A DISTINCTION OF SENTIENCE

1. Sensibility is, in some sense, a rejection of sensuality, a negating and turning away from sensuality in something which is nevertheless more than the absence of sensuality, being a specific kind of sentience in its own right - the inner sentience, namely, of that which is sensible.

2. Therefore sentience is divided between the outer sentience of sensuality, which is - to coin a religious phrase - 'once born', and the inner sentience of sensibility, which is 'reborn', and therefore something finer and deeper than sensuality.

3. Sensuality should really be seen as a guide to sensibility, a pathway to sensibility, rather than as something to be lived for in itself; for to limit oneself to sensuality is to turn one's back on that which is deeper and finer, the love of metachemical sensibility being superior, in this regard, to the love of metachemical sensuality; the pride of chemical sensibility likewise being superior to the pride of chemical sensuality; the pleasure of physical sensibility being superior to the pleasure of physical sensuality; and the joy of metaphysical sensibility being superior to the joy of metaphysical sensuality, since, to repeat, deeper and finer.

4. In fact, where the love associated with metachemical sensuality is absolutely evil in its noumenally barbarous freedom, the love associated with metachemical sensibility is absolutely good in its noumenally civilized constraint; and where the pride associated with chemical sensuality is relatively evil in its phenomenally barbarous freedom, the pride associated with chemical sensibility is relatively good in its phenomenally civilized constraint.

5. On the other - and male - side of the gender fence it should be noted that where the pleasure associated with physical sensuality is relatively foolish in its phenomenally natural (philistine) enslavement, the pleasure associated with physical sensibility is relatively wise in its phenomenally cultural binding; and where the joy associated with metaphysical sensuality is absolutely foolish in its noumenally natural (philistine) enslavement, the joy associated with metaphysical sensibility is absolutely wise in its noumenally cultural binding.

6. One could distinguish, in this respect, between the spatial love of metachemical sensuality and the repetitive love of metachemical sensibility; as between the volumetric pride of chemical sensuality and the massed pride of chemical sensibility.

7. Likewise, on the male side of the gender divide, one could distinguish between the massive pleasure of physical sensuality and the voluminous pleasure of physical sensibility; as between the sequential joy of metaphysical sensuality and the spaced joy of metaphysical sensibility.

8. In subatomic terms, I like to think of the falling axis of space-time fieriness in metachemical objectivity as exemplifying a distinction between photons in sensuality and photinos in sensibility, the former appertaining to the eyes and the latter to the heart.

9. Likewise I like to think of the falling axis of volume-mass wateriness in chemical objectivity as exemplifying a distinction between electrons in sensuality and electrinos in sensibility, the former appertaining to the tongue and the latter to the womb.

10. Where the rising axis of mass-volume vegetativeness in physical subjectivity is concerned, however, I like to think of the subatomic distinction as being rather more between neutrons in sensuality and neutrinos in sensibility, the former appertaining to the penis (flesh) and the latter to the brain.

11. And where the rising axis of time-space airiness in metaphysical subjectivity is concerned, I like to think that the subatomic distinction would be rather more between protons in sensuality and protinos is sensibility, the former appertaining to the ears and the latter to the lungs.

12. Be that as it may, a distinction of sentience indubitably exists between the outer and the inner, sensuality and sensibility, and whether sensuality prevails over sensibility, in 'once-born' fashion, or sensibility over sensuality, in 're-born' fashion, will depend not only upon the individual but upon the nature of the society in which he lives and its system of values for better (sensibility) or worse (sensuality).