NATURAL SUBDIVISIONS OF SENSUALITY AND SENSIBILITY

1. Since Nature embraces all the elements, it cannot be solely identified with just one of them, not even the nature per se, as it were, of vegetation, since besides the nature-proper of vegetation there is also, as discussed in previous texts, the unnature of fire, the supernature of water, and the subnature of air, all of which are an integral part of Nature in general.

2. But if Nature proceeds from unnatural to subnatural via supernatural and natural, as from fire to air via water and vegetation, then it also proceeds within any given element from sensual to sensible, and thus from one type of subdivision of itself to another.

3. Therefore salvation from the absolute curse of sensual metaphysics to the absolute sanctity of sensible metaphysics will be from the unholy subnature, as it were, of sequential time to the holy subnature of spaced space, as from ears to lungs, whereas damnation from the absolute blessing of sensual metachemistry to the absolute subjection to sensible metachemistry will be from the clear unnature, as it were, of spatial space to the unclear unnature of repetitive time, as from eyes to heart.

4. Likewise, if lower down, on the phenomenal axes, salvation from the relative curse of sensual physics to the relative sanctity of sensible physics will be from the unholy nature, as it were, of massive mass to the holy nature of voluminous volume, as from phallus to brain, whereas damnation from the relative blessing of sensual chemistry to the relative subjection to sensible chemistry will be from the clear supernature, as it were, of volumetric volume to the unclear supernature of massed mass, as from tongue to womb.

5. Hence a rise from one type of subnature to another will - or should be - complemented by a fall from one type of unnature to another - the salvation of gods from sensuality to sensibility, absolute folly to absolute wisdom, entailing the damnation of devils from sensuality to sensibility, absolute evil to absolute good, and contrary standings of metaphysics and metachemistry, air and fire, in consequence.

6. Hence a rise from one type of nature to another will or should be complemented by a fall from one type of supernature to another - the salvation of men from sensuality to sensibility, relative folly to relative wisdom, entailing the damnation of women from sensuality to sensibility, relative evil to relative good, and contrary standings of physics and chemistry, vegetation and water, in consequence.

7. The unnature of metachemistry will always be a context in which doing is paramount over giving, taking, and being, and in which things accordingly proceed from the most barbarous doing to the most civilized doing as the absolute evil of metachemical sensuality is eclipsed by the absolute good of metachemical sensibility, following damnation from the over-plane blessing, as it were, of an identity with spatial space to the under-plane subjection to an identity with repetitive time in space-time objectivity, the noumenal objectivity of devils.

8. Conversely, the subnature of metaphysics will always be a context in which being is paramount over taking, giving, and doing, and in which things accordingly proceed from the most natural (philistine) being to the most cultural being as the absolute folly of metaphysical sensuality is eclipsed by the absolute wisdom of metaphysical sensibility, following salvation from the under-plane curse of an identity with sequential time to the over-plane sanctity of an identity with spaced space in time-space subjectivity, the noumenal subjectivity of gods.

9. The supernature of chemistry will always be a context in which giving is paramount over doing, being, and taking, and in which things accordingly proceed from the most barbarous giving to the most civilized giving as the relative evil of chemical sensuality is eclipsed by the relative good of chemical sensibility, following damnation from the over-plane blessing of an identity with volumetric volume to the under-plane subjection to an identity with massed mass in volume-mass objectivity, the phenomenal objectivity of women.

10. Conversely, the nature of physics will always be a context in which taking is paramount over being, doing, and giving, and in which things accordingly proceed from the most natural (philistine) taking to the most cultural taking as the relative folly of physical sensuality is eclipsed by the relative wisdom of physical sensibility, following salvation from the under-plane curse of an identity with massive mass to the over-plane sanctity of an identity with voluminous volume in mass-volume subjectivity, the phenomenal subjectivity of men.

11. Hence the salvation of those for whom being is of paramount concern necessitates the damnation of those for whom doing is paramount, that they may be reduced from absolute evil to good and duly serve the absolute wisdom of metaphysical culture from a metachemically civilized base.

12. Likewise the salvation of those for whom taking is of paramount concern necessitates the damnation of those for whom giving is paramount, that they may be reduced from relative evil to good and duly serve the relative wisdom of physical culture from a chemically civilized base.

13. Both of these bases have been identified by me with the female manifestations of sensibility in noumenal and phenomenal contexts, the former largely appertaining to the administrative aside to what, in previous texts, has been called the triadic Beyond of 'Kingdom Come', and the latter to the bottom tier of the three-tier structure in question.

14. Hence a sensibly metachemical aside to chemical, physical, and metaphysical manifestations of the triadic Beyond as germane to time vis-à-vis mass, volume, and space in 'Kingdom Come', wherein the totality of Nature, both objectively in relation to unnature and supernature, and subjectively in relation to nature per se and subnature, is and must remain ever-present, so that, speaking in religious terms, Hell, purgatory, earth, and Heaven are appropriately represented.

15. We can now say quite categorically that although unnature will always be a context in which doing is paramount on account of its identification with the will per se, such metachemical doing will be paramount on either absolutely evil or good terms, depending whether sensuality or sensibility is the prevailing manifestation of unnaturalism.

16. Likewise, although supernature will always be a context in which giving is paramount on account of its identification with the spirit per se, such chemical giving will be paramount on either relatively evil or good terms, depending whether sensuality or sensibility is the prevailing manifestation of supernaturalism.

17. Although, on the male side of the gender divide, nature will always be a context in which taking is paramount on account of its identification with the ego per se, such physical taking will be paramount on either relatively foolish or wise terms, depending whether sensuality or sensibility is the prevailing manifestation of naturalism.

18. Likewise, although subnature will always be a context in which being is paramount on account of its identification with the soul per se, such metaphysical being will be paramount on either absolutely foolish or wise terms, depending whether sensuality or sensibility is the prevailing manifestation of subnaturalism.

19. Therefore no more than unnature is exclusively evil can it be said that supernature is exclusively good. Both alike are evil and good depending whether sensuality or sensibility is the prevailing manifestation of what, on the female side of life, are metachemical and chemical modes of objectivity.

20. And no more than nature is exclusively foolish can it be said that subnature is exclusively wise. Both are alike foolish and wise depending whether sensuality or sensibility is the prevailing manifestation of what, on the male side of life, are physical and metaphysical modes of subjectivity.