Super-antichristic diabolic, but to the Superchristic divine as well, i.e. with reference to both
Transcendental Socialism and Social Transcendentalism, not forgetting their
respective 'dope' and 'acid' concomitants.
Thus the body has to defend itself against a fourfold encroachment upon
its democratic integrity by both divine and diabolic alpha-stemming and
omega-oriented head alternatives.
Ultimately both the body and the alpha-stemming (old-brain/subconscious)
head should lose, though not before the omega-oriented head, in both its
diabolic and divine aspects, proves worthy of global victory, thereby
initiating an age of exclusively new-brain and superconscious
drugs. For salvation is not only at the
expense of the world, and therefore of tobacco and alcohol, but of everything
pertaining to the pre-worldly divine and diabolic options as well. Now from a Social Transcendentalist and hence
truly divine standpoint, it is from the
possibility of post-worldly drugs like hashish and tablet LSD too, since what
pertains to Transcendental Socialism must, of necessity, be irrelevant to
Social Transcendentalism.
111. If cocaine is relevant to some kind of superworldly ideological bias, then that, too, would prove
irrelevant from both divine and diabolic standpoints. Broadly speaking, if the cannabis/capsule LSD
equation pertains to rock-jazz (a Social Transcendentalist equivalent), and the
tablet LSD/hashish equation ... to jazz-rock (a Transcendental Socialist
equivalent), then cocaine should pertain to electric blues, that middle-ground
theocratic musical form (whose political analogue is Ecology) in between centristic jazz and communistic rock. So if the future turns out anything like I
imagine, which is not inconceivable, then cocaine will go the way of all the
other drugs not strictly relevant to either of the two main ideological
alternatives under discussion.
112. As a sort of footnote to the above, I should
like to draw attention to the superphenomenal nature
of 'dope', whether cannabis or hashish, as opposed to the supernoumenal
nature of 'acid', whether capsule or tablet.
Cocaine is also superphenomenal, though from a
different standpoint than either cannabis or hashish, whereas untipped cigarettes and/or roll-ups on the one hand, and
fizzy beer on the other hand are superphenomenal from
a strictly worldly and, hence, bodily standpoint. Musically speaking, they stand to the head
drugs in the manner of pop and/or soul to rock, jazz, and blues. Both rhythm 'n' blues and rock 'n' roll
pertain to a mid-point in between pop and soul - the former with a bias towards
soul and the latter with a bias towards pop.
Such a mid-point corresponds, as already noted, to a moderately worldly
integrity as characterized by touch, that uniquely worldly sense, and finds its
chief drug neither in alcohol nor tobacco, but simply and purely in sex. For sex is to touch what alcohol is to taste
and tobacco to smell.
113. Writing or, more specifically, the technique
of writing will correspond to phenomenal, superphenomenal,
or to supernoumenal categories according to whether
it is divisibly relative, divisibly absolute, or indivisibly absolute. In the first case, we are dealing with word
pairs, for example pronouns and verbs like 'I am', 'you are', 'they are', as
well as with negative verbs like 'do not', 'will not', 'shall not',
'cannot'. In the second case, we are dealing
with the contraction of such word pairs into one word divided by an apostrophe,
as in 'I'm', 'you're', 'they're', 'don't', 'won't', 'shan't', 'can't'. In the third case, however, we are dealing
with the further contraction (centro-complexification)
of such words by elimination of the apostrophe, as in 'Im',
'youre', 'theyre', 'dont', 'wont', 'shant',
'cant'. Thus we have an overall
progression from worldly relativity, which is bourgeois, to divine absolutism,
which is classless, via diabolic absolutism, which is proletarian. A progression, in other words, from divisible
relativity to indivisible absolutism via divisible absolutism, which
corresponds, so I maintain, to phenomenal, superphenomenal,
and supernoumenal distinctions. In a bourgeois society, the phenomenal mode
of writing will be the accepted norm, while superphenomenal
contractions will accord with a proletarian alternative or opposition to
it. There will be scarcely any writing
conceived on a supernoumenal basis, since that
presupposes a classless society and, hence, the supersession
of State divisibility by Centrist indivisibility - in a word, the transcendence
of bourgeois/proletarian or, in the case of liberal republics, white- and
blue-collar distinctions ... through a social homogeneity aimed at the creation
of a truly divine society, one which is neither plutocratic nor democratic but
theocratic and therefore socially indivisible.
In such a society, where the great majority of people are programmed for
spiritual transcendence by a politico-religious elite assisted by special
police, supernoumenal writing would become the
accepted norm, and consequently something approximating to what G.B. Shaw
pioneered would take the place of all phenomenal and superphenomenal
modes of writing in the name of absolutist indivisibility. For in writing, no less than everything else,
centro-complexification is both a mark and a standard
of evolutionary progress. 'I have' -
'I've' - 'Ive', or 'do not' - 'don't' - 'dont' ... attest to just such a centro-complexification,
and any writer worthy of the claim 'progressive' will doubtless be more
disposed to one or other of the two absolutist technical approaches to writing
than to conventional relativity. But a
radical technique is of little use or justification if it does not serve an
equally radical subject-matter, the thematic treatment of which should be no
less radical. One cannot and should not
marry superphenomenal contractions to a worldly, or
democratic, subject-matter, and neither should a post-worldly, or
transcendental, subject-matter, treated positively and with sincerity, be
married to phenomenal relativity.
Getting sorted out in this regard and remaining both technically and
thematically congruous ... is the test of a great writer. It is also the mark of one!
114. Other examples of phenomenal vis-à-vis superphenomenal vis-à-vis supernoumenal
distinctions are afforded us by time and money.
In the case of time, we are speaking of a progression, as it were, from
conventional alphanumeric relativity to noumenal
absolutism, whether this latter be divisible, as between a.m. and p.m., or
indivisible, and hence 24 hrs. Thus
'five past six' or 'two minutes to eight' or 'half-past twelve' will accord
with phenomenal relativity by dint of the compromise between numerals and
words, even when, as in the examples cited, numerals are written as words (for,
in reality, they are read as numbers from conventional wind-up watches). However, superphenomenal
time-reading will only entail numbers, as from a twelve-hour digital watch, and
it is the division of such time into a.m. and p.m. which makes for a divisible
absolutism. With a 24 hr. digital, on
the other hand, no such division exists, and therefore the indivisible
absolutism which results from a 24 hr. mode accords with a supernoumenal
status - the ultimate mode of time-reading, especially pertinent to a Social
Transcendentalist society and ideological bias.
115. As to money, a similar progression from the
phenomenal to the supernoumenal via the superphenomenal can be inferred with regard to the
distinctions between traditional pounds/shillings/ pence counting and decimal
counting which either divides pounds from pence, as in superphenomenal
usage, or counts in pence alone, as with the supernoumenal
alternative. Thus whereas '£5 - 2s - 6p'
accords with phenomenal relativity by dint of its fulcrum, so to speak, being
shillings rather than pounds or pence, and therefore having a worldly and,
indeed, atomic significance in between larger and smaller units (not to mention
entailing a compromise, as with phenomenal time-reading, between words and
numbers), '£6 - 50p' accords with a superphenomenal,
or divisible, absolutism by dint of being pounds and fractions of pounds, i.e.
pence, in contrast to the indivisible absolutism of '650p' which accords with a
supernoumenal counting by dint of its exclusive
emphasis on pence - a more idealistic emphasis, given the indivisible character
of pence in relation to pounds. Of
course, in speaking of pounds, I am alluding to pound pieces rather than to
notes. For the superphenomenal
can only be established on the basis of a coin absolutism, and would not be
possible with notes and old-style (large) pennies, both of which accord with
the phenomenal in its extreme manifestations.
It is just that with the superphenomenal this
coin absolutism is divisible, as between pounds and pence. With the supernoumenal,
by contrast, it is only in pence and therefore indivisible.
116. Similarly, in respect of length measurement,
yards, feet, and inches accord with the phenomenal, feet standing in between
the two extremes in the way that shillings may be said to stand in between
pounds and pence or, for that matter, minutes in between hours and
seconds. With metres and centimetres,
however, one enters the realm of superphenomenal
length measurement, the metric absolutism divisible between metres and
centimetres, which can be transcended only on the supernoumenal
basis of centimetre indivisibility.
Nowadays we deal in metric units rather than imperial ones and
accordingly measure on a superphenomenal basis. The same is true of weighing (grams,
kilograms), solid volume (cubic metres, cubic centimetres), and so on ...
through all the possible metric modes of quantification, and to that extent it
is fair to say that phenomenal, i.e. imperial, standards of quantification no
longer have any relevance. In my view,
telling the time on a conventional alphanumeric basis is no less obsolete than
imperial measurements. The man for whom
the time is 'half-past twelve' (instead of 12.30) or 'five to six' (instead of
5.55) is living on the level of imperial measurements and is accordingly
lagging behind the times. Even the superphenomenal will one day be eclipsed as indivisible
absolutism puts divisible absolutism in the shadow of its supernoumenal
light.
117. Devolution from autocratic theocracy (the
Father) to theocratic autocracy (Satan), with further devolution from
autocratic autocracy (worldly alpha) to democratic autocracy (alpha
world). Evolution from autocratic
democracy (omega world) to democratic democracy (worldly omega), with further
evolution from theocratic democracy (the Antichrist) to democratic theocracy
(the Holy Ghost). Thus a 'fall', on the
one hand, from alpha theocracy to the worldly alpha/alpha world via diabolic
autocracy, and a 'rise', on the other hand, from the omega world/worldly omega
to omega theocracy via diabolic democracy.
God - Devil - world; world - Devil - God, with the head, on both
subconscious and old-brain terms, eclipsed by the worldly body on both
autocratic and democratic terms, prior to the possibility of the head being
resurrected, on both new-brain and superconscious
terms, with the return of Devil and God on an omega basis.
118. Similarly, one could speak of a regression
from alpha idealism to worldly realism via alpha naturalism and worldly
materialism on the one hand, but of a progression from worldly superrealism to omega superidealism
via worldly supermaterialism and omega
supernaturalism on the other hand. Thus
from (idealistic) autocratic theocracy to (realistic) democratic autocracy via
(naturalistic) theocratic autocracy and (materialistic) autocratic
autocracy. And thus from (superrealistic) autocratic democracy to (superidealistic) democratic theocracy via (supermaterialistic) democratic democracy and (supernaturalistic) theocratic democracy. On the one hand, noumenal
to subphenomenal regressions; on the other hand,
phenomenal to supernoumenal progressions. Devolution from the noumenal
head to the subphenomenal body in the case of the
regressive distinctions. Evolution from
the phenomenal body to the supernoumenal head in the
case of the progressive distinctions.
Treated graphically, this will read as follows:-
ALPHA DEVOLUTION OMEGA EVOLUTION
1. autocratic theocracy (noumenal) 8. democratic theocracy (supernoumenal)
2. theocratic autocracy (noumenal-subphenomenal) 7. theocratic democracy (superphenomenal-supernoumenal)
3. autocratic autocracy (subphenomenal) 6. democratic democracy (superphenomenal)
4. democratic
autocracy (phenomenal-subphenomenal) 5. autocratic democracy (subphenomenal-phenomenal)
Such a procedure is
rather more complex and, I trust, accurate than would be the use of
comparatively simple noumenal/phenomenal or superphenomenal/supernoumenal distinctions, given the
necessary gradations of alpha devolution on the one hand and of omega evolution
on the other hand which, considered with regard to the head in each of its dual
extremities, flank worldly phenomenalism in regard to
the body.
119. Thus we can pinpoint antithetical equivalents
between idealistic autocratic theocracy, which is noumenal,
and superidealistic democratic theocracy, which is supernoumenal; between naturalistic theocratic autocracy,
which is noumenal-subphenomenal, and supernaturalistic theocratic democracy, which is superphenomenal-supernoumenal; between materialistic
autocratic autocracy, which is subphenomenal, and supermaterialistic democratic democracy, which is superphenomenal; and between realistic democratic
autocracy, which is phenomenal-subphenomenal, and superrealistic autocratic democracy, which is subphenomenal-phenomenal.
On the one hand, a devolutionary regression, as we have seen, from
idealism to realism via naturalism and materialism; on the other hand, an
evolutionary progression from superrealism to superidealism via supermaterialism
and supernaturalism, with antithetical correlations between alpha idealism and
omega superidealism, alpha naturalism and omega
supernaturalism, alpha-worldly materialism and omega-worldly supermaterialism, worldly realism and worldly superrealism. Thus
the realistic body is flanked by the materialistic body, while the naturalistic
head is flanked by the idealistic head.
Worldly relativity and worldly absolutism; diabolic relativity and
divine absolutism.
120. Defining each historical distinction
separately, we have in autocratic theocracy the subconsciously-dominated,
Creator-oriented societies of pagan antiquity, including the Egyptian and early
Irish, which may be defined as proto-papal by dint of their cosmic religious
essence, an essence shared, though on a less elevated plane, by the succeeding
theocratic autocracies which, again like the Egyptian and Irish, were rather
more disposed to god-kings than to kingly gods ... to the extent that the
latter lost power in proportion to the increase in power of the former, who
thus ruled on the basis of diabolic and, hence, old-brain autocracy. Contrasted to which we shall find the
autocratic autocracies of alpha-worldly societies like the ancient Greek and
Roman, whose chief characteristic is a secular ruling elite of kings and
tyrants - an autocracy of the body as opposed to the head. This is also true of the succeeding
democratic autocracies, including the late Roman and early English, except that
in their case the tyrant or monarch is accountable to his nobles through some
agreement such as the Magna Carta, which effectively
curbs his autocratic power. One might
say that autocratic devolution has gone as far as it is possible to go at this
point without ceasing to be autocracy, and that such an autocratic nadir is a
precondition of subsequent democratic transformation, following a Cromwell-type
parliamentary revolution which shifts the balance of power from the monarch and
his nobles to the People or, at any rate, the bourgeoisie in what I have termed
an autocratic democracy - the parliamentary democracy upon which Britain built
its greatness as a world power of the first rank, a democracy in which not the
People but parliament is sovereign, an essential representational sovereignty
which contrasts with, though exists in the service of, the apparent sovereignty
of the reigning monarch within the constitutional framework of a United
Kingdom.
121. And yet, if a parliamentary democracy is, by
definition, bourgeois on account of its semi-autocratic nature, then the
succeeding republican democracies of, for example, France and the United States
may be regarded (somewhat contrary to accepted opinion) as proletarian
democracies within a Western, or Germanic, context, which is necessarily bodily
rather than of the head (in its new-brain aspect) and therefore inherently relative
or, as we usually say, pluralistic. For
the body is politically divisible not just in the autocratic and democratic
parts, as between blood and bone on the one hand and muscle and flesh on the
other, but - as just indicated - in both its autocratic and its democratic
aspects. Now if this is not to push the
metaphor too far, then I would say that in between such a division we can posit
a bodily parallel to parliamentary democracy on the basis of a vein/nerve
compromise, which is relatively middle-ground in relation to autocratic blood
and bone on the one hand and to democratic muscle and flesh on the other, and
therefore suitable to something which, strictly speaking, is neither of the one
nor of the other but ... a sort of half-way house in between the two. Thus if we are to equate blood with royalty,
and hence a secular or bodily monarchy, while reserving for the nobility in
general a connection with bones, both of which accord with an alpha-worldly
autocracy, then the antithetical equivalent to this, namely an omega-worldly
democracy, should be conceived in terms of the equation of bodily muscles with
one part of the democratic democracy and flesh with the other, so that a kind
of antagonism between muscles and flesh is envisaged, which, so I contend,
would typify a Western-style People's democracy.
122. Taking the American democracy as our model,
it seems feasible to equate muscles with the Democrats and flesh with the
Republicans, which gives us a kind of pain/pleasure distinction between workers
and players or, in popular parlance, the poor and the rich, the have-nots and
the haves. In a parliamentary democracy,
on the other hand, no such political distinction really exists, because we are
speaking rather more on the level of veins in the one case and of nerves in the
other, neither of which has any real connection with proletarian extremes
within a bodily context. Indeed, such a
division, being relative to an autocratic democracy, is somewhat more bourgeois
than proletarian, as between plutocratic conservatism on the one side and
laissez-faire liberalism on the other, and, so far as the British example of
parliamentary democracy is concerned, no longer exists in its traditional mould
but has been superseded by a kind of vein/muscle dichotomy between Low Toryism and Democratic Socialism (Labour), a dichotomy
between disjunctive adversaries which is neither bourgeois nor proletarian but
effectively grand bourgeois in the Tory case and petty bourgeois in that of the
Democratic Socialists, so that each side pulls in obliquely opposite directions
rather than, as with republican democracies, at approximately parallel points
to each other. The only way anything
approximating to the American type of democracy could arise in Britain would be
if the Labour Party, as the party correlative with muscles, found itself in
opposition to a Liberal and/or Social Democratic party which, correlating with
the flesh, sought to stay in government or to become the government at Labour's
expense. In other words, if the only two
main contenders for political power in Britain were the Democratic Socialists
and the Liberal Democrats - the former broadly representative of blue-collar
interests and the latter of white-collar interests, neither of them much
interested in either bourgeois or grand-bourgeois interests.
123. Yet such a dichotomy between alternative
working-class parties is hardly likely to arise in a parliamentary democracy
like Britain's where, one way or another, the Tories will always be a major, if
not the main, contender for
office, given British plutocratic traditions, and only one 'working-class'
party can ever hope to seriously rival them as an effective alternative. Two 'working-class' parties in competition
for the majority vote may be a fact of life in republican democracies, but it
certainly doesn't and can't have any reality in a parliamentary democracy,
where one of the contending parties will always be bourgeois or, more
correctly, grand bourgeois, and therefore constitute a direct link with the aristocracy
and monarchy, the Lords and the reigning sovereign. It is for this reason that any party to the
right of the Conservatives will be not so much fascist, in the accepted latin sense, as neo-royalist, since blue blood in
Conservative veins can be replaced, if necessary, by a transfusion of red blood
in the event of the monarchy being seriously called into question or put under
threat from the Extreme Left, no matter how unlikely such a prospect may seem
in reality. For just as the Extreme
Right in a parliamentary democracy like Britain's can only be of the body, and
hence a resurrection of royalist blood, so the Extreme Left will also be merely
bodily, and hence muscular. In both
cases, the head is beyond the pale, as it must be in any parliamentary
democracy, where either neo-royalism or socialist
anarchism will be the alternative extremes, never genuine Fascism or Communism,
which pertain to the head, but only something bodily.
124. And yet in a republican democracy, which is rather
more extreme than a parliamentary one, head alternatives to the bodily rule will encroach upon the
democratic status quo from time to time and threaten to destabilize it, as in
France, where communistic opposition to democracy is not unheard of, even if
such opposition hasn't had any appreciable effect in undermining or supplanting
it. For even the French remain by and
large democratic in a Western mould, which, being bodily, is inherently superphenomenal and therefore relative. Like their American counterparts, they fall
short of the head and, consequently, France is not on that account a bourgeois
democracy like Britain or Holland, even if it is less of a proletarian
democracy, in the Western mould, than the United States of America, which is far
more Germanic and accordingly more bodily and materialistic than France. If France is ideologically contiguous with
the lesser East European states like Poland and Hungary, then America is
ideologically contiguous with the Commonwealth of Independent States (formerly
the Soviet Union), that great supra-national entity which signifies a
full-blown theocratic democracy, a democracy not of the body but the head and,
needless to say, in terms of the new brain, which, in contrast to the
democratic body, is indivisible and accordingly aligned with absolute political
criteria, as congenial to the Slavic race.
For the Slav is less bodily in proportion as he is more brainy, using
the word in an ideological sense.
Consequently he leads the ideological field and will continue to do so
until the superconscious has its ideology and
democratic theocracy, in the form of Social Transcendentalism, stakes its claim
on a variety of, for the most part, Third World peoples in the name of a divine
alternative to Transcendental Socialism.
125. Such an alternative, no less supra-national,
would not be Fascist but, as I define it, Centrist, and therefore no mere
resurrection of the subconscious or collective unconscious such as Nazism and,
to a lesser extent, Italian Fascism tended to be. These latter ideologies are no more identical
to Social Transcendentalism than a military dictatorship is identical to
Transcendental Socialism. For whereas
Fascism resurrects the subconscious, military dictatorships to some extent
resurrect the old brain, and accordingly stand to Communism as Fascism to
Centrism or, for that matter, bodily neo-royalism to
socialism - mere rehashes of the alpha-stemming past rather than genuinely
omega-oriented proletarian ideologies.
Now, obviously, for a head people like the Italians, the resurrection of
subconscious idealism is no closer to true progress than the resurrection of Mosleyite neo-royalism for a
bodily people like the British. Either
way - and with regard to neo-autocratic militarism as well - we are not seeing
anything new but, rather, a kind of archreactionary
obstacle to transcendental progress. As
history dealt with neo-royalism, so it has dealt with
Fascism and military dictatorships.
126. Which leaves three contemporary alternatives,
viz. Socialism, Communism, and Centrism, approximately paralleling the omega
world, the omega Devil, and the omega God, whether or not subdivisions can be
adduced in the case of the world, as between muscular Democratic Socialism and
fleshy Liberal Democracy in Britain, or the muscular Democrats and the fleshy
Republicans in the United States, or, indeed, any other Western equivalents of
a two-party proletarian option which suggests if not an alternative approach to
Socialism then certainly an alternative approach to Capitalism - one either
State Capitalist, as in the British Labour movement traditionally, or
Corporate, as in the American system, where Socialism in any strict sense of
the word, i.e. with reference to public ownership of the (artificial) means of
production, is strictly taboo. For it
does seem that Socialism in the West is interpreted far more with regard to a
wider distribution of wealth on a capitalistic basis than in terms of a
Socialist economy as such, which, within the bodily context relative to the germanic democracies of the West, could all too easily be
interpreted too literally and materialistically, as in the case of fringe
Socialist parties in which ownership is conceived on the basis of worker
collectivism, or literal ownership by workers of the means of production at
their factory, rather than in the more elevated, and hence idealistic, sense of
public ownership through the State.
127. And yet ownership of the means of production
by the People through the State should not be confused with State ownership as
such. For whereas the former is
Socialism on a theocratic and therefore head (new-brain) basis, the latter is
State Capitalism, and it is this rather than State Socialism which obtains in
the West, particularly in countries like
128. Now this is no less true of those Western
societies where Corporatism tends to prevail over State Capitalism and
consequently provides the main alternative to Private Capitalism, that is to
say, to Capitalism pursued on an individualistic or traditional basis. One could argue that whereas Private
Capitalism is Republican and therefore aligned with the flesh, Corporate
Capitalism is Democratic and accordingly more aligned with the muscles. In each case, we have a post-parliamentary
democratic antagonism between Private and Corporate Capitalism, which is not so
much horizontal as vertical, and therefore constitutive of a proletarian polarity
rather than of a grand-bourgeois/petty-bourgeois antagonism on the
parliamentary model, as in
129. Yet such an approach paves the way for State
Capitalism which, masquerading as Socialism, seeks under Labour, traditionally,
to supplant private-owned industry by nationalized industry whenever possible -
at any rate, provided the Labour Party is being true to its petty-bourgeois
colours and is not playing either the grand-bourgeois tariff capitalists' or
the middle-bourgeois laissez-faire
capitalists' games. Should either of the
latter subsequently change their tune slightly - the Tory capitalist becoming
less obstructive of foreign imports and the Liberal capitalist partial to a
degree of nationalized industry, services, etc., then that is no reason for
Labour to sell-out to the private sector, but, rather, all the more reason for
it to remain State Capitalist until such time, if ever, as politicians of a genuinely
Socialist stamp begin to infiltrate the Labour movement and - dare I say it? -
introduce notions of public ownership of the means of production on a Western
and, hence, literal basis, the very basis that would undermine democratic
centrality and threaten Labour's elected status as a parliamentary party. For one cannot advocate decentralist economic
policies without calling into question the entire future of State Capitalism,
and to advocate such policies from a centralist, i.e. parliamentary point of view,
is both hypocritical and illogical, particularly when there cannot be the
slightest chance of their implementation, least of all in terms of the basis in
question! Therefore, much as some people
in the Labour Party may traditionally have entertained genuine ideals with
regard to Socialist economics, there is no way those ideals could bear
practical fruit without that party becoming torn apart and effectively
committing political suicide. For such
ideals undermine the very basis on which the parliamentary Labour Party is
elected, since they run contrary to its centralized grain. Consequently the Labour Party, true to its
state-capitalist colours, has no option but to oppose all those who would take
power away from the centre in pursuance of Socialist economics. For such people are wittingly or unwittingly
a socialist 'fifth column' within the Labour movement and, like the Trojan
Horse, their decentralist predilections can only lead to Labour's downfall!
130. However, despite militant-type infiltration,
it has to be admitted that most decentralist economic thinking takes place outside the Labour Movement by
Socialist parties that bitterly oppose what Labour stands for and see
themselves as the vanguard or, at any rate, focal-point of Socialist opposition
to Capitalism, both private and state.
Such parties are not interested in political centrality, with its
socialistic politics of distributing wealth as widely and fairly as possible on
the basis of State Capitalism, but represent economic decentralization and are
accordingly economically Socialist (on the Western bodily model) where Labour
is politically Socialist. Thus they
signify a 'fall' from political centrality to the economic fringes where,
invariably, they languish in verbal opposition to the Capitalist status
quo. Frankly, there is scant chance of
any hard-line extra-parliamentary party influencing the course of British
political or economic thinking, and I wager that if, at some future time, the
East became responsible for the political and economic direction of the West
(as to some extent it already has done in regard to Japan), it would oppose the
kind of economic thinking that advocates literal worker ownership of the means
of production and introduce its own theory and, indeed, practice of a sort of
sublimated ownership of those means by the workers through the State, so that
State Socialism rather than Utopian Socialism became the economic norm, and the
head, in its new-brain manifestation, accordingly prevailed over the body,
whether as flesh or muscle. For it is
most unlikely that a highly centralized people like, for example, the Chinese
would encourage decentralization, particularly in view of the fact that what
they upheld, as State Socialism, was superior - as superior as the head to the
body, and therefore not a materialistic but an idealistic approach to Socialist
economics.
131. And yet State Socialism is not the ultimate
form of economic management, no more than the new brain is the ultimate form of
the head. If it is superior to Utopian
Socialism, it is distinctly inferior to theocratic Centrism, or trusteeship of
the means of production by the Centre for the People, which pertains not to the
Transcendental Socialist stage of evolution or mode of democracy, but to the
Social Transcendentalist stage of evolution and mode of theocracy beyond,
whether or not co-existence between the two becomes a temporary fact of
life. For just as what I have described
as theocratic democracy, analogous to Transcendental Socialism, comes after democratic
democracy in evolutionary terms, so democratic theocracy comes after theocratic
democracy ... to usher in not the kingdom of superhell
but the kingdom of superheaven, the Social
Transcendentalist heaven in which trusteeship of the means of production by the
Centre relieves the People of responsibility in respect of public ownership,
and thereby renders them, through Superchristic
auspices, all the more credible as collective, albeit rudimentary, Holy
Ghost. For one cannot own the means of
production and be saved to the Holy Spirit at the same time, and if the People are to be saved (from the
State and, hence, the materialistic worldly responsibilities which accrue to a
republican status), then they must be freed from public ownership and elevated to
the divine status of so many units of potential transcendence. This can only happen by and through the
Centre, which is my principal contribution to ideological evolution, and thus
on the basis of a Social Transcendentalist revolution, democratically achieved,
in those countries where the establishment of 'Kingdom Come' would be both
logical and just.
132. For other countries - and I have gone into
this subject often enough elsewhere in my writings without wishing to repeat
myself here - Transcendental Socialism, with its state-socialist control of the
means of production, would continue to be valid for quite some time, if only
because the superdiabolic destiny is required if the
world is to be overcome and all forms of Capitalism be consigned to the rubbish
heap of history. Doubtless the head in
both its new brain and superconscious aspects will
work together to this end, since such aspects have more in common and are
closer to each other than to the body against which they must struggle, if the
world is eventually to be overcome. For
the goal of history is not the perpetual co-existence of the world (with its
autocracies and democracies), the Devil, and God, but the overcoming of the
world by the Devil (theocratic democracy), and, finally, the overcoming of the
Devil by God (democratic theocracy), in order that only the Divine may
ultimately prevail and the 'Kingdom of Heaven' be globally established as the
necessary precondition of post-millennial transcendence. Thus if State Socialism corresponds to a superphenomenal-supernoumenal integrity commensurate with
theocratic democracy, then Centre trusteeship corresponds to a supernoumenal integrity commensurate with democratic
theocracy, that ultimate ideological standpoint which must eventually eclipse the
penultimate ... if divine justice is to be done. Verily, we have come a long way from the age
of autocratic theocracy, both in terms of devolution and evolution, but
haven't yet arrived at the age of democratic theocracy. Only when we do, will 'heaven on earth' be
more than just a dream or hope of the pious millions!
133. Strictly speaking, we should speak of the
devolution of ape to pagan man, and then of the evolution of Christian man, and
Christian-equivalent men in other (so-called) world religions, from pagan
man. For the necessary corollary of
evolution towards the Omega Absolute is devolution from the Alpha Absolute, and
in Christian man devolution and evolution balance out between the Devil on the
one hand and Christ on the other, that is to say, between Hell and Heaven in
relative terms. The evolution of
transcendental man from Christian man, however, takes man beyond such
relativity into an aspiration towards the absolute Heaven of pure spirit, i.e.
the Holy Ghost. Transcendental man is
thus wholly evolutionary and therefore antithetical to the devolutionary
integrity of pagan man. If the former
can be described as superhuman, then the latter may be regarded as subhuman. Only Christian, or relative, man was purely
human, and thus balanced between devolutionary and evolutionary extremes in a
kind of worldly purgatory of bodily humanism.
One might say that with this stage of life there is neither a dress
absolutism nor a zipper suit absolutism, as between alpha and omega sartorial
extremes, but a sort of compromise in the form of skirts on the one hand and
trousers on the other hand. Transvaluated devolution and untransvaluated
evolution (since trousers are usually worn in conjunction with an overlapping
jacket - a phenomenon rather more feminine than masculine).
134. Thus we should think in terms of devolution
from planets and trees to animals, including apes, and early man, who himself
underwent a further series of devolutions from autocratic theocracy and
theocratic autocracy to autocratic autocracy and democratic autocracy, as
already described. The fact that early
man tended to look-up to certain animals and even to worship trees can only be
fully comprehended on the basis that he felt himself to be at a further remove
from the noumenal than those animals or trees and
consequently, in a very real sense, their inferior, so untransvaluated,
and hence merely devolutionary, was his point of view. Therefore it need not surprise us that women
and children also held - and to some extent still hold - a special place in the
estimation of men by dint of being closer to nature and accordingly more
alpha-orientated in themselves. The
disparity in status between women and men was amply reflected in their respective
modes of attire - the women garbed, as a rule, in full-length dresses ...
suggestive of an alpha-noumenal absolutism, the men,
by contrast, restricted to shorter-length dresses or, rather, tunics by dint of
their inferior feminine status, not quite men but more akin to women in their
psychological stance before the world.
In fact, we should distinguish men from women at this early juncture in
time on the basis of a submasculine/superfeminine
dichotomy, since if men were neither sartorially nor psychologically quite
masculine, they were nevertheless not women in any clinical sense, and
therefore deserve at least a submasculine status,
which contrasts quite sharply with the full-blown femininity, as it were, of
women, whom I have accordingly described as superfeminine. For if we think of men in this way, it
enables us to pit an evolution from submasculine to supermasculine via masculine levels against a devolution
from superfeminine to subfeminine
via feminine levels, as between submen and superwomen
in a devolutionary stage of history, men and women in a balanced devolutionary/
evolutionary stage, and subwomen and supermen in an
evolutionary stage such as we are currently embarked upon. For what devolves on the one side must evolve
on the other. A contemporary female in
miniskirt is rather more a subwoman than a woman, for
whom a knee-length skirt would be the norm, whereas a male in a one-piece
zipper suit is rather more a Superman than a man, for whom trousers would be
the norm. Yet just as women can now
dress beyond miniskirts in jeans, one-piece zipper suits, etc., and so become
effectively quasi-supermasculine, so men once dressed
beneath pantaloons, breeches, leggings, etc., in gowns or tunics, and thus
appeared effectively quasi-superfeminine. Sartorial dichotomies between male and female
are to all intents and purposes cancelled out at the very extremes of
devolution and evolution. There is only noumenon in the one case and supernoumenon
in the other. But as soon as the
phenomenon enters into account, no matter how modestly initially, i.e. in subphenomenal terms, we have a 'fall' from noumenal indivisibility into noumenal/phenomenal
divisibility which, contrary to appearances, continues as devolution until such
time as a transvaluation along Christian lines
('rebirth') establishes the phenomenal in an evolutionary light, and
consequently it assumes an independence from the noumenal
which paves the way for true evolution in due course, that is to say on the
basis of a superphenomenal/supernoumenal dichotomy,
pending the eventual eclipse of the superphenomenal
and subsequent attainment of a supernoumenal
indivisibility. For we must pass through
the relative in order to attain to the absolute, and the world is but a
phenomenal precondition of supernoumenal salvation.
135. Applying my devolutionary/evolutionary
theories to Darwin and, indeed, to the creation-verses-evolution argument which
persists even now in some quarters, I would maintain that while the
evolutionists are not entirely right, the creationists are far from being
entirely wrong. Or, put like this, it
should be apparent that while man wasn't literally created by God (the Father),
he didn't evolve from apes either but, rather, devolved from them to become not
man as we understand him, but a subhuman creature with no concept of evolution
and no desire, initially, to break with the alpha-stemming system of
things. It is only because and to the
extent that we are evolutionary that we tend to regard man's emergence from
apes in an evolutionary light. An untransvaluated point of view, strongly autocratic in
character, would regard it in an entirely different light - indeed, in terms of
creationism, which is nothing less than a mythical concept of devolution, i.e.
devolution in a noumenal age, when gods rather than
stars ruled human consciousness and man sought an explanation for life not in
science but in religion. Of course, this
is still true of some men even these days, which is why they oppose
evolutionary theories from a creationist point of view. Yet two wrongs don't make a right! Both creation and evolution must go, the one
because alpha-stemming metaphysics is no longer relevant, and the other because
it imposes where it doesn't belong. Only
devolution can adequately explain the link between ape and man, and the more devolved
man became from nature, the less sway alpha-noumenal
criteria had upon him and the closer he grew to an evolutionary possibility,
the very possibility to which we, in this post-Christian age, are logical
heirs.
136. To my mind, the Big Bang theory of the
origins of the Universe is merely a secular extrapolation from monotheism and,
consequently, no nearer the truth as to how the Universe began than
monotheism. For as most people will
know, monotheism was not the original state of religious observance but a
Judaic creation established in defiance of pagan polytheism, as sanctioned by
virtually all of the ancient world, including the Greeks and Romans. Thus polytheism is the original mode of
religious observance, monotheism a revolt against pagan precedent and therefore
a worldly, anthropomorphic development which sought to eclipse the Many by the
One, the Gods by God. But polytheism is
closer, by dint of its primal nature, to the truth of the origins of the Universe
than monotheism, if by 'truth' we mean that which accords with a
proton-constituted diabolic order or, rather, disorder of flaming stars flying everywhichway.
Consequently ‘Big Bangs’ would likewise be closer to the truth of the
origins of the Universe than the monotheistic Big-Bang theory currently in
vogue in the Judeo-Christian West. For
what begins in proton-proton reactions does not begin in unity but, rather, in
disunity and, hence, friction, and such a beginning is less divine than
diabolic, even though it will be perceived as divine by pagan humanity, who are
polytheistic in consequence. Divinizing
the diabolic, or replacing polytheism by monotheism, comes later ... at a more
devolved juncture in time when, as with the ancient Hebrews, the desire for a
unitary explanation of creation took precedence over polytheistic diversity,
and the One God was accordingly proclaimed.
It could be said that at this monotheistic point in time, the universal
has been eclipsed by the galactic, that the Galaxy has, in effect, replaced the
Universe, and the divine reference-point accordingly become more centralized,
as though a macrocosmic centrifugal bias has been superseded by a microcosmic
centripetal one, which could only signify progress away from the Many towards
the One.
137. It has long been a contention of my
philosophy that the central star of the Galaxy, as of any galaxy, is the
God-equivalent star (the Almighty), and if we devolve from galaxies in general
to this galaxy in particular, then the inevitable religious concomitance of
doing so is a devolution from gods in general to the particular god which, as
the central star of the Galaxy, serves a monotheistic purpose. Furthermore, devolutionary progress is also
guaranteed by citing an unseen First Mover (the central star of this galaxy) at
the expense of stars in general, irrespective of their galactic positions, so
that, contrary to polytheistic precedent, only this First Mover, or
Creator-star, is accorded a divine status, not the small or peripheral stars
which, in reality, are diabolic by dint of their decentralized, revolving, and
(in relation to the central star) cruder proton formations. For the largest stars will be the purest as
well as the oldest, and therefore be wavicle
proton-proton reactions as opposed to particle proton-proton reactions, which
is nothing less than a distinction, on an alpha-cosmic basis, between the
Divine and the Diabolic, the large central star of any given galaxy and the
host of smaller peripheral stars which revolve around it. Thus not only is monotheism an improvement on
polytheism by dint of singling out one galaxy, namely the one in which we
happen to live, and effectively attributing divinity to its principal star; it
improves on polytheism by avoiding the error of attributing divinity to stars
in general, irrespective of their galactic positions, with a consequence that
only that which is relatively divine in relation to lesser stars (inherently
diabolic) is acknowledged as such, and no confusion of the Divine with the
Diabolic, or vice versa, can result.
138. If monotheism refers back, willy-nilly,
knowingly or unknowingly, to the central star of the Galaxy, then it seems to
me that atheism, or the refusal to acknowledge God's existence, whether monotheistically or polytheistically,
is inherently worldly and therefore a step down, as it were, from the head to
the body or, more literally, from the Cosmos to the planet, so that
earth-centrism comes to replace star-centrism, and man accordingly becomes the
measure of all things, including divinity, which no longer exists
transcendently but anthropomorphically and, consequently, in the guise of man,
in accordance with humanistic criteria.
Such a humanized God is hardly God in any true, or formless, sense, but
a worldly figure whose reign will only last while the world, and hence the
body, has its day. For He is relative to
the world and must end with it, once it is overcome by the superdiabolic
Antichrist. Of all churches, the
Protestant Church is the most purely Christic and
therefore worldly, since it is effectively atheistic with regard to the Father,
or Creator-God, having no allegiance whatsoever to the papacy, that symbol and
representative on earth of the Father.
Yet if bourgeois liberal humanism is centred in a false, or worldly, God,
then proletarian socialist humanism is centred in the Antichrist, which is to
say, the superdiabolic. It is not only atheist with regard to the
Father, but also with regard to the Son, whom it looks down upon from a head
(new-brain) standpoint. One might almost
say that it is polytheistic in respect of the People who, as proletariat, are
democratically sovereign, sovereign diabolically rather than divinely. For this latter sovereignty can only exist in
and through the Centre ... in which not the new brain but the superconscious prevails, making for a theocratic
sovereignty in the People which is monotheistic to the extent that it can be
associated with a collective spiritual aspiration towards divinity, conceived
as the omega goal and culmination of evolution.
139. Thus from atheistic worldly sovereignty to
monotheistic divine sovereignty via polytheistic diabolic sovereignty - three
stages and manifestations of popular sovereignty, two of which have already
come to pass, the third of which awaits its coming largely in and for the Third
World, that truly godly part of the globe.
For just as the so-called
140. Traditionally, man stands to woman as the sun
to the earth, which is to say as the Diabolic to the world. Woman is physical, whereas man is
wilful. Woman is mundane, whereas man is
transcendental. He is 'will' in the Schopenhaurian sense of the word, and it is the exercise of
this will which, in connection with woman, results in sexual conquest. For the bigger, more powerful body that is
man goes in search of the smaller, weaker body that is woman and strives to
bend it to its will. Sex is therefore
akin to a union of the sun with the earth, and the child that ultimately
results from this union is akin to the moon, is effectively a kind of human
satellite, dependent upon and hence revolving around its mother, who is akin to
the earth. It shines, like the moon,
with a borrowed or reflected light, the light of parental, though especially
maternal, authority. Now this light is
chaste and intellectual, not unchaste and sensual, like the sun and, by
implication, emotional love of the husband for his wife.
141. Thus the family is but a microcosmic
reflection of and extrapolation from the Solar System, is effectively a mini
solar system ... with sun, earth, and moon(s), the father giving, like the sun,
to his wife and child, who revolve around him - the one directly (as planet)
and the other indirectly (as moon).
Originally man had many wives, the principle of polygamy more closely
paralleling the Solar System than monogamy, which is really an attenuation of
it consequent upon solar devolution. In
other words, the more primitive the age or society, the more likely it is to
reflect the Solar System in terms of one sun and several planets or, translated
into human terms, one husband and several wives, each of whom have children
(satellites) of their own who, naturally enough, revolve around them. Thus the modern monogamous family is but the
furthermost contraction of a cosmic principle, the utmost point of galactic
devolution. Father, mother, and child -
sun, earth, and moon. Add a godfather,
and one has the equivalent of the central star of the Galaxy, the First Mover
in the family cosmos, who remains somewhat aloof from the family unit itself,
as godfathers should, just as the central star remains at a constant, almost
aloof distance from the Solar System of which the sun is the principal
mover. For the father-proper,
corresponding to the sun, is effectively a devilfather
in relation to the godfather and, hence, someone who directly imposes, through
masculine will, upon his wife, who, as mother of her child, corresponds to the
earth, with its moon in attendance.
142. Yet just as the sun is a larger and more
powerful body than the earth, and the earth in turn is a larger and more
powerful body than the moon, so the husband is a larger and more powerful body,
as a rule, than his wife, who, in turn, is a larger and more powerful body than
her child, be it son or daughter. In
relation to his wife, the husband, or devilfather,
stands, like the sun, in an immoral light, since he imposes upon her for
his own sexual self-gratification. On
the other hand, the wife, or earthmother, stands to
her husband in an amoral light, like the earth to the sun, prepared to
bow to his will when required to do so but not, in herself, sexually
self-assertive. Thus she stands in
between husband and child, since only on this amoral basis can the latter be
accredited a moral standing in relation to herself. For the child shines, it will be remembered,
with a borrowed light, like the moon, and is therefore anything but amoral
itself, still less immoral and, hence, self-assertive like its father. On the contrary, the child is innocent
and therefore sexually moral, shielded from the immorality of the father by the
amorality of the mother, who is the intermediary making the child's existence
possible, just as the earth makes the existence of the moon possible and, in a
sense, shields it from the sun. Thus
children were regarded by Christ as epitomizing, in their innocence and purity,
the 'Kingdom of Heaven', since they are not consumed, like husbands and
fathers, with sexual lust, but exist at a transcendent or, at any rate, moral
remove from any such possibility, shining with the light of intellectual
curiosity, which includes curiosity as to the nature of sexuality, particularly
as it bears upon parental distinctions.
143. Such curiosity, however, has nothing
whatsoever to do with lustful fantasies concerning sex itself. For these only emerge, as a rule, following
puberty, when the moral innocence of childhood is undermined and besieged by
creeping adulthood, and one of two things generally happens, depending on one's
sex: either, as a female, one becomes amoral, like the earth, and accepts the
possibility of being sexually imposed upon or, as a male, one become immoral,
like the sun, and actually proceeds to sexually impose oneself upon others. There is, however, a third possibility, which
is considerably rarer and only found, as a rule, among people - and in
particular men - of genius, and that is a refusal to consider oneself in either
a sexually amoral or an immoral light but, on the contrary, a determination to
remain celibate and therefore moral. As
I say, it is usually only men of genius or religious vocation who are like
this, and they may be regarded as very much an exception to the rule, a kind of
adult children who, willy-nilly, aspire to following in Christ's footsteps and
becoming as little children in their own creative or contemplative 'Kingdoms of
Heaven', wherein the pursuit of truth is the principal aim, the raison d'être of
their moral existence. On the other
hand, the great majority of men are drawn towards the sun, as it were, and
effectively function towards women in a diabolic and, hence, immoral fashion,
albeit one regulated by social conditioning.
Where marriage does not take place, it can be assumed, I think, that the
couple concerned are more evolved than to fall for a social pattern which
derives, in all its essentials, from cosmic precedent and is therefore
inherently alpha-stemming and atomic.
Yet cohabitation is still hardly a transvaluation
along the lines of a social rebirth, but more a symptom of the breakdown or
decay of traditional values. For as
often as not the male partner in such a relationship has imposed himself upon
the female and thereby functions, in effect, as a sun vis-à-vis a planet, or as
the sun to the earth. Now
if a child results from their relationship, it is no less a kind of moon
equivalent than if they had been married.
The only real difference is that it is then more of an unofficial moon
equivalent than an official one, just as its progenitors may be described as
unofficially paralleling the sun and the earth respectively.
144. No, while the degeneration of an age-old
system of familial relationships is one thing, a true transvaluation
is quite another! For whereas the former
is the utmost point of devolution, a truly evolutionary stance can only be
maintained outside of and beyond all heterosexual cohabitations, whether
official or unofficial, bound or free.
Yet by this I do not mean through homosexual cohabitation, which is less
omega-orientated than worldly or, rather, antiworldly,
but through the establishment, under Social Transcendentalism, of a
transcendent process of propagation which is designed to free both men and
women alike from atomic interdependence and thereby allow for a free-electron
society commensurate with divine criteria.
For men and women cannot live together and be saved. Even Christ taught that to follow Him and
set-up the 'Kingdom of Heaven' one would have to abandon family, wife,
girlfriends, etc., since such a 'Kingdom' can only be established on a supermasculine basis, and so long as atomic compromises
between males and females continue to exist, it is not Heaven but the world
that prevails, as at present, for the great majority of people, who maintain
familial relationships.
145. Consequently the 'Kingdom of Heaven', which I
interpret in Social Transcendentalist and hence Centrist terms, cannot be
established while families, patterned on the Solar System, continue to exist,
and therefore the family, which is already under threat from the winds of
change, will have to be consigned to the rubbish heap of social history ... if
the free-electron Heaven is ever to be born.
For Heaven and the world are incommensurate, cannot co-exist, and if
Heaven is to become more than a wishful dream but a sort of concrete reality,
then the world, in all its permutations, must die - whether naturally or
violently. Those of us who wish to
further Heaven have no option but to oppose the world. For unless we do so, the world, and hence the
family, will continue to exist indefinitely, to the detriment of Heaven.
146. Thus Social Transcendentalism will be
pledged, in the future, to rejection of the family and to the furtherance of
artificial methods of propagation, including sperm banks, artificial
insemination, test-tube reproduction, incubators, State- or, rather,
Centre-sponsored collective nurturing and upbringing of children, and so on ...
in order that the need for family relations, and thus by implication the
cohabitation of men and women, can become a thing of the past, as relative to
an alpha-stemming or atomic phase of social experience. For where the People are concerned, we are
dealing less with atomic man and woman than - potentially if not literally at
this juncture in time - with electron Superman and quasi-Superman respectively,
at any rate within the republican context, and it would be both morally and
socially wrong to regard them in a strongly atomic and, hence, familial
light. Everything should be geared to
the absolute, to absolutist criteria, and this includes sexual behaviour no
less than any other pattern of social behaviour. Where a more sublimated, pornographic
sexuality is neither possible nor desirable ... by dint of an individual's
comparative spiritual or psychological limitations, then plastic-inflatable
('sex doll') or vibrator sexuality should obtain, thereby lifting sex from the
natural to the artificial plane and providing a release from sexual tensions
which might otherwise seek traditional and therefore worldly outlets, to the
detriment of spiritual progress. For, in
the future, people will not behave like animals but like gods - indeed, the
People will be God ... the Holy Ghost and consequently be above natural
patterns of sexual behaviour, even if only as far above, initially, as is
compatible with the use of either plastic inflatables
or vibrators, depending on one's gender.
Life will not be relative and dualistic, as at present, but absolute and
transcendental, with a much more radical swing between solitude and multitude,
which is to say, between sensual obligations conducted in private and spiritual
aspirations carried out in public. Thus
while people will live alone in single rooms or cubicles, and so sleep, eat,
drink alone (non-alcoholically), and have solitary sex, they will be far more
public and collective as regards the spiritual, cultural, and educational
aspects of life. For the public face
will be entirely religious in character, and such a face can only achieve a
blissful smile when it no longer has to compete with public sensuality, of
whatever description. To all
appearances, it will be as though the sensual side of life didn't exist, since
only the spiritual side would obtain a public airing. Truly, the Social Transcendentalist '
147. Masculinity and femininity are of the world
rather than of that which precedes or succeeds it. Strictly speaking, it cannot be said that the
stars are either masculine or feminine, since they are less masculine or
feminine than pre- or sub-masculine/feminine ... in that their existence is on the
plane of a subatomic absolute, i.e. proton-proton reactions, and therefore it
cannot be accorded gender. Yet just as
the stars are beneath gender, so pure spirit of a transcendent order, i.e.
electron-electron attractions, would be above gender and therefore supra-atomic
in constitution, no less absolute in its own fashion than the stars or, at any
rate, the biggest and purest of them are in theirs. For the smaller stars may be regarded as
having devolved from proton purity to a crude atomicity which, in the case of
planets like the earth, assumes an inorganic materialistic status commensurate
with the atom as such and, hence, with a combination of protons and
electrons. Doubtless there are degrees
of devolution from the utmost, or wavicle, proton
purity to a very crude, or particle, proton purity, which is nothing less than
a distinction between the Divine and the Diabolic, or the central star of the
Galaxy and peripheral stars like the sun, while further devolution will entail
the formation of inorganic materialism on the basis of planetary atomicity.
148. However that may be, we would have no more
right to consider a proton star masculine than an electron globe of pure spirit
feminine. Gender only obtains in the
world, and it does so both simultaneously and successively, the former literally
and the latter effectively, since the world passes from a predominantly
centrifugal phase to a predominantly centripetal one in the course of its
historical unfolding, and this is approximately commensurate with the
distinction between autocracy and democracy - the one preceding the other, just
as dresses precede trousers and bottles precede cans. Thus whilst it obviously goes without saying
that men exist in an autocratic age no less than women in a democratic one, it
nevertheless has to be said that in the former context the female element
predominates, whereas in the latter context it is the male element which is
ascendant, and to such an extent that the female element becomes threatened
with total eclipse, a fact which in large measure explains the paradoxical
phenomenon of feminism - really quite the opposite of what it at first appears
to be, since less a defence of woman as woman than a manifestation of
masculine criteria or, more correctly, a symptom of the ongoing 'masculinization' of the female to a point where she no
longer regards herself in traditional feminine terms but, rather, in relation
to a liberation from them. Through
Feminism woman is effectively pursuing her right, in this incipiently post-atomic
age, to be treated like a man and granted equal opportunity with men. For, as I have often maintained in the past,
women who effectively function like men deserve to be treated like men, and
this is the only workable basis for equality between the sexes, an equality
founded upon the post-dualistic nature of an advanced democratic society,
wherein distinctions between male and female gradually cease to apply, as
ongoing masculine progress eclipses the feminine element in life.
149. Of course, there are women and women, just as
there are men and men ... on each side, one might say, of the political divide,
and while some women are determined to socially progress and to see that
justice, on the basis of sexual equality, is done, there are others who,
inherently more conservative or intellectually less-evolved, seek to impede
post-sexist progress as much as possible and thereby stand-up for traditional
female norms, whether in terms of sex or motherhood or domestic responsibility
or whatever ... to the detriment of women's liberation. Whether or not they realize it, such women
are fighting a losing battle - like their male counterparts. For the pressure of evolution is decidedly
away from female/male distinctions, which are merely bourgeois, towards a unisexual
uniformity in which, instead of a skirt/trousers dichotomy, one finds a jeans
and, eventually, one-piece zipper suit absolutism indicative of a free-electron
homogeneity. The world may be balanced
between female and male elements, not to mention autocratic and democratic
political norms, but that which supersedes it, whether as Devil or God,
Transcendental Socialism or Social Transcendentalism, is less concerned with
such a balance than with establishing, on a unisexual basis, free societies in
which everything sexist has been consigned to the rubbish heap of world
history, including the traditional maternal and sexual status of women.
150. Yet while such societies - and in particular
that which pertains to the Superdivine rather than to
its superdiabolic counterpart - would maintain a unisexual
bias, the eventual outcome of evolution should be no less post-feminine than
the inception of devolution was pre-masculine, and accordingly aspirations
towards the culmination-point in Eternity would be beyond gender and therefore
manifestations of a free-electron absolutism which, being neither male nor
female, could only be defined in terms of a blissful 'it'. This would be especially true of those
aspirations which were conducted on a post-human basis within the millennial
context of the Supra-beings, or new-brain collectivizations,
which I have hitherto characterized as the second (after the Superbeings) and final post-human life form beyond
man. For a Supra-being would be as much
above man, and hence gender, as a tree is beneath him, and in this totally
classless, genderless society of hypermeditating
new-brain collectivizations, the development of pure
spirit would be taken to such a point that transcendence, or the achievement of
pure electron-electron attractions, would automatically ensue ... to signal the
beginnings of a truly heavenly phase of evolution. Such electron-electron attractions,
antithetical to the proton-proton reactions which characterize the alpha noumenal, would bring evolution to a supernoumenal
culmination, which would be as far above masculine superphenomenalism
as the inception of devolution was beneath feminine subphenomenalism. Verily, at whichever extreme of the Universe
one cares to dwell, there is neither 'she' nor 'he', but only 'it'.
151. Although the death penalty is fundamentally
an autocratic procedure deriving its justification from the tit-for-tat
mentality of 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth', we can, I think,
distinguish between applications of the death penalty which are bodily and
applications which pertain, by contrast, to the head, thereby effectively
distinguishing the world from the Diabolic and/or Divine - a distinction more
often taking effect between one type of country or society and another ... than
within the confines of any given country or society. Thus whilst it can be argued that some
countries will favour executions which make a target of the head, other
countries will favour executions which take immediate effect against the body,
and this, I argue, is because such countries are inherently bodily rather than
of the head, i.e. worldly as opposed to diabolic or divine. Consequently in the first category of
executions we can place beheading (whether by sword or axe), hanging, and
guillotining, the latter a kind of antithetical equivalent of the axe option,
insofar as the head is actually removed, albeit by mechanical rather than
manual means. In the second category,
however, we shall find crucifying, shooting, and electrifying, as with the
electric chair. Broadly, the first modes
of execution in each category are parallel both in an historical and an
evolutionary sense, as are the second and third respectively. Therefore we can posit a parallel progression
from beheading/crucifying to guillotining/electrifying via hanging/ shooting -
at least in an approximate way, since overlappings
between one mode of execution and another do of course occur, and some
countries have shown a susceptibility towards more than one mode both in terms
of horizontal and vertical distinctions - in other words, with regard to both
the head and the body (Britain being a case in point, as between hanging and
shooting, for which its inveterate dualistic integrity may be cited as a
probable explanation).
152. However that may be, such options are usually
with regard to adjacent modes of execution like beheading and hanging or
shooting and electrifying, rather than with regard to what might be described
as the historical extremes, like beheading and guillotining on the one hand, or
crucifying and electrifying on the other hand.
The Republican French may have guillotined people, but they didn't
literally behead them with an axe.
Similarly, while Americans may sentence people to death through
electrocution, they are unlikely to crucify anyone. Such extremes are mutually exclusive and,
hence, reserved for antithetical periods in historical time - as between
autocratic antiquity and democratic modernity.
Yet no matter how antithetical these methods of execution may happen to
be, they have reference either vis-à-vis the head, as in the French case, or
vis-à-vis the body, as in the American case, and this factor is symptomatic, it
seems to me, of the peoples concerned and the type of society in which they
happen to live. Just as the guillotine
affects the head via the neck, so the electric chair affects the body via the
limbs.
153. Now what applies to these latter-day modes of
execution applies no less to the primitive modes such as beheading on the one
hand and crucifying on the other hand.
It even applies, in some degree, to the relatively bourgeois, or
realistic, modes of execution coming in-between. For hanging predominantly has effect with
regard to the head and shooting with regard to the body, the former a more
idealistic method of execution than the latter ... to the extent that it
focuses on the head or, more specifically, the neck as opposed to the body,
while yet leaving the head intact. In
effect, hanging is more moderate than either beheading or guillotining, just as
shooting (in the chest) is more moderate than either crucifying or
electrifying. Each of these pertains to
a less extreme type of civilization, and one could argue that the replacement
of hanging by shooting is indicative of a degenerate progression from idealism
to materialism and is therefore symptomatic of a liberal rather than a
Christian epoch in time - the head having been eclipsed, as it were, by the
body.... As to the distinction I suggested earlier between the Diabolic and the
Divine, both of which pertain rather more to the head than to the body, I think
we should regard beheading by axe as a diabolic mode of execution and beheading
by sword as a divine one, insofar as the axe suggests, in its truncated
materialism, a particle equivalence, whereas the sword suggests, in its
elongated idealism, a wavicle equivalence, and this
is nothing less than the fundamental distinction between the Diabolic and the
Divine. Accordingly, one could argue
that the use of a small or short guillotine would signify a diabolic mode of
execution, while the use of a large or tall one would amount to a comparatively
divine mode of execution - the length of the blade also a determining factor,
on the basis of the particle/wavicle distinction
already drawn in relation to axes and swords.
Since, in principle, I am against the death penalty, I am not here
advocating its reinstatement in terms of either the guillotine or the electric
chair, still less in terms of older and cruder methods of execution, but am
simply endeavouring to provide a brief outline, necessarily partial, of the
principal historical modes of execution as they bear upon God/Devil and world
distinctions between the head and the body, and therefore in relation to the
tripartite essence of my teachings.
154. The opposite of a gentleman is not a man but
a rough man - in short, a lout. For the
world isn't simply dualistic or antithetical, but is divisible between divine,
diabolic, and worldly options, with the latter somewhat preponderant these
days. Thus while the majority of men may
be described as neither particularly gentle nor rough but as existing somewhere
in between the two extremes, it can be inferred that they correspond to the
mean and consequently are men in relation to the less populous categories of
divinely-biased gentlemen on the one hand and diabolically-biased rough men on
the other, both of which stand to the former as the head to the body and,
hence, as God and Devil to the world.
For a tripartite division on this basis is of the essence of life, and
explains why it is so often riven with frictions not
only between the Diabolic and the Divine, but between each of these and the
worldly, the latter of which will often be divided against themselves (as in
parliament). To establish approximate
sartorial distinctions between each of our three principal categories of males
(each of which has its female counterpart), we may posit a PVC zipper-jacket
mean for those in the first, or divine, category; a leather-jacket mean for
those in the second, or diabolic, category; and a cotton denim/cord-jacket mean
for those in the third, or worldly, category.
155. However, as I have specifically selected superphenomenal modes of jacket attire, I must qualify my
selection in relation to supermen rather than men, since we have to distinguish
between contemporary proletarian norms and the more conventional bourgeois
norms ... if we are to do proper justice to the present. Thus males who regularly dress in such
fashion will be less gentlemen, rough men, and men than effectively supergents, super-roughs, and supermen - as appertaining to
an alternative society. Obviously, in
traditional terms, gentlemen have dressed in silk or some other finer material
than either rough men or men in general, and where bourgeois gentlemen continue
to exist, as in
156. Further to my earlier supernotational
entry concerning the division of theism into monotheistic, polytheistic, and
atheistic categories, I should now like to add a fourth category - namely that
of pantheism, and to place this mode of theism, which identifies God with
nature, in between polytheism and atheism in a chronological sequence reading
as follows: monotheism, polytheism, pantheism, atheism, which I would like to
equate with specific historical/ideological periods of time and/or civilization
... beginning with (idealistic) autocratic theocracy and ending, as before,
with (superidealistic) democratic theocracy, all due
gradations of devolution and evolution coming in-between. Thus to take the devolutionary series from
autocratic theocracy to democratic autocracy first, we shall have a regression,
so to speak, from autocratic theocracy to democratic autocracy via theocratic
autocracy and autocratic autocracy, which can be illustrated, as before, in the
following manner:-
1. autocratic
theocracy (idealistic monotheism)
2. theocratic
autocracy (naturalistic polytheism)
3. autocratic
autocracy (materialistic pantheism)
4. democratic
autocracy (realistic atheism)
with autocratic
theocracy corresponding to idealistic monotheism, theocratic autocracy
corresponding to naturalistic polytheism, autocratic autocracy corresponding to
materialistic pantheism, and democratic autocracy corresponding to realistic
atheism, the latter of which brings us to the possibility and, indeed, reality
of a democratic transvaluation, as it were, and
therefore of an evolutionary progression from autocratic democracy to
democratic theocracy via democratic democracy and theocratic democracy, as
follows:-
8. democratic
theocracy (superidealistic monotheism)
7. theocratic
democracy (supernaturalistic polytheism)
6. democratic
democracy (supermaterialistic pantheism)
5. autocratic
democracy (superrealistic atheism)
with autocratic
democracy corresponding to superrealistic atheism,
democratic democracy corresponding to supermaterialistic
pantheism, theocratic democracy corresponding to supernaturalistic
polytheism, and democratic theocracy corresponding to superidealistic
monotheism - the ultimate divinity.
157. Thus if we once more bring the two series
together into one devolutionary/evolutionary diagram, we shall find:-
ALPHA
DEVOLUTION OMEGA
EVOLUTION
1. monotheistic autocratic theocracy 8. monotheistic democratic theocracy
2. polytheistic theocratic autocracy 7. polytheistic theocratic democracy
3.
pantheistic autocratic autocracy 6. pantheistic democratic democracy
4. atheistic democratic autocracy 5. atheistic autocratic democracy
which gives us a
comprehensive outline of religious regression ... from the Creator to Catholic
atheism via Satan and the Virgin Mary on the one hand, and of religious
progression ... from Protestant atheism to the Holy Ghost via the Second Coming
and the Antichrist on the other hand.
For in relation to the monotheistic extremes of the Father and the Holy
Ghost, the anthropomorphic middle-ground of Catholicism and Protestantism is
distinctly atheistic, as befitting worldly humanism. In other words, the divine focus of
Christianity is not the Creator, still less the Holy Spirit, but Christ ...
regarded as the Son of God and therefore in effect as man. The only real difference between the Catholic
Christ and the Protestant one is that whereas the former is autocratic, the
latter is democratic ... as relative to the distinction between democratic
autocracy and autocratic democracy, each of which corresponds to realistic
periods of worldly time. Thus whereas
the Catholic Christ is closer to the Father, both theologically and paternally,
the Protestant Christ is relatively independent of the Father and consequently
more democratically humanistic and religiously accessible. In the one case pessimistic atheism; in the
other case optimistic atheism. But
atheist they both remain, if for no other reason than that the religious focus
is on man rather than on some theistic Creator of the Universe.
158 Hence Christianity is essentially idolatrous
from a truly divine standpoint, and may be described as the religion of the
world, as opposed to either God (monotheism) or the Devil (polytheism). Similarly, pantheism is also a worldly
religion, if in the somewhat broader sense of identifying God with nature
rather than with either the Cosmos, in one or more of its components, or
man. Certainly polytheism and pantheism
can and do overlap, as when the stars are regarded as being part of
nature. But, strictly speaking, worldly
pantheism will be confined to the earth.
I have subsumed this under the Virgin Mary only because, like Venus
before her, she can be equated with 'Mother Earth' and, hence, with nature as
opposed to the Cosmos on the one hand and man on the other, coming in-between
polytheistic and atheistic alternatives.
Similarly, I have subsumed superpantheism, or
the artificial pantheism of a democratic democracy, under the Second Coming ...
not because I wish to identify it with Christ, but to point up a kind of sexual
antithetical equivalent to the Virgin Mary which, taking America as our model,
can be regarded as a symbol for worship of the machine - the form superpantheism more usually takes. Thus God as machine rather than God as
nature, and, in a certain mythical sense, Superman, who may well approximate to
the American equivalent of the Second Coming - an all-powerful doer of good.
159. However that may be, superpantheism
accords with a supermaterialistic age and society,
the exact antithesis to autocratic materialism, and whilst it, too, is of the
world, it borders on superdiabolic polytheism which,
in the guise of Transcendental Socialism, threatens it from an Antichristic and proletarian point-of-view, as pertaining
to a supernaturalistic age and society. For the world doesn't have eternal validity,
even on its most evolved level, and beyond the machine are the People, polytheistically sovereign in a
160. Thus far religious evolution may be said to
have progressed from worship of Christ to worship of the People via worship of
the machine. Hence from superrealistic individualism to supernaturalistic
collectivism via supermaterialistic
collectivism. In the future, the new
factor of an aspiration by the People towards a definitive transcendent unity
will take its rightful place and, ultimately, eclipse everything else. For this is no mere worship of anything, but
a transvaluated spiritual aspiration towards the
ultimate individualism of the Holy Ghost, and may accordingly be described as superidealistic individualism ... insofar as the People
will be collectively aspiring, whether indirectly (through contemplation) or
directly (through meditation), towards that indivisible absolute which, as
electron-electron attractions, is the ultimate indivisibility - the
transcendent unity of the Omega Beyond.
Therefore better than the Antichristic worship
of the collective is the Superchristic aspiration by
the collective towards a definitive unity.
For that which is ultimately one is beyond collectivism, beyond
polytheistic Communism in monotheistic Centrism. The collective is simply a means to that
higher end. And in superidealistic
Centrism the People will effectively be One, not a 'collection' of democratic
individuals but an 'individual' of theocratic collectivism - in a word, God.
161. Should anyone mindful of Schopenhauer's
criticisms of the atomic theories of the noumenon,
propounded in his day by Cartesian materialists, regard my own theories as
atomic, and therefore equally deserving of criticism from an idealistic
standpoint, I should like to say this in their defence: that they are not
atomic but subatomic as regards the alpha noumenon
and supra-atomic as regards the omega noumenon, which
I have also termed the supernoumenon. Thus my concept of the alpha noumenon as proton-proton reactions is no more atomic than
the antithetical concept of the omega noumenon as
electron-electron attractions, since in both cases we are dealing with
elemental absolutes, necessarily formless, and not with formal atomic
relativities, of which the world, in both its organic and inorganic
manifestations, affords us a permanent example.
To extrapolate the noumenon from the atom, on
the other hand, would be to take a worldly, materialistic view of it
commensurate with anthropomorphic predilections, of which ghosts, or the
concept of bodily spirits, are among the best known. For electrons and protons joined together
form atoms, and atoms are the building blocks of the material world. Thus an atomic view of the noumenon will be worldly, as Schopenhauer well-knew, and
consequently far from being the primal view of the noumenon
as something that lies at the back of the world ... as its subatomic
precondition. It will also be far from
the omega view of the noumenon which, according to my
teachings, is diametrically antithetical to the alpha noumenon
and therefore one dependent on the world as its precondition. In short, it will be a bourgeois view of the noumenon, and accordingly be neither subatomic nor
supra-atomic but, rather, an atomic compromise between the two - a noumenon which is neither alpha nor omega but strictly of
the world. Unfortunately, Schopenhauer
was not prepared to admit to the validity of such a noumenon,
or view thereof, since he was somewhat more aristocratic and monarchic than
bourgeois and democratic, in consequence of which he spoke from an alpha-noumenal point of view.
Yet much as I despise the atomic conception of the noumenon,
I have to accept it as a precondition of a free-electron conception, since the
subatomic conception, to which Schopenhauer related, leads nowhere because it
is an end-in-itself. Without bourgeois
materialism or, more correctly, realism ... there could be no proletarian
idealism, but only the aristocratic idealism of a proton noumenon
which defies change. And yet salvation
is more than just a denial of the alpha noumenon; it
is evolution towards the omega noumenon, conceived on
a post-atomic basis. Schopenhauer may
have been correct as regards the alpha noumenon, but
the bourgeois philosophers were not incorrect to conceive of a worldly noumenon. They were
simply more evolved.
162. Since a constitutional monarchy is
democratically accountable, it cannot be a thing of the head (old brain) but,
rather, a thing of the body (blood) and hence contiguous with democratic
constraint, which is also bodily, if in a relatively more evolved way. Thus a constitutional monarchy is less solar
than planetary, less diabolic than worldly, and may be regarded as an
extrapolation from the earth's molten core, in contrast to monarchies which
derive their authority from the sun and are accordingly diabolic. Traditionally it will be found that head
peoples, including Slavs and Latins, have been more
given to autocratic, or absolute, monarchies than bodily peoples, who, like the
British, prefer a constitutional monarchy, since that alone accords with the
body and, hence, a democratic compromise.
It is a secular monarchy, more devolved than the diabolic monarchies
that preceded it in the overall devolution of autocratic traditions.
163. Further to my entry on drugs, especially
cannabis and hashish, I would like to add a new theory which, on balance,
probably does more justice to truth than the old one. For I was wont to regard 'dope' as a
continuation of smoking beyond tobacco and therefore as a kind of complement to
LSD. Now, on further reflection, it
seems to me that cannabis and hashish are not so much transcendental drugs
beyond tobacco as transcendental, or head, drugs before it, and consequently
symptomatic of pre-worldly theocratic societies, including the Islamic. For is it not the case that such drugs are
natural, i.e. grown in plant form from the soil, rather than synthetic, and
that they are accordingly more symptomatic of an alpha-stemming naturalistic
age or society than of an omega-aspiring artificial age or society - in short,
a traditional theocratic equivalent of tobacco.
Hence their use would signify a sort of neo-pagan or theocratic
alternative to democratic smoking norms, which are called into question in and
by the decadence of worldly, or Western, society. Thus the democratic body could be regarded as
being under threat, in its civilized decrepitude, from the theocratic head,
albeit in old-brain/subconscious and, hence, traditional terms. Consequently, instead of signifying a
progression beyond worldly norms, the use of hashish and cannabis may be
regarded as constituting an assault upon those norms and, by implication,
Western civilization ... from a traditionally theocratic angle, as though Islam
were seeking to subvert and replace Christianity, now that Western civilization
appears to be in rapid decline. One
might say that smoking 'dope' instead of or in addition to tobacco is akin to
embracing Islam or Buddhism or some other oriental religion at the expense of
Christianity, and is therefore less a progression towards some new, higher
religion than a regression towards some older, more sensual religion.
164. Now what applies to 'dope', or natural drugs
that are smoked, could and probably does apply just as much to drugs that, like
heroin and morphine, are injected, which, on account of their liquidity,
suggest an alternative, albeit more lethal one, to alcohol, including
spirits. For it does seem that just as a
parallel exists between, say, hashish and tobacco, so a parallel likewise exists
between heroin and alcohol, and that just as people are divisible into drinkers
and smokers, so a like-division can be discerned between those who smoke 'dope'
and those who inject 'smack'. It may
even be that people who smoke are more susceptible to 'dope' or vice versa, whereas
those who drink are more susceptible to 'smack' or vice versa - assuming
the one habit doesn't automatically exclude the other. Whatever the case, it would seem that, like
'dope', injected drugs are more usually a resurrection of the past, or
infiltration of traditional theocratic norms into Western civilization, than an
indication of the future, contrary to synthetic drugs like LSD. It could be that such a phenomenon is
inevitable in a civilization which has absorbed, through mass immigration,
peoples from older, more theocracy-biased civilizations who may well, in some
cases, have need for drugs of this order.
For while tobacco and alcohol are endemic to the West, 'dope' and
'smack' stem from the East, both Middle (dope) and Far (smack), and should be
regarded in a traditional light by dint of their naturalistic constitution and
narcotic properties. Substituting the
old-brain/subconscious head for the autocratic/democratic body does not
indicate either evolutionary or moral progress.
On the contrary, it creates a problem which the West has to solve, if
civilized progress isn't to be set back hundreds if not thousands of years!
165. Regarding drugs from the standpoint of a
divine/diabolic dichotomy, it seems feasible to contend that drugs which expand
consciousness are entitled to a divine connotation, in contrast to those which,
like heroin and morphine, reduce or contract it, and may therefore be presumed
to connote with the Diabolic. Thus we
can distinguish between 'divine' and 'diabolic' drugs on this fundamental
basis, and it would seem that, as a rule, mind-expanding drugs are smoked
whereas mind-contracting ones are injected.
For hashish and cannabis are both mind-expanding in relation to, say,
heroin and morphine. Furthermore, such a
distinction to some extent also exists between tobacco and alcohol, since
tobacco is a stimulant which slightly increases consciousness, whereas alcohol
almost invariably results in a diminution of consciousness proportionate to the
volume drunk and the alcoholic strength of the type of alcohol - be it wine,
spirits, or beer. Consequently what
'dope' and 'smack' are to a pre-worldly context, namely mind-expanding and
mind-contracting drugs respectively, tobacco and alcohol are to the worldly
context itself, and thus, it could be argued, divine and diabolic alternatives within the world rather
than outside of or before it.
166. Yet if we are to distinguish between
pre-worldly divine and diabolic drugs and worldly drugs which assume a
relatively divine or diabolic status, then we should also distinguish between
divine and diabolic drugs on a post-worldly basis, the basis of the Holy Ghost
and its diabolic counterpart, rather than of either the Father or Christ and
their diabolic counterparts. Thus we
should distinguish between mind-expanding drugs like LSD and mind-contracting
ones like cocaine, regarding both in a post-worldly transcendental light by
dint of their synthetic properties. For
it does indeed seem that a kind of divine/diabolic dichotomy exists here which
in the one case transcends smoking and in the other case transcends drinking,
since LSD and cocaine are truly contemporary drugs, not merely age-old drugs
which have acquired a pseudo-modern currency in the decadence of Western
civilization, but contemporary in a way that suggests a Centrist and a
Communist polarity - the one comparatively divine because mind-expanding and
the other comparatively diabolic because mind-contracting or, more
specifically, mind-numbing. If God desires
the expansion of consciousness, would it not be logical for the Devil to reduce
it or, at the very least, maintain it at a level of heat (emotion) as opposed
to light (awareness)? Such a rhetorical
question requires no answer, and if cocaine was not the diabolic drug of the
late-twentieth century, then I would be at a loss to discover an
alternative. After all, is there not a
correspondence of sorts between LSD ('acid') and soda on the one hand, and
cocaine ('coke') and cola on the other - a correspondence of names which, as I
am sure many people would agree, is more than merely coincidental but, rather,
indicative of an underlying Centrist/Communistic dichotomy?
167. However that may be, I should like to expand
this basic dichotomy in terms of a Fascist/Social Transcendentalist distinction
on the one hand, and of a Communist/Transcendental Socialist distinction on the
other, reserving for the first category a distinction between capsule LSD and
tablet LSD, and for the second category a distinction between injected cocaine
and snorted cocaine. Thus Fascist
capsule LSD and Social Transcendentalist tablet LSD in the one case, but
Communist injected cocaine and Transcendental Socialist snorted cocaine in the
other - a double distinction paralleling that between streamlined scooters and
plain scooters on the one hand, but plain motorbikes and streamlined motorbikes
on the other hand, which reflects a regression from idealism towards
materialism in the Fascist/Social Transcendentalist case, but a progression
from materialism towards idealism in the Communist/Transcendental Socialist
case, both cases still essentially remaining apart and therefore indicative of
a divine/diabolic dichotomy.
Consequently while tablet LSD is less idealistic than capsule LSD, snorted
cocaine (free basing) is more idealistic than injected cocaine. This is because in the one case we have a
regression from a wavicle-suggesting (capsule) entity
to a particle-suggesting (tablet) entity, whereas in the other case we have a
progression from fluid cocaine intravenously injected to powdered cocaine
nasally inhaled, the latter symptomatic of a higher approach to the use of this
narcotic. Of course, I do not, as a
self-pronounced Social Transcendentalist, recommend cocaine, since my ideological
bias is towards LSD-type hallucinogens which, in the event of a Social
Transcendentalist revolution, I would favour legalizing, though only within
certain restricted terms and, hence, germane to the context of the Centre -
both ideologically and spiritually. Not
for me to expect LSD to be legalized in an open-society democratic context,
since it would be irrelevant to the type of society in question! If LSD, or some such hallucinogen, was to be
legalized in the future, it could only be under Social Transcendentalism for
purposes of religious aspiration.
Cocaine, however, would remain illegal - what it is in all democratic
societies at present. (As an afterthought, I would like to contend that
mescaline is an Ecological equivalence in between Fascist LSD and Communist
cocaine. This is because it usually has
the appearance of the latter but the essence of the former, comes in a powdered
form but tends to expand consciousness ... making for artificially-induced
visionary experience of an upward self-transcending order. In that respect, it can be regarded as a
cross between cocaine and LSD, since having the appearance of a narcotic but
the effect of an hallucinogen.)
168. Hegel teaches us that societies evolve from a
state where a few are free to a state where all are free via a state where some
are free. Thus from approximately
autocratic to theocratic via democratic levels.
Likewise, we can infer from this fact that in the first type of society
'the Few' make history, in the second type of society 'some' make history,
while in the third type of society 'all' make history. Therefore the question: is history made by
the Few or by the Many, by individuals or by the People in general, can be
answered by reference to the type of society prevailing at any given historical
time. If, formerly, the Few (the
nobility) and, subsequently, some (bourgeois parliamentarians) made history,
then these days it is increasingly the Many (the People) who are responsible
for its making.
169. But what exactly do we mean by 'free'? Certainly freedom, or the concept thereof,
changes from society to society, from age to age, and what is free to one age
or society may appear unfree, or bound, to
another. Yet, as a rule, men are neither
free nor bound but, in greater or lesser degrees, both free and bound ... depending on
the individual and the society or age to which he belongs. If we are to speak of a few being free at one
point in history, with 'free' taken to mean independent or in a position of
freedom from want or simply not enslaved, then we should qualify that freedom
in terms of their independence, and without reference to moral or spiritual
values, which can be assumed to have less applicability or to be relatively
undeveloped. Thus in this basic respect
'being free' is simply the antithesis to 'being enslaved', or physically bound,
and therefore merely relative, not absolute (or with regard, in other words, to
spiritual values). One can be free and
yet be a tyrant or a slave-driver at the same time. But this is hardly compatible with freedom in
a moral or spiritual sense! For that is
the ultimate freedom, far superior to physical freedom, and it tends to be less
the concern of the State than of the Church, which interprets freedom
spiritually - as freedom from sin or, in Schopenhauer's sense, the will and its
sensual desires.
170. Thus one could argue that contraction of
physical enslavement to a point of freedom, or seeming physical freedom, is the
prerogative of political progress, whereas expansion of spiritual freedom to a
point of binding ... is the prerogative of religious, or moral, progress. We cannot speak of freedom simply in physical
terms; it must also be considered from the standpoint of the spirit. Now in terms of spirituality it is, above
all, the idea of a new and higher binding which has to be borne in mind, since
it is not enough to be free from physical enslavement, one must also be free for the new spiritual
binding. For freedom is not an
end-in-itself but simply a means to a higher end, which I conceive as the
ultimate spiritual binding of and to the Centre. It is only in the struggle against physical
binding that man is free, since freedom is not absolute but relative, as
between protons and electrons in the atom.
Indeed, it is atomic. For, being
relative, there are options, and one must choose between them if one is to be
free - in other words, if one is free to make such a choice. Only with pre-atomic societies is man truly
bound, since in such autocratic societies there is no (democratic) relativity,
but an approximation, derived from cosmic precedent, to proton-proton
reactions. Such a society is absolutist,
and therefore bound to alpha-stemming criteria.
The bound man is not free and neither, in a moral sense, is the
so-called freeman, whose physical freedom depends upon the enslavement of
others. All men are, in effect, bound to
the physical, whether as master or slave.
171. Now while some men are bound to the physical,
whether as employer or employee, within a democratic society, others are free
from the physical and bound to the spirit.
There exists a balance between the bound and the free, and the struggle
against the bound is waged by the free, whether in the name of freedom, as with
Socialists and Communists, or in the name of a new binding, as with Fascists
and Centrists. In the one case, freedom
from physical enslavement to the bourgeoisie is regarded as an
end-in-itself. In the other case,
freedom from enslavement must lead to a new binding, since the bound is what is
truly absolutist and, in post-atomic societies, it will amount to
electron-electron attractions as an approximation - at any rate within a Social
Transcendentalist context - to the Holy Spirit.
For that is the ultimate spiritual binding, which makes for the Centre,
and such a theocratic binding is no less absolute than the autocratic binding
of pre-worldly societies. Beyond the
atom there is no more a relativity (between protons and electrons) ... than
there was before it. Both the Father and
the Holy Ghost are bound - as, for that matter, are Satan and the Antichrist,
though they or, rather, their devotees may proclaim themselves free. Only the world, however, is truly free
because indeterminate, and therefore torn between antithetical options. Yet freedom is a passing phase of historical
time. Even Communist freedom is, in
effect, bound to a new centre - namely that of the totalitarian State. But because Communist society is more
economic and political than religious and spiritual, it will proclaim itself
free from autocratic bindings rather than bound to theocratic aspirations. And in this respect it is totally free, not
partially free like Liberalism, whether of the centre or of the left. In other words, the difference between a
proletarian democracy and a bourgeois democracy, particularly one with
autocratic roots still nominally intact.
172. Yet it is not just adherence to autocracy
that constitutes a binding, since the bourgeoisie are also bound to their own
centre to the extent that they are capitalistic and parliamentarian, and if the
Father is one binding, then Christ is very much another - a middle-ground, or
worldly, binding in between antithetical absolutes. Thus freedom in a bourgeois democracy is
relative to those who oppose such a Capitalist binding, whether from a
Socialist or a Communist standpoint, and is necessarily decentralist and
anti-Christian. For 'the free' are
either a 'fall' from the centre or an opposition, in freedom, to the centre,
whether it be autocratic or democratic, aristocratic or bourgeois. And freedom is a kind of damnation in
relation to the centre, to those who are saved on whichever evolutionary
level. Freedom is an alienation from and
opposition to the centre, and therefore an imperfect condition which, except for
those who revel in it, goads its protagonists towards the establishment of a
new centre, superior to the old one. For
some, this objective is eventually achieved.
For others - perhaps the great majority of those caught between centres
- there is no alternative but to languish in freedom or perish from it. That has certainly been the fate of most
Western Socialists to-date!
173. I am not free to act if I am bound, but I am
bound to act if I am free - whether against an old binding (Socialism), for the
sake of acting (Anarchism), or for a new binding (Communism/Centrism). Broadly, freedom in the twentieth century was
for the proletariat (an electron equivalence) to become free from aristocratic
(proton) and bourgeois (neutron) constraints, and so achieve a proletarian
absolutism within a uniquely People's society.
One can trace the beginnings of this struggle to bourgeois liberalism (a
neutron-centred atomicity), and from there a split developed between Democratic
Socialism (a particle-biased atomic-electron equivalence) and Liberal Democracy
(a wavicle-biased atomic-electron equivalence) - as
between blue- and white-collar interests.
These are relative to the world, or Western democracies, and can
co-exist within the same political framework.
174. Beyond the world, however, no such relative
co-existence is possible, since both the Divine and the Diabolic are absolute
on post-worldly terms, and therefore can only exist independently of each other
... in different societies or countries, even though, in the paradoxical nature
of contemporary life, each will uphold relativity within their respective
ideological frameworks. Thus we get (or
will do in the future) Transcendental Socialism (a particle-biased electron
equivalence) on the one hand and Social Transcendentalism (a wavicle-biased electron equivalence) on the other - the
former morally free and the latter bound to the Centre (conceived in its Social
Transcendentalist context), as befitting a wavicle
and, hence, idealistic bias.
Alternatively, one could speak of Centristic
Communism in the one case and of Communistic Centrism in the other. For whilst each ideology would exist in
absolute independence, they are intrinsically relative, albeit with
diametrically opposite biases. In the
case of Transcendental Socialism an electron-particle freedom of the
proletariat from bourgeois and/or aristocratic constraints, in the case of Social Transcendentalism an
electron-wavicle binding of the proletariat to the
ultimate Centre - the transcendent 'Kingdom of Heaven', wherein lies divine
salvation for all Eternity.
175. To distinguish, on the one hand, between unfree binding (proton wavicles),
bound unfreedom (proton particles), bound binding
(atomic protons), and freedom-in-binding (proton-biased atomicity), as regards
alpha-stemming idealism, naturalism, materialism, and realism; and then to
distinguish, on the other hand, between freedom-from-binding (electron-biased
atomicity), free freedom (atomic electrons), bound freedom (electron
particles), and free binding (electron wavicles), as
regards omega-oriented realism, materialism, naturalism, and idealism. Thus a devolutionary regression from unfree binding to freedom-in-binding via bound unfreedom and bound binding on the one hand, but an
evolutionary progression from freedom-from-binding to free binding via free
freedom and bound freedom on the other hand.
Consequently, Transcendental Socialism may be defined in terms of bound
freedom, Social Transcendentalism, by contrast, in terms of free binding - a distinction,
one could argue, between the centralized State and the state-like Centre.
176. Not free from what but free for what (Nietzsche)? And the ultimate response to that is: For a
new binding! Thus as the Diabolic
contracts, and greater degrees of physical freedom from autocratic constraint
are accordingly proclaimed, so the Divine expands, and greater degrees of
binding to theocratic transcendentalism are likewise proclaimed. As the State withers, so the Church expands. The ultimate contraction of the State is a
free, or socialist, society. The
ultimate expansion of the Church is a bound or Centrist society. Freedom is diabolic, binding divine. The world achieves a balance between binding
and freedom, and is therefore amoral. On
the other hand, an imbalance on the side of binding, as in traditional secular
autocracies, is relatively moral (albeit in an untransvaluated
sense), whereas an imbalance on the side of freedom, as in republican
democracies, is relatively immoral. For
morality is proportionate to binding, and the more moral the society the
greater the degree of binding. In the
alpha-stemming case, a proton morality; in the omega-oriented case, an electron
morality - the former false and the latter true.
177. Only in the case of an omega-oriented society
can binding, and hence being, be not merely apparent (as in alpha-stemming
societies) but essential, as regarding the wavicle
indivisibility of electron-electron attractions - a truly indivisible
absolutism in relation to the false absolutism of proton-proton reactions in
the apparent 'indivisibility' of the Creator, viz. the central star of the
Galaxy.
178. In relation to being, doing is always
immoral, whether positive and constructive, like good acts, or negative and
destructive, like evil acts. For, like
the Divine, the Diabolic is both negative and positive, Satanic and Antichristic, and while, from a Christian standpoint, good
acts may be preferable to bad ones, nonetheless they are immoral in relation to
true morality, which is being-orientated and therefore not free but bound,
whether the binding be negative or positive, to proton wavicles
or to electron wavicles, to the Father or to Christ;
as also, within an artificial and hence contemporary context, to the Superfather or to the Superchrist
(both the latter of which can be generalized into an allegiance, temporary or
otherwise, to violent films in the one case and to passive trips in the other
case). Being should be associated, in
its negative manifestations, with illusion and sadness, whilst in its positive
manifestations it should be associated with happiness and truth. By contrast, doing should be associated, in
its negative manifestations, with ugliness and hate, though in its positive
manifestations it should be associated with beauty and love. Whether the qualitative attribute precedes
the quantitative one, or vice versa, will depend upon whether the type of being
or doing in question is naturalistic or artificial, which is to say upon
whether it conforms to a noumenal-phenomenal
regression or, by contrast, to a superphenomenal-supernoumenal
progression, depending on both the individual and the age or society in which
he happens to live. In
the one case, a regression, for instance, from hate to ugliness at the negative
pole of the naturalistic diabolic spectrum. In the other case, a
progression from ugliness to hate at the negative pole of the artificial diabolic
spectrum. Similarly a regression,
for instance, from happiness to truth at the positive pole of the naturalistic
divine spectrum, as, conversely, a progression from truth to joy at the
positive pole of the artificial divine spectrum.
179. Thus whereas hate is a precondition of
ugliness in the one context, ugliness is a precondition of hate in the
artificial context antithetical to it.
In the former case, an act could only be ugly if preceded or motivated
by hate, whereas in the latter case hate, or a hateful feeling, follows upon
the precondition of ugliness. For
whereas in the natural context the noumenal precedes
the phenomenal, of which the quantitative attribute is a phenomenal
manifestation, in the artificial context antithetical to it, by contrast, the superphenomenal precedes the supernoumenal,
of which the qualitative attribute is a noumenal
manifestation. No less than the good act
(beauty) is preceded by the positive diabolic feeling and the bad act (ugly) by
the negative diabolic feeling in a naturalistic context, so the positive
diabolic feeling (love) is preceded by the good act and the negative diabolic
feeling (hate) by the bad act in an artificial context. And no less than the false being (illusion)
is preceded by the negative divine feeling and the true being (truth) by the
positive divine feeling in a naturalistic context, so the negative divine
feeling (sadness) is preceded by the false being and the positive divine
feeling (joy) by the true being in an artificial context. And so on, with due regard to the worldly
spectra of strength/pride and weakness/ humiliation, evil/pain and
goodness/pleasure, strife/fear and peace/hope, which I have characterized as
bodily rather than of the head. In an
alpha-stemming naturalistic context, pride will precede strength and
humiliation likewise precede weakness, but in an omega-oriented artificial
context strength is a prerequisite of pride and weakness a prerequisite of humiliation.
180. Returning to our moral/immoral distinctions,
one should distinguish between worldly immorality and diabolic immorality on
the basis of a pantheistic/polytheistic dichotomy. For whereas worldly immorality has to do with
nature or some antithetical equivalence
thereof ... like the city, diabolic immorality has to do with the stars
or some antithetical equivalence, like the proletariat. Immorality is free rather than bound, is
decentralized rather than centralized, and accordingly contrasts with divine
morality, which, at its purest level, can only be monotheistic. Thus one should speak of an alpha-stemming
regression from monotheistic morality to atheistic amorality via polytheistic
and pantheistic immorality, while reserving for the omega orientation a
progression from superatheistic amorality to supermonotheistic morality via superpantheistic
and superpolytheistic immorality.
181. Correlated with the specific ideological and
historical stages we have already touched upon, the devolutionary and
evolutionary distinctions listed above will read as follows:-
ALPHA DEVOLUTION OMEGA
EVOLUTION
1.
monotheistic autocratic theocracy (moral) 8. supermonotheistic democratic theocracy (moral)
2.
polytheistic theocratic autocracy (immoral) 7. superpolytheistic theocratic democracy (immoral)
3.
pantheistic autocratic autocracy (immoral) 6. superpantheistic democratic democracy (immoral)
4. atheistic democratic autocracy (amoral) 5. superatheistic
autocratic democracy (amoral)
with a devolutionary
regression from alpha monotheistic morality to worldly atheistic amorality via
alpha polytheistic immorality and worldly-alpha pantheistic immorality on the
one hand, and an evolutionary progression from worldly superatheistic
amorality to omega supermonotheistic morality via
worldly-omega superpantheistic immorality and omega superpolytheistic immorality on the other hand.
182. As to the distinction between monotheistic
and supermonotheistic morality, we have two
diametrically opposite kinds of divine binding ... commensurate with the Father
and the Holy Ghost. As to the
distinction between polytheistic and superpolytheistic
immorality, we have two diametrically opposite kinds of diabolic freedom ...
commensurate with Satan and the Antichrist.
As to the distinction between pantheistic and superpantheistic
immorality, we have two diametrically opposite kinds of worldly freedom ...
commensurate with the Virgin Mary and the (Germanic) Second Coming. And finally, as to the distinction between
atheistic and superatheistic amorality, we have two
diametrically opposite kinds of worldly binding ... commensurate with the
Catholic Christ and the Protestant Christ - the former divisible between the
Child and the Resurrection, the latter humanistic or, as one should say, adult,
making for a neutron amorality in contrast to a proton/electron oscillation
between antithetical extremes.
183. Put more concretely, we have an
extrapolation, in the case of alpha morality, from the central star of the
Galaxy, which is worshipped as Creator, while, in the case of omega morality,
we have an aspiration towards the transcendent culmination of evolution in
spiritual unity. In the case of
polytheistic immorality we have a 'fall' from binding, or monotheism, into
worship of the stars, or extrapolations thereof, as gods, whilst in the
antithetical case of superpolytheistic immorality we
have a worship or, rather, quasi-religious self-identification of the People,
collectively, with ultimate sovereignty - at any rate, in democratic
terms. In the case of pantheistic
immorality we have an identification of nature, in all its diverse
manifestations, with divinity, whereas in the superpantheistic
immorality antithetical to it, the city and/or machine become the focus of a
divine identification. Finally, in the
case of atheistic amorality we have a worship of man as God which, in both
Catholic and Protestant contexts, takes the form of Christ.
184. Thus whereas the bound is always individual,
whether moral or amoral, the free is ever collective, whether in a worldly and,
hence, pantheistic context, or in a diabolic and, hence, polytheistic one. Morality is rooted in the individual,
immorality in the collective. Binding is
to the One, freedom is for the Many. Whether
the One be Father, Son, or Holy Ghost (depending on the type and stage of
religion), a moral binding thereof will ensue, whereas in between, on both
polytheistic and pantheistic levels, a decentralized freedom (from such a
binding) will become the immoral norm.
What makes adherence to Christianity, in a binding to Christ, amoral
rather than strictly moral is that, being man, Christ is neither protonic nor electronic, the Father nor the Holy Ghost, but
an atomic mid-point in between two purist extremes, and accordingly an impure
realism appertaining to the world. For
true morality is ever idealistic and, hence, bound to the absolute - in a word,
monotheistic. Thus it happens that,
traditionally, the Jews have shown themselves, through their refusal to
compromise with worldly relativity, to be the most moral people, even in the
face of worldly persecution. Doubtless
once the Jewish people accept Social Transcendentalism as the true world
(global) religion, they will become no less moral but, if anything, even more
so ... as they take a lead in furthering the ultimate monotheism - the supermonotheism of an unequivocally transcendental
aspiration which, unlike allegiance to the Creator, will be rooted in the
people and tend towards the true indivisibility of an ultimate binding in
electron-electron attractions. For centro-complexification leading towards the projected Omega
Point is the way of divine evolution, and those of us who have an interest in
furthering such evolution must champion the Social Transcendentalist Centre at
the expense of the decentralized State.
185. True morality resides in the individual and
adherence to the One through personal binding to a religious focal-point. No-one can trip or meditate for you, and even
if you trip or meditate in a group ... you are essentially still alone with
your spirit. For the group is not
indivisible, like spirit, but divisible, like matter, and therefore any concept
of divinity which is social in character is less moral than immoral - in fact,
is polytheistically diabolic. Doubtless the world, or a certain part of it,
must pass through this polytheism before any prospect of global monotheism on
the ultimate spiritual level becomes possible.
Now, paradoxically, such a diabolic immorality is preferable, from an
omega-divine standpoint, to the worldly immorality that characterized the
greater part of the Germanic West in the twentieth century. Being equivalent to the new-brain head rather
than to the flesh/muscle body, it is closer to the superconscious
than to the latter - indeed, so close as to be virtually contiguous. Only a standpoint which, like worldly
amorality, was beneath worldly immorality would find the flesh/muscle body
preferable to the new-brain head. For
one part of the body, in this case that of the veins/nerves, is closer to
another part of it than to the head, and when it comes to the crunch the body
will stick together, as it were, to defend itself from encroachments of one
kind or another from the head. The world
is not interested in becoming either the Devil or God but only in remaining
itself, and accordingly its end can only be at the expense of bodily will.
186. God helps his own, and can only do so through
a divinely-biased publisher, like one affiliated to the Catholic Church. He cannot seek publication in the world,
through commercial channels, and neither should he seek it through academic or
university publishers, since publishers of that sort are the nearest Western
approximation to the Devil or, at any rate, to a diabolic (brain-centred) order
of publication. For let there be no
doubt on this point: the commercial worldly and the academic diabolic types of
publishers are not the channels
through which divine truth should seek printed dissemination! Neither the body nor the brain is of direct
use to God. Only the mind, and the mind
will be given its due by religious rather than by academic or commercial
publishers. The true equivalent to the
Second-Coming appeals to the Church for recognition of his messianic
revelations, since the Church is alone qualified to recognize divine truth when
such truth is put before it, and for the Church the Second Coming is no mere
myth or figment of the imagination but a centuries-old hope and waiting ...
that the 'Kingdom of Heaven' may be proclaimed and established here on earth
for those who deserve such a 'kingdom'.
God calls His own, and those who deserve salvation from the world will
surely receive it ... through Social Transcendentalism.
187. Traditionally the State is an instrument of
oppression, a means of defending the interests of the oppressor rather than of
the oppressed. It is only with the
Welfare State that the State becomes less an instrument of oppression than a
source of help to the oppressed. Yet the
Welfare State is not absolutist but, within the liberal contexts of Western
democracy, co-exists with the traditional bourgeois State of capitalist
oppression. Only in a Socialist State
does the State become absolutely a means of helping the oppressed or, more
correctly, of preventing oppression. For
such a State does not co-exist with a capitalist opposition, as in the liberal
contexts, but is beyond all possibility of such an opposition. Thus it is not only a transmuted State but an
absolutist State intimating, no matter how indirectly, i.e. through itself, of
a future 'Kingdom of Heaven', or Millennium, without being in a position to
become that 'kingdom'. For such a
millennial 'kingdom' can only come via Social Transcendentalism, and it
presupposes the Centre, which is less a State than a new Church, albeit one
that will dovetail State responsibilities into itself and thereby function on
an inclusive basis beyond worldly relativity - in other words, the relativity
of Church and State. When the State becomes absolutist, both
within itself and at the expense of the Church, one has but a diabolic parallel
to divine absolutism, a parallel which is Super-antichristic
rather than Superchristic, like the Centre. This is Communism, and whilst it may be
preferable, from a divine standpoint, to Liberalism and the consequent
co-existence of Satanic and Antichristic States, it
is inferior to Centrism, which alone lays claim to the establishment of a true
'Kingdom of Heaven'. By comparison, the
Communist State is a 'Kingdom of Hell', albeit more on positive than negative
terms, i.e. with regard to doing well to the proletariat rather than, as in
revolutionary or transitional contexts, doing bad to the bourgeoisie. Certainly there are those who will argue that
doing good to others (the proletariat) is preferable to being bad to oneself, that a good doing is preferable to a bad being, as
in Fascist States.
188. It is no less important to realize that there
is a negative morality ... than to realize there is a positive one. There is no more a single kind of morality
than a single kind of immorality. Being
can be both negative and positive, like doing, and by 'negative' and 'positive'
I mean active and passive or, alternatively, for and against. Thus, within the sphere of naturalistic
morality, one can speak of the negative morality of the dream but the positive
morality of visionary experience. In the
more contemporary sphere of artificial morality, one can speak of the negative
morality of film viewing but the positive morality of artificially-induced
visionary experience. Indeed, films are
to dreams what trips are to visions - their antithetical equivalence ... as
relative to an omega-oriented age or society.
189. Likewise, within the sphere of naturalistic
immorality, one can speak of the negative immorality of doing against others
and/or the self, in contrast to the positive immorality of doing for others
and/or the self ... where the former is Satanic and the latter Antichristic, with worldly and diabolic options depending
upon whether the target of whichever kind of immorality is other people or the
personal self. Now what applies to the
sphere of naturalistic immorality applies no less to that of artificial
immorality, in which doing for or against the self and/or others will be
conducted rather more via mechanical or synthetic means than via natural means,
including the human body.
190. Thus to recapitulate: being against my self -
negative divine morality; being for my self - positive divine morality; doing against
myself - negative diabolic immorality; doing for myself - positive diabolic
immorality; doing against others - negative worldly immorality; doing for
others - positive worldly immorality.
191. Although 'good' and 'evil' are relative terms
usually employed in connection with worldly contexts, it is possible to employ
them absolutely, in terms of distinctions outside the world, the way the
Catholic Church has traditionally done, and on the basis that absolute good is
divine and absolute evil diabolic, a distinction, I maintain, between wavicle proton-proton reactions on the one hand, and
particle proton-proton reactions on the other - the former appertaining to the
Father (central star of the Galaxy) and the latter to Satan (the sun).
192. Thus within a strictly cosmic framework, it
is possible to differentiate between absolute good and evil, though only up to
a certain point. For while we need not
doubt that the particle proton-proton reactions of the sun are absolutely evil
by dint of their infernal essence, the wavicle
proton-proton reactions of the bigger, purer, central star of the Galaxy (from
which, willy-nilly, the Creator was extrapolated) are only absolutely good to
the extent that we have a wavicle being which
contrasts with the particle doing, as it were, of stars in general, i.e. those
which revolve around the central star of the Galaxy. Yet such being is merely apparent,
since wavicle proton-proton reactions are no less
reactive in their own context than ... particle proton-proton reactions in
theirs, and while the central star has the appearance of stillness, and hence
being, on account of its central position in a galaxy of revolving stars,
nevertheless its essence is reactive and, consequently, this apparent being is
negative, a negative morality of being-against-the-self or, rather, itself,
which is the condition of alpha divinity.
193. Hence while we can infer absolute goodness
from the apparent being of the Galaxy's central star, such goodness is merely
negative in character, and therefore a poor second to the positive absolute
goodness which can only arise with the Holy Spirit at the culmination of
evolution when, from the utmost omega-aspiring life form, i.e. the Supra-being
new-brain collectivizations, the wavicle
electron-electron attractions of transcendent spirit are set free, in the guise
of spiritual globes, to converge towards the long-term possibility of a
definitive unity (of all such spiritual globes) in the Omega Point (de Chardin). Only in wavicle electron-electron attractions does positive being,
or being-for-itself, come to pass, and such an essential being stands to the
apparent being of the Creator as positive morality to negative morality, or
ultimate Heaven to primal Heaven, or the purest bliss to the purest agony - in
sum, as true absolute goodness to false absolute goodness.
194. The fact that, in contrast to Catholicism,
the Protestant faith denies the existence of absolute good and evil outside the
world may be attributed to the inherently worldly nature of this largely
Germanic mode of Christianity. For
Protestantism is, above all, concerned with man in the world, and
therefore with good and evil conceived relatively, as worldly experiences. Doubtless this lack of a cosmic sense - at
any rate, with regard to absolute good and evil on the alpha plane - is in
large part due to the bodily nature of Germanic humanity, who, unlike both
Slavic and Celtic humanity, have their kingdom in the world, that
planetary correlation of the body, and not in either a cosmic hell or a cosmic
heaven such as correlates with the head - at least on old-brain/subconscious
terms. For the world is a revolt against
the Cosmos, in some sense a more evolved orientation which, religiously
speaking, fights shy of both the Father and Satan - much as bourgeois
philosophy fought shy of the alpha noumenon by
positing, to Schopenhauer's aristocratic displeasure, the thing-in-itself as in the material world
rather than as its subatomic precondition.
Thus while Protestant insistence on relative good and evil is no less
incorrect from a Catholic standpoint than Kant's insistence on a worldly
thing-in-itself, it is perfectly inevitable within the context of its time and
society, not to mention the racial preconditions - in this case Germanic - of a
bodily standpoint. True, to acquire a
bias for positive absolute goodness and even (within the communist context)
positive absolute evil, one has to turn one's back, so to speak, on the alpha
negative absolutes. But, ironically, it
is only the peoples whose religious traditions upheld these negative absolutes
who would be qualified, both racially and morally, to acquire such a bias,
since the Protestant peoples are ever worldly and, by themselves, incapable of
transcending the worldly body for either the divine or the diabolic head. Thus the Resurrection, in both its diabolic
and divine manifestations, has especial applicability to those very peoples for
whom the truth of absolute good and evil outside the world was
incontestable. Communism is one
resurrection. Centrism has yet to
establish the other!
195. Returning to the distinction between moral
being and immoral doing, the former divine and the latter either diabolic or
worldly, depending whether it is focused on the self or on others, I must now
add amoral being to our calculations, since this is primarily the worldly
equivalence which assumes a Christian status in relation to both immoral and
moral alternatives. Indeed, just as we
have distinguished between negative and positive morality on the basis of being
against self on the one hand and being for self on the other (a distinction
which also applied to each kind of immorality ... whether diabolic and
self-centred or worldly and focused on others), so we must distinguish between
negative and positive amorality, conceiving of the former in terms of being
against others, and the latter in terms of being for others. Thus not only does doing have two modes of
diabolic immorality, viz. doing against self and doing for self, as well as two
modes of worldly immorality, viz. doing against others and doing for others,
the same also applies to being, with being against self and being for self the
negative and positive modes of divine morality, but being against others and
being for others the negative and positive modes of worldly amorality. Hence a four-way division between negative
and positive which, so I maintain, parallels our earlier divisions between
devolutionary idealism, naturalism, materialism, and realism on the one hand,
and evolutionary realism, materialism, naturalism, and idealism on the other,
as regards monotheism, polytheism, pantheism, and atheism ... or vice versa,
depending on whether we focus on alpha stemming or omega aspiring, devolution or
evolution.
196. Using a similar schema, we can list our
being/doing options as follows:-
DEVOLUTION EVOLUTION
1.
negative divine morality of being against self 8.
positive divine morality of being for self
2.
negative diabolic immorality of doing against self 7. positive diabolic immorality of doing for
self
3. negative worldly immorality of doing against
others 6. positive worldly immorality of doing for
others
4.
negative worldly amorality of being against others 5. positive worldly amorality of being for
others
or
alternatively:-
DEVOLUTION EVOLUTION
1.
idealistic being against self (monotheism) 8. superidealistic being for self (supermonotheism)
2.
naturalistic doing against self (polytheism) 7. supernaturalistic doing for self (superpolytheism)
3. materialistic doing against others
(pantheism) 6. supermaterialistic
doing for others (superpantheism)
4. realistic being against others (atheism) 5. superrealistic
being for others (superatheism)
which
also corresponds, it should be remembered, to:-
DEVOLUTION EVOLUTION
1.
proton-wavicle autocratic theocracy 8. electron-wavicle
democratic theocracy
2.
proton-particle theocratic autocracy 7. electron-particle theocratic democracy
3.
atomic-proton autocratic autocracy 6. atomic-electron democratic democracy
4.
proton-biased atomic democratic autocracy 5.
electron-biased atomic autocratic democracy
Consequently, we have a
journey, so to speak, which begins in the Father and regresses to the Catholic
Christ via Satanic and Maternal (Virgin Mary) stages of devolution, but which
then progresses from the Protestant Christ to the Holy Ghost via Messianic
(Second Coming) and Antichristic stages of evolution.
197. At death both the spirit and soul die, which
is to say are terminated by and through the body's mortality. Emotion and consciousness cease at death,
since death is their end. It is not the
body that dies, since, strictly speaking, the body had never lived but merely
functioned like a machine. Yet the
breakdown of this worldly machine puts an end to both diabolic emotions,
whether negative or positive, and divine consciousness, whether negative or
positive; to heat-will and light-will, soul and spirit. What was potentially eternal (certainly on
the divine plane of conscious being) is thus prevented from being
eternally, and so succumbs to death, or nothingness. One could say that the world, or the body,
gains a victory over it, since the world is temporal and its temporality
becomes an obstacle to eternity. Only
when the body has been overcome ... through the gradual replacement of natural
parts by artificial parts and the subsequent even more radical elevation of
human brains to the post-human status of being artificially supported and
no-less artificially sustained in collectivized contexts, analogous to a
Christmas tree, will both the soul and the spirit, though particularly the
latter, be freed from the threat of death and thereby enabled to realize their
eternal potential. Then will God have
achieved a definitive victory over the world.
198. Worldly will, or sensations; diabolic will,
or emotions; divine will, or consciousness.
A connection may accordingly be posited between worldly will and the
body, diabolic will and the brain, and divine will and the mind, with blood in
the body the essence of worldly will, blood in the brain the essence of
diabolic will, and consciousness the essence of divine will. Thus whereas both worldly and diabolic will
are centred in the blood, divine will is transcendently aloof from the blood,
as light from heat or, more correctly, fire.
In this regard, it is less a will than a will-less being. For will is indistinguishable, physically
speaking, from the blood, and without blood there can be no will, which is to
say sensations and emotions, both of which stand to will as feelings to
consciousness. Thus whereas we have a
quantitative distinction between will and consciousness, a qualitative
distinction exists between emotions and feelings. The real difference, however, is that whereas
will is subordinate in both body and brain to sensations and emotions respectively,
feelings are subordinate in the mind to consciousness. Put analogically, one could argue that
whereas light (will) is subsidiary to heat (sensations/emotions) in both
electric cookers and electric fires, heat (feelings) is subsidiary to light
(consciousness) in electric lights. For
electric cookers and electric fires stand to bodily sensations and brain
emotions as electric-light bulbs to mind consciousness, which is to say as
worldly and diabolic parallels to a divine parallel. Now at death it could be argued, to extend
our analogy, that the cooker overcomes both the electric fire and the electric
light at once, precluding a diabolic and a divine eternity. For it is the electric cooker which parallels
the world and, hence, bodily temporality.
199. However that may be, traditional theology has
upheld three posthumous options for the dying: either Hell, Heaven, or, failing
both, a sort of purgatorial no-man's-land in between. Doubtless these options correlate with the
tripartite distinctions we have already drawn between diabolic emotions (soul),
divine consciousness (spirit), and worldly sensations (will), so that,
depending on the person, a bias one way or another in life could be expected to
lead to a correlative, albeit more absolute, fate in death. The emotional man would be a candidate for
Hell, the conscious man a candidate for Heaven, and the sensual man a candidate
for Purgatory or, in Eastern terms, reincarnation. Thus to a certain extent people would be
predestined for one or another of the three posthumous options, depending on
which level they generally conducted their lives whilst alive. The divine man would go to Heaven, the
diabolic man to Hell, and the worldly man to Purgatory. Strictly speaking, however, people went
nowhere. For one cannot survive death,
neither spiritually, soulfully, nor wilfully.
Yet the fact that Christian theology distinguished between three options
accords with the tripartite division of man into divine, diabolic, and worldly
selves, a division, so I maintain, which can be extrapolated from the cosmic
roots of life in the central star of the Galaxy (negative spirit), the sun
(negative soul), and the fiery core of the planet (negative will) - the first
and second eternal (Heaven and Hell), the third temporal (the world). Hence the Christian emphasis upon overcoming
the will, if any possibility of salvation (from the world) is to be achieved.
200. Consequently the body, as the objectification
of the will ... as taught by Schopenhauer, must be denied if salvation, and
hence greater consciousness, is to become a reality. Thus not only sex but exercise, eating,
drinking, etc., which conform to the world as opposed to God. Divine teaching is therefore profoundly
anti-bodily and anti-populist. For it is
the mass man who most accords with a bodily and therefore sensual predilection,
in contrast to the intellectual or spiritual elites. A democratic society will accordingly be
anti-divine, since such a society is precisely that in which the mass man, and
hence the average bodily type, is king or, more literally, politically
sovereign, and where the mass man is free to please himself ... there can be
little denial of the will but, on the contrary, a maximum affirmation of it
which, in democratic societies, will take a predominantly positive and therefore
pleasure-oriented form rather than, as in worldly autocratic societies, a
predominantly negative and therefore pain-oriented form more suggestive of a
will-to-death than of a will-to-life.
Such a wilful state-of-affairs can only continue so long as the world is
free to please itself and do what it wants.
For the world will not deny itself, since it isn't free to become other
than what it is by nature. If the will
is to be denied, then the world must be overcome and a new order of will, less
worldly than diabolic, take its place, with one kind of democracy supplanting
another. Yet from a divine standpoint,
that would be less of a salvation than a damnation, since salvation ultimately
rests with the Superchristic God rather than with the
Super-antichristic Devil, and therefore isn't so much
a higher and more attenuated order of will ... as a complete denial of the will
achieved through will-less being in pure consciousness. Thus not positive soul but positive spirit,
not love but joy. Such is the ultimate
divine order, and it can only be achieved under Superchristic
auspices, which is to say through the Social Transcendentalist Centre.
201. Put analogically, one could argue that the supersession of worldly will by diabolic will is equivalent
to electric fires superseding electric cookers, while the analogical
equivalence for divine consciousness is electric light, which towers above both
fires and cookers alike, shining at a quasi-spiritual remove from soulful and
wilful orders of heat. Yet before the victory
of light over heat, the victory of diabolic heat over worldly heat, of positive
emotions over positive sensations, in order that one kind of will be eclipsed
by another in the progression of will from the body to the head. For denying bodily will through the
affirmation of head will is a step in the direction of liberation from the will
through divine consciousness, albeit an indirect step, and one which those who
support it would probably regard in a definitive light, as though an
end-in-itself. The fact that it is not such an end ... is
an article of divine judgement, and, while from a divine standpoint, emotional
and intellectual will may be superior, because of the brain, to sensational and
physical will, nevertheless it is manifestly inferior to the pure feelings and
consciousness which accrue to the affirmation of positive being. Will is ever connected with the realm of
doing ... whether for others, as in the context of positive worldly will, or
for self, as in the context of positive diabolic will, and until doing is
denied, there can be no true being, the being-for-self which is the ultimate
positive affirmation because the definitive morality - supermonotheistic
in character.
202. Thus whilst a People's democracy is
preferable to a bourgeois democracy because symptomatic of a more elevated
order of will, it can only be morally inferior to a People's theocracy, which
is less a question of will than of consciousness, less a question of soulful
heat than of spiritual light, and therefore less a question of eternal
damnation than of eternal salvation. For
whereas a bourgeois democracy is purgatorial, since of the world, a People's
democracy is hellish, since aligned with a soulful survival of the body. It is not a means to a higher end, i.e. a People's
theocracy, but an end-in-itself and, consequently, a kind of eternity. Only a People's theocracy can be heavenly,
since aligned with a spiritual survival of the body, and such a survival is the
will-less salvation which is commensurate with the true eternity of
Heaven. Thus in the event of the world
'dying', i.e. being overcome, the two positive eternities of communistic soul
and centristic spirit will co-exist on a bipolar
supra-national planet for centuries to come, in fact until such time as Heaven
finally comes to terms with Hell, and the spiritual eternity vanquishes the
soulful eternity in the name of global unification - the material precondition
of ultimate spiritual unity achieved on a truly divine basis.
DEVOLUTION EVOLUTION
1.
proton-wavicle being against self 8. electron-wavicle
being for self
2.
proton-particle doing against self 7. electron-particle doing for others
3.
atomic proton doing against others 6. atomic electron doing for others
4.
proton-biased atomic being against others 5.
electron-biased atomic being for others
203. Regarding the above-mentioned devolutionary
and evolutionary options, it becomes clear that whereas 'self', whether in the
contexts of being or doing, pertains to the
proton and electron absolutes, 'others', whether in the contexts of being or
doing, pertain to atomic relativities, so that while the former is either
divine or diabolic, the latter is inherently worldly. In other words, reference to 'self' puts
being and doing on the plane of God and Devil (whether in regard to the alpha
or to the omega alternatives), whereas reference to 'others' puts being and
doing on the plane of the world (whether in terms of materialism or realism,
pantheism or atheism).
204. Thus, bearing this in mind, one can list the
aforementioned options as follows:-
DEVOLUTION EVOLUTION
1.
proton-wavicle being against self 8. electron-wavicle
being for self
2.
proton-particle doing against self 7. electron-particle doing for self
3. atomic proton-particle doing against others 6. atomic electron-particle doing for others
4.
proton-biased atomic-wavicle being against
others 5. electron-biased atomic-wavicle
being for others
with, in the case of (1) and (8), an alpha and
omega divine antithesis; in the case of (2) and (7) an alpha and omega diabolic
antithesis; in the case of (3) and (6) a worldly alpha and worldly omega
antithesis; and in the case of (4) and (5) an alpha worldly and omega worldly antithesis. With wavicles one
has being, with particles doing. With
protons one has reaction against, with electrons ... attraction towards. Proton-wavicle
absolutism is accordingly being against self, proton-particle absolutism ...
doing against self. Electron-wavicle absolutism is accordingly being for self,
electron-particle absolutism ... doing for self. Reaction and attraction, against and for, or,
as one could also say, active and passive, bearing in mind the reactive nature
of action and the attractive nature of passivity - doing and being. Similarly, atomic proton-particle relativity
is doing against others, proton-biased atomic-wavicle
relativity ... being against others.
Electron-biased atomic-wavicle relativity is
being for others, atomic electron-particle relativity ... doing for
others. Thus with wavicles
one is either in the sphere of morality or, as in the case of the alpha worldly
and omega worldly antithesis, in that of amorality, whereas with particles one
is in the sphere of immorality, whether on worldly or diabolic terms.
205. All being is in space, whereas all doing is
in time. For space is no less
correlative of being than time ... of doing.
There is divine space and worldly space, diabolic time and worldly time,
both negatively and positively. On the
one hand, devolutionary space and time, and, on the other hand, evolutionary
space and time; the one preceding the other on an alternate basis, starting on
the devolutionary plane with negative diabolic time as the effect of
negative divine space, and ending on the evolutionary plane with positive
diabolic time as the cause of positive divine space, due worldly causes
and effects coming in-between. For
whereas effects succeed causes when space is at issue, causes precede effects
when time is at issue, though in the world such a procedure is less absolute
than relative. Consequently we may speak
of negative diabolic time as the effect of negative divine space but
negative worldly time as the effective cause of negative worldly space on
the one hand, and of positive worldly time as the causative effect of
positive worldly space but positive diabolic time as the cause of
positive divine space on the other hand.
Otherwise we would fall into the illogical trap of accrediting space,
and hence being, with directly causative properties when, in point of fact,
being of a negative order, i.e. alpha and worldly, can only be indirectly
responsible for doing of a negative order, which, whether diabolic or worldly,
finds its correlation in time - the direct cause of being, whether negative or
positive.
206. Hence a distinction between cause and effect
where the divine and diabolic absolutes are concerned, but a distinction
between effective causes and causative effects where the worldly relativities
are at issue, as in the devolutionary regression from negative worldly time to
negative worldly space, the former the effective cause of the latter, and also
as in the evolutionary progression from positive worldly space to positive
worldly time, the latter the causative effect of the former. Thus as against alpha worldly relativity,
negative diabolic time is the effect of negative divine space (the apparent
cause), whereas as against - or beyond - omega worldly relativity, positive
diabolic time is the cause of positive divine space (the essential
effect). Therefore whereas negative
divine space is merely the apparent cause of negative diabolic time, positive
divine space is the essential effect of positive diabolic time. Alpha and omega, protons and electrons,
centrifugal and centripetal, reactions and attractions. In the alpha case, a space-time continuum
leading to worldly time/space; in the omega case, a time-space continuum
results from worldly space/time. Alpha
outer space and outer time, negative worldly time and worldly space; positive
worldly space and worldly time, omega inner time and inner space.
207. Outer space and time have reference to self,
to a self with a subconscious/old-brain bias or, more correctly, to selves with
either a subconscious bias or an old-brain bias, depending on the type of alpha
'self' in question; negative worldly time and space have reference to others,
to others with a blood/bone bodily bias or, more correctly, with either a blood
bias or a bone bias, depending on the type of negative worldly 'other' in
question. Positive worldly space and
time have reference to others, to others with a flesh/muscle bodily bias or,
more correctly, with either a flesh bias or a muscle bias, depending on the
type of positive worldly 'other' in question; inner time and space have
reference to self, to a self with a new-brain/superconscious
bias or, more correctly, to selves with either a new-brain bias or a superconscious bias, depending on the type of omega 'self'
in question.
208. Put in the form of our familiar
devolutionary/evolutionary diagram, we could say:-
DEVOLUTION EVOLUTION
1.
being against self in negative divine space 8.
being for self in positive divine space
2.
doing against self in negative diabolic time 7.
doing for self in positive diabolic time
3.
doing against others in negative worldly time 6. doing
for others in positive worldly time
4. being against others in negative worldly
space 5. being for others in positive worldly space
Additionally, we should also note that while
both negative worldly time and space on the one hand and positive worldly space
and time on the other hand are in the world, and therefore neither strictly
outer nor inner, alpha nor omega, the negative pair constitute a relative outer
in relation to the relatively inner nature of the succeeding positive pair.
209. Space and time are thus either inner or
outer, depending on the type of space and time in question. In the world they are relatively inner and
outer, before the world they are absolutely outer and beyond it they are
absolutely inner. Outer space and time
are only intelligible within the context of proton absolutism, in contrast to
inner space and time which are synonymous with electron absolutism. In between, we find the worldly space and
time which is both outer and inner, protons and electrons, in an atomic
compromise. Space as we ordinarily
understand it, i.e. cosmic space and the gaps between objects, pertains to the
world, albeit more in terms of a neutron void than an atomic compromise.
210. Similarly, when consciousness is equated with
a void, or nothingness (neant), as by Sartre, we
have a neutron position in between protons on the one hand (old brain/subconscious)
and electrons on the other (new brain/superconscious),
which is symptomatic of bourgeois decadence.
By contrast, proletarian consciousness (light), when properly 'turned
on', is an electron being in superconscious space,
whereas proletarian motion (heat) is an electron doing in new-brain time, the
difference, in other words, between wavicles and
particles, divine and diabolic, white- and blue-collar alternatives. Such superbeing and
superdoing are dependent on and motivated by
artificial phenomena (superphenomena) of an
electronic bias, whether in optical or aural terms. On the other hand, worldly being and doing
are motivated by natural phenomena of an atomic constitution, whether in
optical or aural terms, and stand between the transcendental orders of
(super)being and (super)doing and the traditional, alpha-stemming orders of
(sub)being and (sub)doing motivated by natural noumena
of a proton bias. For whereas the superphenomenal is a precondition, or cause, of the supernoumenal, the phenomenal stems from a noumenal precondition and may accordingly be described as
its causative effect.
211. As against being in space, of whatever order,
we have doing in time of whatever order, and whereas being accords with binding
- indeed, is inseparable from binding - to a centre, doing accords with freedom
from a centre, be it alpha or worldly.
To be free is to do in time; to be bound is to be in
space. If I am free to do, I am not
bound to be. If I am bound to be, I am
not free to do. Space cancels time and
time space, though a time-space continuum of doing-being or a space-time
continuum of being-doing are possible and, indeed, inevitable while relativity
remains a reality. In the one case, a
Social Transcendentalist free binding; in the other case, a Transcendental
Socialist bound freedom. The
Devil-God/God-Devil ideological alternatives of the foreseeable future (see
appendix).
212. If Schopenhauer can be described as a
theosophical philosopher, then it seems to me that I, who stand in an antithetical
relationship to him, should be described as a philosophical theosophist. For philosophical theosophy is, after all,
the antithesis to theosophical philosophy.
213. Philosophy is not about saying simple things
in a complex manner, as certain pseudo-philosophers have erroneously supposed,
but about saying complex things as simply and therefore straightforwardly as
possible. The philosopher has the
difficult task of rendering extremely complicated issues as simply as
possible. It is not his business to
obfuscate or seek to appear profound. On
the contrary, it is his business to reveal the Truth.
214. We need be in no doubt concerning the fact
that Schopenhauer was a revolt against bourgeois idealism, or claims for the
primacy and supremacy of thought, since he posited will as the supreme and
primary factor in life, which he rightly regarded as preceding intellect and,
hence, thought. Yet unlike Marx, who
also revolted against bourgeois idealism, Schopenhauer effectively did so from
an aristocratic point-of-view and thus functioned as a Neo-Platonist, a kind of
traditional idealist - as to a lesser extent was Nietzsche, given his
'aristocratic radicalism'. Thus
Schopenhauer and Marx may be regarded as having revolted against bourgeois
idealism in opposite ways - the former backwards and the latter forwards ...
into proletarian materialism. For
Schopenhauer, the will was paramount.
For Marx, on the contrary, economic factors were the driving force
behind historical change, a subject which, in any case, Schopenhauer
repudiated. Consequently while
Schopenhauer was reactionary, Marx was progressive, taking economic materialism
as his starting-point. And, to be sure,
dialectical materialism is the only logical starting-point for a progressive,
and hence proletarian, revolt against bourgeois idealism. One extreme engenders another. So any philosopher whose work is in the least
degree proletarian effectively stems from Marx, rather than from either Hegel
or Nietzsche or any of the other bourgeois idealists. It has the People as its starting-point and
treats of them in a respectful manner.
They are not 'rabble', 'mob', 'poisoners of
all wells', etc., as with Nietzsche, but simply proletarians whose oppressive
and unfortunate circumstances stem, in no small degree, from bourgeois
exploitation, and therefore can only be properly alleviated once that
exploitation has been removed from their backs and they are enabled, in
consequence, to walk upright - as proud, free-standing men.
215. However, whilst it is incontestable that the
proletarian philosopher will maintain a respectful attitude towards the People,
it does not follow that he will be a materialist, like Marx, and only think in
economic terms. While that may be the
most logical starting-point in the revolt against bourgeois idealism, it is
anything but the most logical or even desirable finishing-point, since it
leaves the religious essence of man out of account - indeed, negates it through
its vehement opposition to bourgeois religion, and thus pictures man in his
proletarian manifestation as a kind of behavioural machine for whom economic
factors are the main, if not sole, determinant of his destiny. Now, doubtless, whilst a blue-collar view of
the proletariat will largely confirm one in such a picture (and Marxism is
nothing if not a view which conceives of the proletariat as synonymous with
industrial workers), it cannot claim to do justice to working-class people who
are white collar and therefore more disposed, in their use of intellect or mind,
to a religious or, at any rate, idealistic view of life. Consequently, Marxism is largely irrelevant
to the white-collar proletariat who, though doubtless suffering from bourgeois
exploitation as much as if not more than their blue-collar counterparts, are
less materialistic than manual or industrial workers. That is why proletarian philosophy has to
evolve towards an idealistic position if justice is to be done to that
not-inconsiderable stratum of the working class which is more spiritually
conscious, and hence culture-loving, than the Marxian proletariat. For the time has come for proletarian
idealism to be voiced, and such an idealism can only be voiced in terms of a
proletarian ideology which, contrary to Marxist Communism, has its
starting-point in the white-collar proletariat.
216. Yet if proletarian idealism has a
starting-point in the white-collar proletariat, it cannot have its end or
finishing-point there, since true idealism is more a question of play than of work,
and consequently the goal of this idealism must be proletarian play of the most
idealistic and, hence, religiously being-oriented order. In other words, the end of proletarian
idealism must be play and thus the gradual transmutation of workers into players,
with especial reference to spiritual play.
For while proletarian idealism has its starting-point in the social, or
white-collar, stratum of the People, its end can only be theocratic and
accordingly less concerned with social wellbeing than with cultural and, in
particular, spiritual fulfilment achieved on the basis of the utmost
being-oriented play, thereby confirming its divine bias on both negative, or
worker, and positive, or player, terms.
Likewise, while proletarian materialism has its starting-point in the
blue-collar proletariat and is therefore socialist, it likewise proceeds in the
course of time towards a kind of theocratic idealism which is less being
orientated than doing orientated, and accordingly of a sports order of play
commensurate with blue-collar criteria - a diabolic mode of playing which both
contrasts with and provides a positive counterbalance to the diabolic order of
work that, in its manual essence, appertains to the industrial proletariat.
217. Thus from being-oriented work to
being-oriented play within the divine spectrum of proletarian idealism, and
from doing-oriented work to doing-oriented play within the diabolic spectrum of
proletarian materialism - the twin poles of God and Devil beyond and above the
(bourgeois) world. On the one hand, a Superfatheristic/Superchristic distinction between (proton-wavicle) being-oriented work and (electron-wavicle) being-oriented play, and, on the other hand a Supersatanic/Super-antichristic distinction between
(proton-particle) doing-oriented work and (electron-particle) doing-oriented
play. Social Transcendentalism in the
one case, but Transcendental Socialism in the other case.
218. Of course, such proletarian idealism as is
voiced throughout my writings does owe something, if indirectly, to bourgeois
idealism, particularly to Schopenhauer (to the extent that he can be classified
as a bourgeois idealist), Hegel, Nietzsche, and even Teilhard
de Chardin, whose starting-point is rather more
Catholic than secular. But there can be
no question that, fundamentally, any idealism which is intended for the
proletariat comes after Marxian materialism as a revolt against both a
blue-collar concept of the proletariat and the concomitant economic determinism
which, while largely relevant to the proletariat in question, could only be an
insult to that greater proportion of the working class which is white collar
or, at any rate, other than industrial.
Certainly, late Marxist thinkers like Koestler
and Sartre unwittingly undermined proletarian materialism by their subversive
repudiation of a variety of traditional communist assumptions about man and
society, and therefore indirectly paved the way for the proletarian idealism to
follow; though this idealism makes no short-term claim to supplant Communism,
as though the age were ripe for universal Centrism! On the contrary, I fully accept the
historical value and necessity of Communism for certain countries, since the
world cannot be elevated to the Divine overnight, so to speak, but will remain
divided between diabolic and divine interests for some time to come ...
according to the natures of the various countries, some of which are
traditionally more democratic, others of which traditionally more theocratic,
neither of which can nor indeed should be forced into the same ideological
straitjacket ... contrary to racial factors which, to a significant extent,
condition their respective ideological standings. Even Marx spoke rather more in terms of a
Germanic version of Communism than of a Slavic version, which, as we all know,
had to wait for Lenin to modify Marxism away from the (muscle) body towards the
(new-brain) head, in order that quasi-dictatorial criteria, founded upon the
need for a vanguard party of the (blue-collar) working class within the
framework of a totalitarian State, could come to the fore at the expense of
purely Marxist, democratic criteria more suited to the Germanic West, where
notions of literal worker ownership, worker management, mass-democratic
participation, etc., are especially congenial - at any rate, to those Marxists
whose Socialism is inherently materialistic rather than naturalistic,
decentralist (in relation to bourgeois centrality) rather than centralist, and
democratic rather than theocratic.
Anathema to both Western Capitalists and Eastern Communists alike, they
find themselves trapped between the Scylla of State Capitalism and the Carybdis of State Socialism, mouthpieces of a uniquely
Germanic mode of Communism which, instead of opposing the world from a diabolic
standpoint beyond it, stems from the world as the furthermost reach of worldly
or, more correctly, anti-worldly materialism.
219. However, if this proletarian materialism is
strictly Marxist and, by implication, an ideological precondition of the
proletarian naturalism, or State Socialism, advocated by Lenin and upheld by
his Asiatic followers, of whom the Chinese must be accounted the principal
latter-day exponents, then proletarian naturalism may likewise be regarded as a
precondition of my own Social Transcendentalist Centrism, which is both a
revolt against and an extension beyond Transcendental Socialism to the extent
that, in the one case, it opposes State ownership by Centre trusteeship, and in
the other case it advocates a People's theocracy in which the People, with
particular reference to the white-collar proletariat, become religiously
sovereign ... as, in effect, Holy Spirit, and are thereby empowered to aspire,
no matter how indirectly or humbly at first, towards the definitive realization
of spiritual unity in the Omega Beyond - an aspiration, so I contend, which
would be stepped-up and accordingly rendered more efficacious in the course of
millennial time ... as in due course the People were transcended by the
successive stages and manifestations of post-human life, as described elsewhere
in my writings.
220. Thus Social Transcendentalism is no mere
reaction against Transcendental Socialism, like Nazism or Fascism, but an
extension beyond and above proletarian naturalism to the divine level of a
proletarian idealism, no less supra-national in scope than its diabolic
counterpart, though determined to further the cause of People's theocracy
throughout the globe in the name of spiritual salvation. For ultimate reality rests neither in the
material world nor in the blue-collar proletariat, but in the superconscious mind, which is the starting-point of
transcendent heaven, the Superheaven of an electron-wavicle attraction.
If bourgeois idealism accorded thought the status of an ultimate
reality, then we proletarian idealists must ensure that positive pure spirit is
accorded such a status, as it fully deserves.
221. In the wisdom of his old age Sartre believed
- and correctly - that the ultimate society had to be ethical, i.e. concerned
with the transcendent absolute beyond man, and that no such ethical society
could arise except on the basis of freedom, but that no such freedom was
possible until bourgeois power, or the economic ability of the bourgeoisie to
oppress the proletariat, had been abolished.
Like Sartre, I, too, believe that there can be no transcendental ethics
without freedom (from bourgeois oppression), and no freedom until Capitalism
has been overcome. But, unlike him, I go
beyond opposition to capitalist power in my belief that the People must also be
spared power or, at any rate, have political, economic, and judicial power
removed from them, if an ethical aspiration towards the transcendent is duly to
result. For it is not enough that the
People should be freed from bourgeois oppression. They must also be freed from their own power,
if the 'Kingdom of Heaven' is to become a reality. In other words, they must be given the
opportunity, through Social Transcendentalism, to democratically exchange their
political, economic, and judicial power for the right to become collective Holy
Ghost, since only then will salvation from the world be truly achieved - a
salvation in which, through the aegis of Messianic intervention, the People
literally become ultimate divinity and are thereafter in a position to realize
pure spirit in their collective quest for definitive transcendence. For all secular power is immoral, and
People's political power can be no exception!
Such power, should the People democratically decide to dispense with it
in exchange for the reality of religious sovereignty, would subsequently be
borne, in a Christ-like sacrifice, by the Second Coming, who would thereby take
the immoral 'sins of the world' upon his shoulders, so to speak, in order that
the People could go free of them and thus be all the more spiritually credible
as Holy Spirit. Having delegated
responsibility for bearing these worldly powers, including the economic and
judicial, to his closest followers within the Social Transcendentalist
framework, it would be the duty of the Centre, thereafter, to collectively
serve the religiously sovereign People, the service of whom would be conducted
in a quasi-dictatorial manner, as befitting the shouldering of worldly powers
by the political Centre in the interests of the People's deliverance
(salvation) from such a burden themselves.
To resort to an Old Testament parallel, it would be analogous to Moses
being outside the Promised Land and having to remain outside it for the sake of
his Chosen People. Only those in the 'promised
land' ... of the Social Transcendentalist 'Kingdom of Heaven' would be totally
free from worldly power in the interests of their divine betterment. Now, for them, a truly ethical society would
duly emerge.
222. In terms of economics, a series of distinctions
could be drawn between:-
1.
amoral worldly power, or capitalist private ownership;
2. immoral
worldly power, or corporate capitalism;
3. immoral
diabolic power, or state socialist ownership;
4. moral divine
power, or centre trusteeship.
For the basic
distinction between moral or amoral and immoral modes of economic power is
fundamentally one with regard to the individual, on whose shoulders rests
morality, and the collective, which can only be immoral in view of the
diffusion of power on a necessarily decentralized (centrifugal) basis, whether
we then make a further distinction between the literal implementation of this
basis, as in Marxian Socialism, or a sublimated implementation, as in State
Socialism. Yet, if both Corporate Capitalism
(not to be confused with the first of the above options) and State Socialism
are economically immoral because of the collective, and hence diffused, modes
of ownership, Private Capitalism, although centralized, is less than moral by
dint of the ownership of capital, shares, industry, etc., by a particular
individual, who is likely to amass further capital, industry, etc., at other
people's expense. Only when industry is
transferred to Centre trusteeship and, hence, to an impersonal, institutionalized
'individual', viz. the Centre, can economics approximate to a moral order ...
commensurate with divine criteria, in which no ownership is at stake and
capital profits accruing to industrial success are used to further the People's
interests, with particular emphasis on their spiritual welfare, and thus the
furtherance, in effect, of the Holy Ghost.
Therefore the Centre alone would have true economic power, a power used
for the general good rather than (as with private ownership) to further the
economic growth of a particular person.
Consequently we can speak, overall, of an economic spectrum stretching
from amoral realism (private capitalism) to moral idealism (centre trusteeship)
via immoral materialism (corporate/state capitalism) and immoral naturalism
(state socialism), with worldly and divine individualism flanking worldly and
diabolic collectivism respectively - Fascist and Communist modes of economic
immorality in between Liberal and Centrist modes of economic morality (Germanic
Second Coming and Slavic Antichrist in between Germanic Christ and Celtic Holy
Ghost).
223. On balance, Bertrand Russell was less a
philosopher than an historian of philosophy, which is a breed of writer
antithetical to philosophers of history, such as Toynbee and Spengler. In my
opinion, historians of philosophy are no less a superior breed of historian to
historians-proper than ... philosophers of history are an inferior breed of
philosopher to philosophers-proper. For
whereas the former are rather more of the philosophical head than of the
historical body, the latter are rather more of the historical body than of the
philosophical head. Should Bertrand
Russell's name mean anything to future generations, it will be more in consequence
of monumental books like A History of Western Philosophy than of the series of
slender essayistic volumes - quick to date - which bear many of the hallmarks
of a left-liberal homme de lettres,
and few if any hallmarks of a systematic philosopher!
224. Re-evaluation of different kinds of football,
viz. eleven-a-side, five-a-side, six-a-side, in relation to ideological
equivalents: Democratic Socialist eleven-a-side football played on a grass
pitch; pure Socialist eleven-a-side football played on a plastic pitch;
Communist five-a-side indoor football; Transcendental Socialist six-a-side
indoor football. Thus, further to my
previous thoughts on this subject, [See, for instance, From Materialism to
Idealism.] I have distinguished between Communist and Transcendental
Socialist equivalents on the basis of a five-a-side/six-a-side dichotomy
between a type of indoor football which is materialistic, i.e. played all along
the ground and therefore absolutist, and a type of indoor football which is
comparatively idealistic, i.e. allowing for flighted
balls and therefore relativistic - a distinction analogous to our musical
dichotomy between soft rock as Communist and jazz-rock as Transcendental
Socialist. Thus the addition of a flighted ball possibility to six-a-side football entitles
it to be regarded, in my view, as a Transcendental Socialist equivalent beyond
the Communist purism of (ground-low) five-a-side football - at least that is
one of the principal reasons for considering it in a more idealistic light, a light
analogous (to give a further parallel) to that in which we view streamlined
motorbikes vis-à-vis plain or conventional motorbikes of a comparatively
light-weight (in relation to the larger socialist motorbikes) construction. Doubtless the free-flow of substitutes adds
or, rather, confirms an idealistic, i.e. wavicle-biased,
dimension to the game, and possibly the existence of the not-inappropriately
named 'sin bin' does likewise ... if on Leninist 'theocratic' terms.
225. Considering both types of indoor football in
relation to conventional outdoor football, it should be clear that the former
are of the head rather than of the body to the extent that the indoor context,
having fewer players, signifies a degree of centro-complexification
unattainable on an outdoor eleven-a-side basis, and thereby confirms a superior
ideological development commensurate with communistic criteria. In a very real sense six-a-side football is
the ultimate mode of football, just as Transcendental Socialism is the ultimate
mode of Socialism, as superior to Democratic Socialism as the new-brain head to
the muscle body. Certainly there is
every chance that indoor football will be the football of the future,
played long after the outdoor variety has been consigned to the rubbish heap of
history. For it alone accords with the
diabolic head above the worldly body, and therefore stands in a parallel
relation to Fascist basketball on the one hand and to Social Transcendentalist hoopball on the other: five-a-side football a direct parallel
to the former and six-a-side football to the latter.
226. To distinguish between outdoor American
football as Nazi in a left-wing way and indoor American football as Nazi in a
right-wing way, as regarding avant-garde rock on the one hand and avant-garde
jazz on the other, both of which are ideologically parallel. Thus American football may be said to stand
in an ideologically superior light to conventional outdoor football, whether
Democratic Socialist or pure Socialist, but in an ideologically inferior light
to basketball, which succeeds it, so to speak, on the basis of a properly
theocratic parallel to Communist five-a-side football (see above). As to the possibility of an Ecological
equivalent in between Fascist basketball and Communist five-a-side football, I
should like to posit team handball as the most credible candidate for this
position, since the term 'handball' suggests a midway-point in between
materialistic football and idealistic basketball, and Ecological equivalents
are nothing if not midway between one theocratic extreme and another. Granted that we derive the materialistic
status of football largely from the fact that, in relation to hands or head,
feet are the lowest-common-denominator and therefore balls which proceed along
the ground in consequence of having been kicked or passed can only be regarded
in a materialistic light, correlative with Socialism, by contrast to those
which are thrown through the air or passed from hand to hand, then it must
follow that the idealistic status of basketball owes not a little to the
transcendentalism of the term 'basket', which has nothing whatsoever to do with
any part of the body (any more than does the hoop of hoopball),
since an artificial phenomenon quite distinct from hands or feet. Now if basketball corresponds to a Fascist
equivalent on account of both the transcendentalism of the basket and the
hands-high method of play, and indoor football corresponds to a Communist
equivalent on account of the foot-low method of play which is confirmed by the
term 'football', then it needn't surprise us if handball corresponds to an
Ecological equivalent in between these theocratic alternatives on account of
the midway status of the 'hand' in relation to the 'foot' in the one case and
to the 'basket' in the other - a status confirming a relatively realistic
position vis-à-vis basket-high idealism and foot-low materialism. Such a realistic, or as I should say in
regard to this level of sport, superrealistic
position is commensurate with an Ecological equivalent - a superrealism
lying in-between superidealistic and supermaterialistic positions ... commensurate with Fascist
and Communist ideological equivalents respectively, as, to a lesser degree,
with their Social Transcendentalist (hoopball) and
Transcendental Socialist (six-a-side football) extrapolations.
227. When we speak of a 'good ball' in relation to
football, we generally mean an accurate or skilful pass from one player to
another, whereas a 'bad ball' implies just the opposite, i.e. that one of the
players has given the ball away to the opposition through a careless or foolish
pass. Consequently the expressions have
nothing whatsoever to do with the nature of the ball itself, which does not
enter into account. Yet balls can also
be good or bad, depending on their construction, that is to say, whether they
conform to the specifications of the game and are accordingly of the correct
size, shape, weight, material, etc, or whether, on the contrary, something is
amiss with one or more of these factors.
Thus we distinguish a good ball from a bad ball in terms of physical
factors, which contrasts to our way of distinguishing, within the context of an
actual football match, between a 'good ball' and a 'bad ball', as applicable to
the standard of play. Clearly, whereas
criteria applying to the actual construction of the ball are physical, those
which apply to the way the ball is played are metaphysical, and consequently we
have a distinction between the ball itself and what is done with it during the
course of play - a distinction, in other words, between the phenomenal and the noumenal or, as we should be saying in connection with such
a comparatively advanced and artificial game as football, the superphenomenal ball and the supernoumenal
pass, the latter of which is only possible on account of the prior existence of
the former, which may accordingly be described as its material
precondition. One could argue, in
Hegelian terms, that whereas the ball itself is a manifestation of the world,
the play resulting from its use, whether for good or bad, is a manifestation of
Spirit in the world at that particular level of its unfolding.
228. For a writer, technique is a kind of bridge
between style and theme, a worldly link between appearance and essence. The more apparent the style, the less
essential the theme and, conversely, the more essential the theme, the less
apparent the style. The simplest and
most alpha-stemming writing will be the most stylistic; the profoundest and
most omega-oriented writing, by contrast, the most thematic. In between will come worldly, or bourgeois,
writing, which strives to achieve a balance between style and content,
appearance and essence. Now whether this
balance is effectively with regard to the Father and the Holy Spirit, or Satan
and the Antichrist, or indeed worldly alpha and worldly omega options ... will
depend on the kind of writer in question, which is to say, whether a writer primarily concerned with the
pursuit of truth, like a philosopher; or one primarily concerned with the
pursuit of beauty, like a poet; or one whose primary concern is with the
pursuit of strength, like a playwright; or one whose primary concern is with
the pursuit of goodness, like a novelist.
For each different type of writer correlates with a different spectrum,
and no two spectra have the same stylistic or thematic extremes. To distinguish style from content on the
basis of beauty or truth alone would be to misrepresent the issue, since these
quantities pertain to different spectra and could only be inferred to co-exist
in writers who were neither divine nor diabolic but a paradoxical cross between
the two, like philosophical poets or poetic philosophers. As to those who are less mongrels than thoroughbreds,
we must allow for a false style no less than a true theme, an ugly style no
less than a beautiful theme, a weak style no less than a strong theme, or an
evil style no less than a good theme, depending on the type of writer, viz.
philosopher, poet, playwright, or novelist, in question.
229. Just as there was a pre-historical time of
doing-oriented chaos before historical chronologies were compiled, so there
will be a post-historical time or, rather, eternity of being-oriented order, in
which the study of history or the making of chronologies will be taboo, since
beneath the pale. For history is only
relevant to an open society, not to one which, like the post-historical
eternity I have in mind, will be so omega orientated as to be indisposed to looking
back over its shoulder, so to speak, at the doings - for the most part sordid -
of the past. In a truly omega-oriented
closed society, history would be as much beneath the pale as it was once beyond
the pale of the most alpha-stemming closed societies. For history is the Becoming, not the Become
(being).
230. As a rule, worldly societies, whether
autocratic or democratic, are matriarchal, whereas diabolic and divine
societies, by contrast, are patriarchal.
For whereas the body is of the world, the head is either of Heaven or
Hell above the world, depending on whether a mind or a brain bias is upheld in
and by any given divine or diabolic society.
Because woman more accords, traditionally, with the worldly body than
with either the divine or the diabolic head, being, to all intents and purposes,
akin to a planet vis-à-vis the sun and stars (the sun more conspicuous than the
stars on account of its correlation with husbands and fathers ... as previously
discussed), we should have no hesitation in regarding a worldly, and hence
feminine society, as matriarchal ... in contrast to pre- and post-worldly
patriarchal societies, which accord with the head on either
subconscious/old-brain terms in the former case or new-brain/superconscious terms in the latter case - the divine (mind)
level rather more archpatriarchal than
patriarchal. As yet, however, we haven't
witnessed a post-worldly divine society, since that is germane, so far as I am
concerned, to Social Transcendentalism and, hence, to ideological futurity. But we have ample evidence of post-worldly
diabolic societies, especially in regard to the Communist East, and they are
nothing if not patriarchal, with male leaders in both presidential and
ministerial posts - leaders who would be unwilling to share power with women. How different is the People's Republic of
China, in this respect, from Western countries like Great Britain, a
quintessentially worldly democracy in which not only has a woman been elected
Prime Minister on three successive occasions but ... co-existed with a female
monarch who has been on the throne even longer than her indefatigable Prime
Minister was in parliament! Thus at both
autocratic and democratic poles of this worldly society women have been in
power, thereby confirming its matriarchal nature. Indeed, it is scarcely surprising that two of
the three most esteemed monarchs in English history have been women - namely
Queen Elizabeth I and Queen Victoria, and probably it is no mere coincidence
that their respective reigns marked cultural and imperial highpoints in English
history. It was only during the Cromwellian revolution that anything resembling a
democratic patriarchy existed, while Henry VIII would be the most credible
candidate for an autocratic one - a sort of medieval patriarch who is better
remembered, in the popular imagination, for his eight wives than for his
political achievements.
231. What especially limits languages like French
and German to a bourgeois, worldly status is their division into feminine and
masculine gender, which ensures a dualistic balance at the expense of a
transcendent or genderless one-sidedness.
In other words, a worldly relativity as opposed to a post-worldly
absolutism, the very factor which makes for a bourgeois view of life. For it cannot be denied that language to some
extent conditions one's psychology, and regular use of languages balanced
between feminine and masculine genders can hardly fail to elicit complacency in
dualistic norms - short of one's rebelling against such languages in favour of
one which, like English, is genderless and therefore more extreme in
character. Certainly the Creole language
of the island of Reunion is considerably less dualistic than French, having but
three feminine nouns, viz. la pic (the mountain peak), la
tunnel (the tunnel), and la sable (the sand), which,
ironically, are all masculine in French.
Could it be, I wonder, that the Creole speakers of Reunion despise
gender and thus, by implication, bourgeois dualistic norms?
232. One of the most controversial issues for the
Church, particularly the Protestant one, in the late-twentieth century was the
ordination of women priests, which some saw as a necessary advance towards
complete equality of the sexes and others, evidently more conservative,
regarded with deep suspicion ... as something that flew in the face of
Christian tradition. My own position on
this issue has recently become clearer, so I shall here set it down for the
philosophical record, irrespective of my ideological opposition to the Church,
particularly in its Protestant manifestation, and professed adherence to Social
Transcendentalism. Not altogether
surprisingly, it is the Catholic Church which most opposes the concept of women
priests, and quite logically too, since Catholicism is much more an idealistic
mode of Christianity than Protestantism, more - to revert to my customary
metaphors - a church of the head (mind) than one of the body, given its Latin
origins and, in the main, following.
(For it is only in the Germanic countries that bodily Christianity, or
Protestantism, has traditionally flourished.)
Thus where the head rules, the head decides, and masculine criteria
accordingly prevail. Where the body
rules, on the other hand, such criteria, while nominally upheld, are less
unassailable - indeed, can and have been subverted to suit the climate of the
age. Now since the present age is highly
decadent insofar as the Germanic West is concerned, it can be of no surprise to
us if liberal tendencies of the sort we are discussing make an appearance in
the Church to usher in a new era or, more correctly, a further manifestation of
the general decadence in which, effectively, the bodily phenomenon of women
priests has its day. For let there be no
doubt on this issue: women priests are only credible in a bodily Church whose
decadence is so far advanced ... as to warrant female salvation from the
socialistic and/or communistic damnation which not only lies in wait beyond the
boundaries of the Christian West, but threatens the Church from within, to the
ultimate detriment of women themselves!
Thus, as in other comparable worldly contexts where middle-class women
have been called in or, rather, have called themselves in to heal the breach
and shore-up the tottering edifice of worldly civilization, the Protestant
Church affords us a no-less instructive example of the inexorable decline of
the West, as mainly furthered by men.
233. But let us now take a countervailing argument
which, though essentially irrelevant in this context, can be formulated on the
basis of sexual equality between men and women.
For if women are prepared to do the same things as men, why shouldn't
they be allowed to, providing they can do them just as well? Isn't sexual equality a contemporary ideal,
and therefore doesn't the ordination of women priests confirm that the ideal is
being realized? Superficially it
does. But, judged by more exacting
standards, can the sort of women who want to become priests be regarded as
quasi-Supermen in relation, officially or unofficially, to masculine Supermen
and, consequently, as deserving of real equality? And the answer to this question has to be
'no'. A middle-class woman can never be
the real equal of a middle-class man, since bourgeois heterosexuality,
confirmed by unequal sartorial customs, precludes unisexual equality between
men and women, keeping the latter in a relatively inferior position vis-à-vis
the former. Now since the Church,
especially in its Protestant manifestation, is nothing if not middle class,
there can be no equality in the sense that proletarian women, who both dress
and appear masculine, achieve equality with proletarian men on a
quasi-Superman/Superman basis. Rather,
one will have a heterosexual inequality between men and women, and such an
inequality can only result, in the event of women being ordained, in a
neo-autocratic materialism in which, effectively, priestesses seek to replace
priests as the most credible representatives of bodily Christianity in a
radically decadent age. Now to the
extent that certain male priests may no longer appear quite so credible, for
one reason or another, regarding this purpose, female priests would have a
limited justification, albeit not one that could outlive the eclipse of Western
civilization.
234. When a religion is worldly, like
Christianity, Heaven is otherworldly and only arrived at, if at all, following
death. When, on the other hand, a
religion is transcendental, Heaven is in the world and can be arrived at
through self-realization ... in successive stages of spiritual centro-complexification.
Heaven for the former is without.
For the latter it is within.
Christ taught the 'Kingdom of Heaven' within the self, but he also said:
'Blessed are the pure in heart, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven.' Unfortunately, the heart is too much
connected with the world, since a kind of organic extrapolation from the fiery
core of the planet rather than a truly divine reality like mind, which, in any
case, is more noumenal than phenomenal, particularly
in its most transcendental manifestation.
Christ was the 'Light of the World', but the 'Kingdom of Heaven' demands
a purer and brighter light if heavenly salvation is to be achieved - the light,
I need scarcely add, of the Social Transcendentalist Messiah!
LONDON 1987 (Revised 2012)
________________
Appendix
Graph of Being/Doing Correlations
Devolution
Being against Self Doing against Self Doing against
Others Being against Others
Divine Idealism Diabolic Naturalism Worldly
Materialism Worldly Realism
Autocratic Theocracy Theocratic Autocracy Autocratic
Autocracy Democratic Autocracy
Noumenon Noumenal Subphenomenon Subphenomenon Phenomenal Subphenomenon
Proton Wavicles Proton Particles Atomic
Proton Particles Proton-biased
Atomic Wavicles
Monotheism Polytheism Pantheism Atheism
Divine Outer Space Diabolic Outer Time Worldly Outer
Time Worldly Outer Space
Divine Morality Diabolic Immorality Worldly
Immorality Worldly Amorality
Unfree
Binding Bound Unfreedom Bound
Binding Freedom in Binding
Evolution
Being for Others Doing for Others Doing for Self Being for Self
Worldly Superrealism Worldly Supermaterialism Diabolic Supernaturalism Divine Superidealism
Autocratic Democracy Democratic Democracy Theocratic Democracy Democratic Theocracy
Superphenomenal
Phenomenon Superphenomenon SupernoumenalSuperphenomenon Supernoumenon
Electron-biased Atomic Wavicles Atomic Electron Particles Electron Particles Electron Wavicles
Superatheism Superpantheism Superpolytheism Supermonotheism
Worldly Inner Space Worldly Inner Time Diabolic Inner Time Divine Inner Space
Worldly Supermorality Worldly Superimmorality Diabolic Superimmorality Divine Supermorality
Freedom from Binding Free Freedom Bound
Freedom Free
Binding
________________________
Preview TOWARDS THE SUPERNOUMENON eBook
