MEAN AND SHADOW

 

1.   The theory of 'means' and 'shadows', which I first explored in my previous text, Bringing the Judgement, has to do with the relationship between a predominating not-self and a subordinate not-self which is paradoxically complementary to it from a contrary standpoint, be that standpoint sensual or sensible, noumenal or phenomenal.

 

2.   To begin with, it helps to establish the distinction between the objective axes of space-time and volume-mass, both of which are female, and the subjective axes of mass-volume and time-space, both of which are male.

 

3.   Hence the plane of space is divisible between the objectivity of spatial space and the subjectivity of spaced space, while the plane of time is divisible between the subjectivity of sequential time and the objectivity of repetitive time, space-time accordingly falling diagonally from spatial space to repetitive time, time-space, by contrast, rising diagonally from sequential time to spaced space.

 

4.   Likewise the plane of volume is divisible between the objectivity of volumetric volume and the subjectivity of voluminous volume, while the plane of mass is divisible between the subjectivity of massive mass and the objectivity of massed mass, volume-mass accordingly falling diagonally from volumetric volume to massed mass, mass-volume, by contrast, rising diagonally from massive mass to voluminous volume.

 

5.   Thus the axes of space and time, which are noumenal and hence   upper class, afford us a distinction between the female objectivity of space-time and the male subjectivity of time-space, while the axes of volume and mass, which are phenomenal and hence lower class, afford us a distinction between the female objectivity of volume-mass and the male subjectivity of mass-volume.

 

6.   Scholars of my work - if there are any - will recall at this point that whereas the objective is rooted in a vacuum and tends either to diverge in sensuality or converge in sensibility on a straight-line basis, the subjective, by contrast, is centred in a plenum and tends to diverge in sensuality or converge in sensibility on a curved-line basis.

 

7.   Hence the femaleness of objectivity and, by implication, both space-time and volume-mass, but the maleness of subjectivity and, by implication, both mass-volume and time-space.

 

8.   Just as one cannot be both noumenal and phenomenal, upper class and lower class, at the same time, so one cannot be of space-time and volume-mass or, alternatively, of mass-volume and time-space to an identical degree, since the one tends to preclude the other and both, moreover, are subject to a gender specific integrity, so that he who is of time-space tends not to have that much to do with space-time and vice versa, while he who is of mass-volume tends not to have that much to do with volume-mass, although neither can be completely ruled out.

 

9.   Since these four axes are inseparable from a given element, be it fire in relation to space-time, air in relation to time-space, water in relation to volume-mass, or vegetation (earth) in relation to mass-volume, they operate with regard to the various orders of not-self and selflessness, will and spirit, both on and across the gender divide, from the female elements of fire and water, which are objective, to the male elements of vegetation and air, which are subjective.

 

10.  Hence space-time can be organically translated into a distinction between the eyes and the heart, while time-space affords one a like distinction between the ears and the lungs, the former in each case sensual and the latter sensible.

 

11.  Likewise volume-mass can be organically translated into a distinction between the tongue and the womb, while mass-volume affords one a like distinction between the penis and the brain, the former in each case sensual and the latter sensible.

 

12.  Hence quite apart from the gender specific axes of space-time and time-space, corresponding to eyes-heart and ears-lungs, the plane of space is divisible between the objectivity of the eyes and the subjectivity of the lungs, while the plane of time is divisible between the subjectivity of the ears and the objectivity of the heart.

 

13.  Hence quite apart from the gender specific axes of volume-mass and mass-volume, corresponding to tongue-womb and penis-brain, the plane of volume is divisible between the objectivity of the tongue and the subjectivity of the brain, while the plane of mass is divisible between the subjectivity of the penis and the objectivity of the womb.

 

14.  Now as I have argued in the past, so I shall continue to argue that a hegemonic upper-class, or noumenal, position, be it sensual or sensible, tends to encourage a contrary lower-class, or phenomenal, position, whereas a hegemonic lower-class, or phenomenal, position, be it sensual or sensible, tends to encourage a contrary upper-class, or noumenal, position.

 

15.  Within the male gender options, which the reader will recall are subjective and elementally divisible between vegetation and air, the phenomenality of a hegemonic penis will tend to co-exist with the noumenality of subordinate lungs, the former sensual and the latter sensible, while, conversely, the noumenality of hegemonic lungs will tend to co-exist with the phenomenality of a subordinate penis, the former sensible and the latter sensual.

 

16.  Likewise the phenomenality of a hegemonic brain will tend to co-exist with the noumenality of subordinate ears, the former sensible and the latter sensual, while, conversely, the noumenality of hegemonic ears will tend to co-exist with the phenomenality of a subordinate brain, the former sensual and the latter sensible.

 

17.  Within the female gender options by contrast, which the reader will recall are objective and elementally divisible between fire and water, the phenomenality of a hegemonic tongue will tend to co-exist with the noumenality of a subordinate heart, the former sensual and the latter sensible, while, conversely, the noumenality of a hegemonic heart will tend to co-exist with the phenomenality of a subordinate tongue, the former sensible and the latter sensual.

 

18.  Likewise the phenomenality of a hegemonic womb will tend to co-exist with the noumenality of subordinate eyes, the former sensible and the latter sensual, while, conversely, the noumenality of hegemonic eyes will tend to co-exist with the phenomenality of a subordinate womb, the former sensual and the latter sensible.

 

19.  Thus, on the male side of life, either the penis or the lungs will be hegemonic in the one case, and either the brain or the ears in the other case, with the subordinate complement always standing as a 'shadow' to the prevailing 'mean', be it sensual or sensible, vegetative or airy, noumenal or phenomenal, which is to say, upper class in time-space or lower class in mass-volume.

 

20.  Thus, on the female side of life, either the tongue or the heart will be hegemonic in the one case, and either the womb or the eyes in the other case, with the subordinate complement always standing as a 'shadow' to the prevailing 'mean', be it sensual or sensible, fiery or watery, noumenal or phenomenal, which is to say, upper class in space-time or lower class in volume-mass.