PART SIX

1. The physical ego of the intellectual mind, the once-bovaryized metaphysical ego of the superintellectual mind, the twice-bovaryized metachemical ego of the subintellectual mind, and the thrice-bovaryized chemical ego of the unintellectual mind, as we regress from free intellectual psyche in phenomenal and noumenal subjectivity (intellectual conscious and intellectual superconscious) to bound intellectual psyche in noumenal and phenomenal objectivity (intellectual subconscious and intellectual unconscious).

2. The metaphysical soul of the superemotional mind, the once-bovaryized physical soul of the emotional mind, the twice-bovaryized chemical soul of the unemotional mind, the thrice-bovaryized metachemical soul of the subemotional mind, as we regress from free emotional psyche in noumenal and phenomenal subjectivity (emotional superconscious and emotional conscious) to bound emotional mind in phenomenal and noumenal objectivity (emotional unconscious and emotional subconscious).

3. The chemical spirit of the instinctual body, the once-bovaryized metachemical spirit of the superinstinctual body, the twice-bovaryized metaphysical spirit of the subinstinctual body, the thrice-bovaryized physical spirit of the uninstinctual body, as we regress from free instinctual soma in phenomenal and noumenal objectivity (instinctual sensuous and instinctual supersensuous) to bound instinctual soma in noumenal and phenomenal subjectivity (instinctual subsensuous and instinctual unsensuous).

4. The metachemical will of the superintentional body, the chemical will of the intentional body, the physical will of the unintentional body, the metaphysical will of the subintentional body, as we regress from free intentional soma in noumenal and phenomenal objectivity (intentional supersensuous and intentional sensuous) to the bound intentional soma in phenomenal and noumenal subjectivity (intentional unsensuous and intentional subsensuous).

1. To regress from the knowledge of the intellectual ego to the weakness of the unintellectual ego via the truth of the superintellectual ego and the ugliness of the subintellectual ego, as from the free psyche in primary consciousness and secondary superconsciousness of physics and metaphysics to the bound psyche in primary subconsciousness and secondary unconsciousness of metachemistry and chemistry.

2. To regress from the joy of the superemotional soul to the hate of the subemotional soul via the pleasure of the emotional soul and the humility (if not humiliation) of the unemotional soul, as from the free psyche in primary superconsciousness and secondary consciousness of metaphysics and physics to the bound psyche in primary unconsciousness and secondary subconsciousness of chemistry and metachemistry.

3. To regress from the pride of the instinctual spirit to the pain of the uninstinctual spirit via the love of the superinstinctual spirit and the woe of the subinstinctual spirit, as from the free soma in primary sensuousness and secondary supersensuousness of chemistry and metachemistry to the bound soma in primary subsensuousness and secondary unsensuousness of metaphysics and physics.

4. To regress from the beauty of the superintentional will to the illusion of the subintentional will via the strength of the intentional will and the ignorance of the unintentional will, as from the free soma in primary supersensuousness and secondary sensuousness of metachemistry and chemistry to the bound soma in primary unsensuousness and secondary subsensuousness of physics and metaphysics.

Will and spirit are always free (in primary soma) on the female side of the gender divide and bound (in secondary soma) on its male side, whereas ego and soul are always free (in primary psyche) on the male side of the gender divide but bound (in secondary psyche) on its female side – at least in terms of the hegemonic elements of metachemistry and chemistry on the one hand, and physics and metaphysics on the other. The pseudo-elemental positions, ever subordinate to the hegemonic elements, tend to reflect the elemental hegemonies on reverse ratio terms within pseudo-free and pseudo-bound contexts in which the attributes, being 'pseudo', exist in contrary positions to their exact elemental counterparts in the sense that what is positive in free soma becomes pseudo-positive in pseudo-free psyche and, conversely, what is negative in bound psyche becomes pseudo-negative in pseudo-bound soma where the transpositions from metachemistry and chemistry to pseudo-metachemistry and pseudo-chemistry are concerned, in contrast to what is positive in free psyche becoming pseudo-positive in pseudo-free soma and, conversely, what is negative in bound soma becoming pseudo-negative in pseudo-bound psyche where the transpositions from physics and metaphysics to pseudo-physics and pseudo-metaphysics are concerned.

1. Hence the pairing of metachemical free soma and bound psyche in supersensuousness and subconsciousness with pseudo-metaphysical pseudo-free soma and pseudo-bound psyche in pseudo-subsensuousness and pseudo-superconsciousness in a 3:1 free primary body to bound secondary mind vis-a-vis a 1:3 pseudo-free secondary body to pseudo-bound primary mind ratio differential between the hegemonic photonic element and the subordinate pseudo-protonic pseudo-element.

2. Hence the pairing of chemical free soma and bound psyche in sensuousness and unconsciousness with pseudo-physical pseudo-free soma and pseudo-bound psyche in pseudo-unsensuousness and pseudo-consciousness in a 2½:1½ free primary body to bound secondary mind vis-a-vis a 1½:2½ pseudo-free secondary body to pseudo-bound primary mind ratio differential between the hegemonic electronic element and the subordinate pseudo-neutronic pseudo-element.

3. Hence the pairing of physical free psyche and bound soma in consciousness and unsensuousness with pseudo-chemical pseudo-free psyche and pseudo-bound soma in pseudo-unconsciousness and pseudo-sensuousness in a 2½:1½ free primary mind to bound secondary body vis-a-vis a 1½:2½ pseudo-free secondary mind to pseudo-bound primary body ratio differential between the hegemonic neutronic element and the subordinate pseudo-eletronic pseudo-element.

4. Hence the pairing of metaphysical free psyche and bound soma in superconsciousness and subsensuousness with pseudo-metachemical pseudo-free psyche and pseudo-bound soma in pseudo-subconsciousness and pseudo-supersensuousness in a 3:1 free primary mind to bound secondary body via-a-vis a 1:3 pseudo-free secondary mind to pseudo-bound primary body ratio differential between the hegemonic protonic element and the subordinate pseudo-photonic pseudo-element.

1. The pairing of photonic elements with pseudo-protonic pseudo-elements is equivalent to the hegemony of space over pseudo-time, or spatial space over sequential time at the northeast point of the intercardinal axial compass on what is the apex of the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis.

2. The pairing of electronic elements with pseudo-neutronic pseudo-elements is equivalent to the hegemony of volume over pseudo-mass, or volumetric volume over massed mass at the southwest point of the intercardinal axial compass on what is the base of the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis.

3. The pairing of neutronic elements with pseudo-electronic pseudo-elements is equivalent to the hegemony of mass over pseudo-volume, or massive mass over voluminous volume at the southeast point of the intercardinal axial compass on what is the base of the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis.

4. The pairing of protonic elements with pseudo-photonic pseudo-elements is equivalent to the hegemony of time over pseudo-space, or repetitive time over spaced space at the northeast point of the intercardinal axial compass on what is the apex of the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis.

1. Hence the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis affords us a primary polarity between photonic space and pseudo-electronic pseudo-volume coupled to a secondary polarity between pseudo-protonic pseudo-time and neutronic mass – the former polarity of overall female character in relation to the primary concrete particles and secondary abstract wavicles of noumenal objectivity and phenomenal pseudo-objectivity, and the latter polarity of overall male character in relation to the primary abstract wavicles and secondary concrete particles of noumenal pseudo-subjectivity and phenomenal subjectivity.

2. Hence the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis affords us a primary polarity between protonic time and pseudo-neutronic pseudo-mass coupled to a secondary polarity between pseudo-photonic pseudo-space and electronic volume – the former polarity of male character in relation to the primary abstract wavicles and secondary concrete particles of noumenal subjectivity and phenomenal pseudo-subjectivity, and the latter polarity of overall female character in relation to the primary concrete particles and secondary abstract wavicles of noumenal pseudo-objectivity and phenomenal objectivity.

1. Just as I distinguish between the supersensuous and the subconscious in metachemistry, with a 3:1 ratio differential of free soma to bound psyche, so one could alternatively regard such a distinction as being between supersensuality and subsensibility, since this would not only accord with the aforementioned ratio bias of soma to psyche but would also suggest a parallel with superfemininity vis-a-vis submasculinity, the superparticle supernaturalism of a superconcrete freedom in state-hegemonic materialism via-a-vis what could be termed the subwavicle subnurturalism of a subabstract binding in church-subordinate fundamentalism, the former primary and the latter secondary.

2. Likewise, if on contrary noumenal axial terms, just as I distinguish between the superconscious and the subsensuous in metaphysics, with a 3:1 ratio differential of free psyche to bound soma, so one could alternatively regard such a distinction as being between supersensibility and subsensuality, since this would not only accord with the aforementioned ratio bias of psyche to soma but would also suggest a parallel with supermasculinity vis-a-vis subfemininity, the superwavicle supernurturalism of a superabstract freedom in church-hegemonic transcendentalism vis-a-vis what could be termed the subparticle subnaturalism of a subconcrete binding in state-subordinate idealism, the former primary and the latter secondary.

3. Dropping from the noumenal planes of space and time in metachemistry and metaphysics to the phenomenal planes of volume and mass in chemistry and physics, as from ethereal absolutism to corporeal relativity, it could be argued that just as I distinguish between the sensuous and the unconscious in chemistry, with a 2½:1½ ratio differential of free soma to bound psyche, so one could alternatively regard such a distinction as being between sensuality and unsensibility, since this would not only accord with the aforementioned ratio bias of soma to psyche but would also suggest a parallel with femininity vis-a-vis unmasculinity, the particle naturalism of a concrete freedom in state-subordinate naturalism vis-a-vis what could be termed the unwavicle unnurturalism of an unabstract binding in church-hegemonic pantheism, the former primary and the latter secondary.

4. Similarly, if on contrary phenomenal axial terms, just as I distinguish between the conscious and the unsensuous in physics, with a 2½:1½ ratio differential of free psyche to bound soma, so one could alternatively regard such a distinction as being between sensibility and unsensuality, since this would not only accord with the aforementioned ratio bias of psyche to soma but would also suggest a parallel with masculinity vis-a-vis unfemininity, the wavicle nurturalism of an abstract freedom in church-subordinate humanism vis-a-vis what could be termed the unparticle unnaturalism of a unconcrete binding in state-hegemonic realism, the former primary and the latter secondary.

1. As for the pseudo-elements a plane down, in each class case (pseudo-noumenal and/or pseudo-phenomenal) from the hegemonic elements, one should distinguish between the pseudo-subsensuous and the pseudo-superconscious of pseudo-metaphysics, with a 1:3 ratio differential of pseudo-free soma to pseudo-bound psyche, which could alternatively be regarded as a distinction between pseudo-subsensuality and pseudo-supersensibility, thereby suggesting a parallel with pseudo-subfemininity and pseudo-supermasculinity, the pseudo-subparticle pseudo-subnaturalism of a pseudo-subconcrete pseudo-freedom in state-hegemonic pseudo-idealism juxtaposed with what could be termed the pseudo-superwavicle pseudo-supernurturalism of a pseudo-superabstract pseudo-binding in church-subordinate pseudo-transcendentalism, the former secondary and the latter primary.

2. Likewise, if on contrary pseudo-noumenal axial terms, one could distinguish between the pseudo-subconscious and the pseudo-supersensuous, with a 1:3 axial differential of pseudo-free psyche to pseudo-bound soma, which could alternatively be regarded as a distinction between pseudo-subsensibility and pseudo-supersensuality, the pseudo-subwavicle pseudo-subnurturalism of a pseudo-subabstract pseudo-freedom in church-hegemonic pseudo-fundamentalism juxtaposed with what could be termed the pseudo-superparticle pseudo-supernaturalism of a pseudo-superconcrete pseudo-binding in state-subordinate pseudo-materialism, the former secondary and the latter primary.

3. Dropping from the pseudo-noumenal planes of pseudo-time and pseudo-space in pseudo-metaphysics and pseudo-metachemistry to the pseudo-phenomenal planes of pseudo-mass and pseudo-volume in pseudo-physics and pseudo-chemistry, one should distinguish between the pseudo-unsensuous and the pseudo-conscious in pseudo-physics, with a 1½:2½ ratio differential of pseudo-free soma to pseudo-bound psyche, which could alternatively be regarded as a distinction between pseudo-unsensuality and pseudo-sensibility, the pseudo-unparticle pseudo-unnaturalism of a pseudo-unconcrete pseudo-freedom in state-subordinate pseudo-realism juxtaposed with what could be termed the pseudo-wavicle pseudo-nurtualism of a pseudo-abstract pseudo-binding in church-hegemonic pseudo-humanism, the former secondary and the latter primary.

4. Similarly, on contrary pseudo-phenomenal axial terms, one should distinguish between the pseudo-unconscious and pseudo-sensuous in pseudo-chemistry, with a 1½:2½ ratio differential of pseudo-free psyche to pseudo-bound soma, which could alternatively be regarded as a distinction between pseudo-unsensibility and pseudo-sensuality, the pseudo-unwavicle pseudo-unnurturalism of a pseudo-unabstract pseudo-freedom in church-subordinate pseudo-pantheism juxtaposed with what could be termed the pseudo-particle pseudo-naturalism of a pseudo-concrete pseudo-binding in state-hegemonic pseudo-naturalism, the former secondary and the latter primary.