THE MORAL DESIRABILITY OF CULTURE AND CIVILITY

1. We have used words like evil, good, folly, and wisdom in relation to sensuality and sensibility, contending that evil is ever germane to metachemical and chemical sensuality and good, by contrast, to the metachemical and chemical modes of sensibility, while, on the opposite, or male, side of the gender fence, folly is ever germane to physical and metaphysical sensuality and wisdom, by contrast, to physical and metaphysical sensibility.

2. Therefore there is a distinction not only between absolute evil and relative evil, the evil of the Devil and of woman, but also between absolute good and relative good, the good, once again, of the Devil and of woman, albeit it be a very different kind of Devil and woman from the Devil and woman we have identified, in 'once-born' terms, with evil.

3. Likewise there is a distinction not only between relative folly and absolute folly, the folly of man and of God, but also between relative wisdom and absolute wisdom, the wisdom, once again, of man and of God, albeit it be a very different kind of man and God from the man and God we have identified, in 'once-born' terms, with folly.

4. Therefore just as absolute evil and good are equally - though antithetically - diabolic, or of the Devil, so absolute folly and wisdom are equally - though antithetically - divine, or of God.

5. And just as relative evil and good are equally - though antithetically - feminine, or of woman, so relative folly and wisdom are equally - though antithetically - masculine, or of man.

6. Hence whereas 'the diabolic' and 'the divine' can be absolutely right or wrong, depending on the context, so 'the feminine' and 'the masculine' can be relatively right or wrong, again depending on the context, i.e. whether of sensuality or sensibility.

7. To descend, Devil-wise, in space-time from absolute evil to absolute good is to descend, in fiery metachemistry, from absolute wrong to absolute right, from blessed freedom in spatial space to damned constraint in repetitive time, which is equivalent to descending from the absolute barbarity of noumenal objectivity in its sensual mode to the absolute civility of noumenal objectivity in its sensible mode.

8. To descend, woman-wise, in volume-mass from relative evil to relative good is to descend, in watery chemistry, from relative wrong to relative right, from blessed freedom in volumetric volume to damned constraint in massed mass, which is equivalent to descending from the relative barbarity of phenomenal objectivity in its sensual mode to the relative civility of phenomenal objectivity in its sensible mode.

9. To ascend, man-wise, in mass-volume from relative folly to relative wisdom is to ascend, in vegetative physics, from relative wrong to relative right, from cursed enslavement in massive mass to saved binding in voluminous volume, which is equivalent to ascending from the relative nature of phenomenal subjectivity in its sensual mode to the relative culture of phenomenal subjectivity in its sensible mode.

10. To ascend, God-wise, in time-space from absolute folly to absolute wisdom is to ascend, in airy metaphysics, from absolute wrong to absolute right, from cursed enslavement in sequential time to saved binding in spaced space, which is equivalent to ascending from the absolute nature of noumenal subjectivity in its sensual mode to the absolute culture of noumenal subjectivity in its sensible mode.

11. Thus just as 'the evil' become good when they are damned from sensuality to sensibility on either the metachemical axis of space-time or the chemical axis of volume-mass, so one has a right to speak of a correlative descent, in each case, from barbarity to civility - the former wrong and the latter right, whether absolutely (in the noumenal contexts of metachemical sensuality and sensibility) or relatively (in the phenomenal contexts of chemical sensuality and sensibility).

12. Thus just as 'the foolish' become wise when they are saved from sensuality to sensibility on either the physical axis of mass-volume or the metaphysical axis of time-space, so one has a right to speak of a correlative ascent, in each case, from nature to culture - the former wrong and the latter right, whether relatively (in the phenomenal contexts of physical sensuality and sensibility) or absolutely (in the noumenal contexts of metaphysical sensuality and sensibility).

13. It is as incontestable that being barbarous and natural are 'wrong' as that being civil and cultured are 'right', since the evil of barbarity and the folly of naturalism, as in a sense of being philistine, keep things orientated to a 'once-born' and effectively heathenistic situation of 'the blessed' (with freedom) and 'the cursed' (with enslavement to freedom) in sensuality, whereas the goodness of civility and the wisdom of culture keep things orientated to a 're-born' and effectively non-heathenistic situation of 'the constrained' (from freedom) and 'the saved' (with binding to self) in sensibility.

14. Consequently civility, as in a wider correlative sense civilization, is a damned good thing that follows from a cultured lead by males in either phenomenal or noumenal contexts of sensibility to maintain a saved hegemony of cultural wisdom at the expense not only of natural or philistine folly but, on the female side of life, of the barbarous evil that would otherwise win back the 'civilized good' from their damned constraints.

15. Those with any moral sense or, rather, sensibility ... will always be on the side of culture and civility against nature and barbarity; for they alone are right, whether relatively in the phenomenality of mass and volume or absolutely in the noumenality of time and space, and can accordingly speak of themselves in relation to wisdom and goodness, enhanced subjectivity for males and constrained objectivity of females.