PART EIGHT
1.
In overall
subatomic terms, the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis offers us a
polarity between representative photons and pseudo-representative
pseudo-electrons, in metachemistry and pseudo-chemistry,
on its female side, and one between pseudo-representative pseudo-protons and
representative neutrons, in pseudo-metaphysics and physics, on its male side.
2.
By axial
contrast, the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis offers us a polarity
between representative protons and pseudo-representative neutrons, in
metaphysics and pseudo-physics, on its male side, and one between
pseudo-representative pseudo-photons and representative electrons, in pseudo-metachemistry and chemistry, on its female side.
1.
The
polarity between metachemical photons and
pseudo-chemical pseudo-electrons is primary and that between pseudo-metaphsyical pseudo-protons and physical neutrons secondary
in overall state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axial terms.
2.
The polarity
between metaphysical protons and pseudo-physical pseudo-neutrons is primary and
that between pseudo-metachemical pseudo-photons and
chemical electrons secondary on overall church-hegemonic/state-subordinate
terms.
3.
More
specifically, the polarity between metachemical
photons and pseudo-chemical pseudo-electrons is primary and pseudo-primary
state hegemonic, whereas that between pseudo-metaphysical pseudo-protons and
physical neutrons is pseudo-primary and primary church subordinate.
4.
Likewise
the polarity between metaphysical protons and pseudo-physical pseudo-neutrons
is primary and pseudo-primary church hegemonic, whereas that between pseudo-metachemical pseudo-photons and chemical electrons is
pseudo-primary and primary state subordinate.
1.
In terms of
the once-bovaryized elements and pseudo-elements, the
polarity between metachemical electrons and
pseudo-chemical pseudo-photons is primary and pseudo-primary state hegemonic,
whereas that between pseudo-metaphysical pseudo-neutrons and physical protons
is pseudo-primary and primary church subordinate.
2.
Likewise
the once-bovaryized elemental and pseudo-elemental
polarity between metaphysical neutrons and pseudo-physical pseudo-protons is
primary and pseudo-primary church hegemonic, whereas that between pseudo-metachemical pseudo-electrons and chemical photons is
pseudo-primary and primary state subordinate.
1.
In terms of
the twice-bovaryized elements and pseudo-elements,
the polarity between metachemical neutrons and
pseudo-chemical pseudo-protons is secondary and pseudo-secondary church
subordinate, whereas that between pseudo-metaphysical pseudo-electrons and
physical photons is pseudo-secondary and secondary state-hegemonic.
2.
Likewise,
the twice-bovaryized elemental and pseudo-elemental
polarity between metaphysical electrons and pseudo-physical pseudo-photons is
secondary and pseudo-secondary state subordinate, whereas that between pseudo-metachemical pseudo-neutrons and chemical protons is
pseudo-secondary and secondary church hegemonic.
1.
In terms of
the thrice-bovaryized elements and pseudo-elements,
the polarity between metachemical protons and
pseudo-chemical pseudo-neutrons is secondary and pseudo-secondary church
subordinate, whereas that between pseudo-metaphysical pseudo-photons and
physical electrons is pseudo-secondary and secondary state hegemonic.
2.
Likewise,
the thrice-bovaryized elemental and pseudo-elemental
polarity between metaphysical photons and pseudo-physical pseudo-electrons is
secondary and pseudo-secondary state subordinate, whereas that between pseudo-metachemical pseudo-protons and chemical neutrons is
pseudo-secondary and secondary church hegemonic.
In overall axial terms, one finds that the
primary and pseudo-primary polarities are positive and pseudo-positive, whereas
their secondary and pseudo-secondary counterparts are negative and
pseudo-negative, which is to say, bound and pseudo-bound as opposed to free or
pseudo-free, whether in relation to the state or to the church.
1.
On the
state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis stretching from the northwest to the
southeast points of the intercardinal axial compass,
the overall female (divisible between hegemonic noumenal
objective and subordinate pseudo-phenomenal pseudo-objective) side of the
gender divide is primary and pseudo-primary state hegemonic but secondary and
pseudo-secondary church subordinate, whereas the overall male (divisible
between subordinate pseudo-noumenal pseudo-subjective
and hegemonic phenomenal subjective) side of this divide is pseudo-primary and
primary church subordinate but pseudo-secondary and secondary state hegemonic.
2.
On the
church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis stretching from the southwest to the
northeast points of the intercardinal axial compass,
the overall male (divisible between subordinate pseudo-phenomenal
pseudo-subjective and hegemonic noumenal subjective)
side of the gender divide is pseudo-primary and primary church hegemonic but
pseudo-secondary and secondary church subordinate, whereas the overall female
(divisible between hegemonic phenomenal objective and subordinate pseudo-noumenal pseudo-objective) side of this divide is primary
and pseudo-primary state subordinate but secondary and pseudo-secondary church
hegemonic.
In such fashion is the fourfold composition of
elements and pseudo-elements put into axial perspective, and this is the sum of
philosophical truth which also embraces, as a specific elemental bias within
the overall atomic framework, metaphysical truth as the transcendent ideal of
all philosophical endeavour.
1.
What can be
established with a fair degree of certainty is that each hegemonic element,
whether photon, electron, neutron, or proton, has a primary and a secondary
aspect, the former free and the latter bound, whether in soma or psyche,
depending on gender or, in these elemental contexts, the effective
preconditions of gender.
2.
Conversely,
each subordinate pseudo-element, whether pseudo-proton, pseudo-neutron,
pseudo-electron, or pseudo-photon, has a pseudo-primary and a pseudo-secondary
aspect or, more correctly, pseudo-aspect, the former pseudo-bound and the
latter pseudo-free, whether in pseudo-psyche or pseudo-soma, depending, once
again, on gender or the effective elemental preconditions thereof.
3.
Therefore
whereas the free aspect of an element, whether somatically predominant or
psychically preponderant on absolute (3) or relative (2½) terms, is positive
and, hence, bright, the bound aspect, whether psychically postponderant
or somatically postdominant on absolute (1) or
relative (1½) terms, is negative and, hence, dark, or in shadow.
4.
Likewise,
whereas the pseudo-bound pseudo-aspect of a pseudo-element, whether
pseudo-psychically pseudo-preponderant or pseudo-somatically pseudo-predominant
on pseudo-absolute (3) or pseudo-relative (2½) terms, is pseudo-negative and,
hence, pseudo-dark, the pseudo-free pseudo-aspect, whether pseudo-somatically postdominant or pseudo-psychically postponderant
on pseudo-absolute (1) or pseudo-relative (1½) terms, is pseudo-positive and,
hence, pseudo-bright.
In what could be called majoritarian
ratio terms, whether elementally predominant and preponderant or
pseudo-elementally pseudo-preponderant and pseudo-predominant, the hegemonic
element is bright and the subordinate pseudo-element pseudo-dark, but such
pseudo-darkness is the pseudo-primary corollary of the primary brightness to
which it is pseudo-elementally subordinate on either pseudo-preponderant to
predominant (pseudo-male to female) or pseudo-predominant to preponderant
(pseudo-female to male) parallel ratio terms.
Another thing one can be confident about is the
association between photons and metachemistry,
electrons and chemistry, neutrons and physics, and protons and metaphysics, to
take just the four principal subatomic elements. But it is only a
terminological association, not an exact correlation, because each of the
elements described, whilst they may constitute the fulcrum of the discipline to
which they have been ascribed, do not constitute the atomic basis of that
discipline, much less the nuclear superstructure, which, besides requiring
human application, is also comprised of the bovaryized
elements that supplement the representative elements on the terms outlined in
previous pages. Now what applies to the elements is also applicable to the
pseudo-elements, which require the addition of bovaryized
pseudo-elements to the pseudo-element most representative of the
pseudo-discipline to which it appertains as its pseudo-subatomic precondition,
be that pseudo-discipline pseudo-metaphysical, pseudo-physical, pseudo-chemical,
or pseudo-metachemical. Hence we can no more equate
pseudo-metaphysics with pseudo-protons alone than ,,,,
pseudo-metachemistry with pseudo-photons alone, even
though such pseudo-elements play the main pseudo-subatomic role in the overall
pseudo-atomic composition of any given pseudo-disciplinary bias. But when it
comes to why some people are this way and others that way, why this atomic bias
and not that, we enter the determining realms of gender and class, with gender
taking precedence over class as the primary determinant of a class
extrapolation that even when it shares the same gender does so to a different
extent, making for an absolute/relative dichotomy between the photonic bias,
for instance, of upper-class females (metachemical)
and the electronic bias of lower-class females (chemical) in gender antithesis
to the neutronic bias of lower-class males (physical)
and the protonic bias of upper-class males
(metaphysical, not forgetting the pseudo-gender subordination that stems from
the superior pressure of what becomes the hegemonic gender upon their inferior
counterparts and leads, in due course, to pseudo-class distinctions, on a
pseudo-absolute/pseudo-relative basis, between the pseudo-protonic
bias of what can be termed pseudo-upper class pseudo-males
(pseudo-metaphysical) and the pseudo-neutronic bias
of pseudo-lower class pseudo-males (pseudo-physical) in pseudo-gender
antithesis to the pseudo-electronic bias of pseudo-lower class pseudo-females
(pseudo-chemical) and the pseudo-photonic bias of pseudo-upper class
pseudo-females (pseudo-metachemical), none of whom
would exist as such but for their upper- or lower-class gender counterparts or,
more accurately, opposites.
If much of what has been written on this and
previous pages sounds like the 'Visible Matter/Invisible Matter' or, following
on from the above, 'Bright Matter/Dark Matter' theories of contemporary
scientists and more especially of physicists, then don't be surprised: it does.
But that doesn't mean to say science has caught up with my philosophy. On the
contrary, any system based in empirical observation will never 'catch up' with
one whose logic remains centred in insightful feelings, or truth. Science may
have a beautiful will, but it has no soul or only, at best, a thrice-bovaryized intensely sceptical one, and that is why
philosophy of this nature is so necessary, and why the resurrection of truth,
in the truly metaphysical sense that has nothing to do with fact hyped as
truth, absolutely depends on it, if civilization is to return, on more radical
terms than ever existed in the (medieval) past, to the leadership of religion,
which has nothing to do with fundamentally understanding the world for purposes
of material exploitation, but everything to do with ideally transcending it in
the interests of soulful liberation, since at the opposite gender remove from
the dominance of will and the enslavement of 'the world' to that domination,
both directly, in polar axial terms, and indirectly, where its lapsed
Catholic/republican socialist manifestation is concerned and one finds a
proletariat in dire need of precisely the kind of liberation, deliverance,
salvation – call it by what name one likes – alluded to above, which the
Catholic Church, compromised by ongoing deference to free will in the guise of
'the Creator', 'the Almighty', 'the All-Powerful', and other variations on a
freely-somatic metachemical theme, is no less
signally incapable of providing now than ever it was in the Judeo-Christian
past. Only Social Theocracy, it seems to me, can open the door to religious
freedom and, hence, to the hegemony of metaphysics over pseudo-metachemistry, of true religion over pseudo-science.
LONDON 2014
Preview THE FOURFOLD COMPOSITION OF ELEMENTS AND PSEUDO-ELEMENTS IN AXIAL PERSPECTIVE eBook
