SOME TIMELY REVALUATIONS

1. In the past I would have tended to identify metachemistry, and hence space-time objectivity, with crime, and chemistry, and hence volume-mass objectivity, with punishment, but now I see that as one falls, in damnation, from evil to good, or barbarity to civility, so one must fall from crime to punishment on both noumenal and phenomenal, absolute and relative, terms.

2. Similarly, I would have tended, in the past, to identify physics, and hence mass-volume subjectivity, with sin, and metaphysics, and hence time-space subjectivity, with grace, but now I see that as one rises, in salvation, from folly to wisdom, or nature to culture, so one must rise from sin to grace on both phenomenal and noumenal, relative and absolute, terms.

3. Hence we can have no hesitation in identifying crime with the evil of barbarity and punishment with the goodness of civility, whether in relation to the noumenal 'above' or to the phenomenal 'below', and maintain that damnation from the blessing of unconstrained freedom (for objective not-self) in sensuality to the subjection to constrained freedom (upon objective not-self) in sensibility is commensurate with the eclipse of crime by punishment.

4. Likewise we can have no hesitation in identifying sin with the folly of nature or naturalism and grace with the wisdom of culture, whether in relation to the phenomenal 'below' or to the noumenal 'above', and maintain that salvation from the curse of enslaved binding (of subjective self to objective not-self) in sensuality to the sanctity of enhanced binding (to subjective self) in sensibility is commensurate with the eclipse of sin by grace.

5. Therefore just as it is criminal for females to flow with the objective not-self and punishing to go against it (in the overall interests of sensibility), so it is sinful for males to go against the subjective self (in the overall interests of sensuality) and graceful to flow with it, since the one gender is rooted in objectivity and the other in subjectivity, with contrary interests and capacities in consequence.

6. Self for a female is ever secondary or subordinate to not-self, given the vacuously conditioned objectivity of her overall condition, whereas not-self for a male is ever secondary or subordinate to self, given the plenumously conditioned subjectivity, so to speak, of his overall condition.

7. Hence whereas females peak in will and spirit, the power and glory of the objective not-selves in a metachemical and/or chemical disposition, males peak in ego and soul, the form and contentment of the subjective selves in a physical and/or metaphysical disposition.

8. Put differently, this means that first- and second-rate orders of will and spirit are as germane to the female side of life as third- and fourth-rate orders of will and spirit to its male side, or, conversely, that first- and second-rate orders of ego and soul are as germane to the male side of life as third- and fourth-rate orders of ego and soul to its female side.

9. Therefore until and unless males elect to rise, in salvation, from sensuality to sensibility in either physics or metaphysics, vegetation or air, wherein the emphasis is on ego or soul, depending on the element, they will always be subordinate to the first- and second-rate orders of will and spirit that accrue to a female hegemony in sensuality, wherein metachemistry and chemistry, fire and water, are the dominating elements.

10. And electing to rise from sensuality to sensibility in either mass-volume subjectivity or time-space subjectivity, depending on one's class, is equivalent to passing from sin to grace, nature to culture, and folly to wisdom - relatively in the phenomenal context of masculine maleness and absolutely in the noumenal context of divine (submasculine) maleness.

11. The effect of such an election is to induce what is female to fall, in damnation, from sensuality to sensibility in either space-time objectivity or volume-mass objectivity, which is equivalent to passing from crime to punishment, barbarity to civility, evil to good - absolutely in the noumenal context of diabolic (unfeminine) femaleness and relatively in the phenomenal context of feminine femaleness.

12. Therefore we must distinguish not only absolute crime and punishment from relative crime and punishment on the female side of life, but relative sin and grace from absolute sin and grace on its male side, contending that whereas the former options appertain to noumenal and phenomenal manifestations of clearness and unclearness, the latter options appertain to phenomenal and noumenal manifestations of unholiness and holiness, since clearness and unclearness are to metachemistry and chemistry what unholiness and holiness are to physics and metaphysics - the sensual and sensible manifestations, respectively, of female and male alternatives.

13. But, contrary to what I formerly thought, it is clearness, on the female side of things, which is sensual or 'once born' and unclearness which is sensible or 'reborn', since the former appertains to unconstrained freedom, whereas the latter has very much to do with constrained freedom (upon the objective not-self in either phenomenal or noumenal contexts) and is consequently something that could be described as being at loggerheads with itself in civilized fashion.

14. In other words, clearness has reference to evil and barbarity in its criminal freedom, whereas unclearness accrues to goodness and civility in its punishing constraints upon freedom for the female side of things in sensibility. To fall from crime to punishment is accordingly to be damned from clearness to unclearness, as from eyes to heart in metachemistry or tongue to womb in chemistry.

15. To rise, on the other hand, from sin to grace is to be saved from unholiness to holiness, as from phallus to brain in physics or ears to lungs in metaphysics. Therefore holiness will be no less over unclearness in sensibility than unholiness will be under clearness in sensuality.

16. Civility is the unclearness that supports the holiness of culture, whether in relative or absolute terms, whereas nature is the unholiness that worshipfully 'sucks up to' the clearness of barbarity, whether relatively in the phenomenal or absolutely in the noumenal.

17. Clearness is a blessing in its hegemonic ascendancy over the male positions of sensuality, which are cursed with the subservient subjection of unholiness. Only holiness can save from unholiness, and damn to unclearness that which had been clear and clearly hegemonic in its unconstrained freedom of action to do and/or to give.

18. Therefore until males elect to be saved from the folly of unholiness to the wisdom of holiness, the sin of nature to the grace of culture, they will continue to defer to the evil of clearness as to an angel of criminal barbarity who is free to do and/or give her blessed most.