1. To
contrast the metachemical unclearness of evil with
the chemical clearness of good, as one would contrast fire with water - the
former noumenal and the latter phenomenal, as with
regard to space-time materialism and to volume-mass realism on the objective,
or female, side of life.
2. To
contrast the physical unholiness of folly with the
metaphysical holiness of wisdom, as one would contrast vegetation with air -
the former phenomenal and the latter noumenal, as
with regard to mass-volume naturalism and to time-space idealism on the subjective,
or male, side of life.
3. That
which is unclear, being evil, can be viciously or virtuously so, depending
whether it is conceived in relation to power or glory as noumenal
particles and wavicles of an objective disposition.
4. That
which is clear, being good, can be viciously or virtuously so, depending
whether it is conceived in relation to power or glory as phenomenal particles
and wavicles of an objective disposition.
5. That
which is unholy, being foolish, can be viciously or virtuously so, depending
whether it is conceived in relation to form or content as phenomenal particles
and wavicles of a subjective disposition.
6. That
which is holy, being wise, can be viciously or virtuously so, depending whether
it is conceived in relation to form or content as noumenal
particles and wavicles of a subjective disposition.
7. Since
power is perfect on the noumenal planes of space-time
materialism and imperfect on the phenomenal planes of volume-mass realism, one
should distinguish the primary vice of noumenal power
in metachemical unclearness from the secondary vice
of phenomenal power in chemical clearness - the former beautiful and the latter
strong.
8. Since
glory is imperfect on the noumenal planes of
space-time materialism and perfect on the phenomenal planes of volume-mass
realism, one should distinguish the secondary virtue of noumenal
glory in metachemical unclearness from the primary
virtue of phenomenal glory in chemical clearness - the former loving and the
latter proud.
9. Since
form is perfect on the phenomenal planes of mass-volume naturalism and
imperfect on the noumenal planes of time-space
idealism, one should distinguish the primary vice of phenomenal form in
physical unholiness from the secondary vice of noumenal form in metaphysical holiness - the former
knowledgeable and the latter truthful.
10. Since
content is imperfect on the phenomenal planes of mass-volume naturalism and
perfect on the noumenal planes of time-space
idealism, one should distinguish the secondary virtue of phenomenal content in
physical unholiness from the primary virtue of noumenal content in metaphysical holiness - the former
pleasurable and the latter joyful.
11. Unholiness is no more evil, and thus a metachemical
attribute, through materialism, of the Devil/Hell, than clearness is wise, and
thus a metaphysical attribute, through idealism, of God/Heaven.
12. Unholiness is simply foolish, and thus a physical
attribute, through naturalism, of man/earth, while clearness is simply good,
and thus a chemical attribute, through realism, of woman/purgatory.
13. The
'unholy man' may be a fool, but he certainly isn't evil, since unholiness is the next best thing to holiness, as
vegetation to air or physics to metaphysics.
14. The 'clear
woman' may be good, but she certainly isn't wise, since clearness is the next
worst thing to unclearness, as water to fire or chemistry to metachemistry.
15. The
'unclear woman' stands at an evil, and thus absolutely antithetical remove,
from the 'holy man', as the noumenal objectivity of
space-time materialism from the noumenal subjectivity
of time-space idealism.
16. The
'clear woman' stands at a good, and thus relatively antithetical remove, from
the 'unholy man', as the phenomenal objectivity of volume-mass realism from the
phenomenal subjectivity of mass-volume naturalism.
17. That
which is natural may be unholy ... in its vegetative phenomenality,
but it can never be evil, like the fiery noumenality
of materialism.
18. That
which is real may be good ... in its watery phenomenality,
but it can never be wise, like the airy noumenality
of idealism.
19. 'The
fool', or foolish man, is closer to the wise man than are either 'the good' or
'the evil', the good woman or the evil woman, and consequently counts for more
with him - as was, in fact, the case with Christ, Who preferred sinners to
scribes and pharisees.
20. Men,
too, can be good or evil, and thus 'bent' away from what is either phenomenally
masculine (lower to upper) or noumenally masculine (submasculine to supermasculine),
sinful or graceful, in one degree or another of punishment and/or crime.
21. Men
that are 'bent' may well be just or cruel, depending on the order of their bentness, but they can never be stupid or kind - at any
rate, not so long as they remain 'bent'.
22. To
be a bent man is to effectively function as a woman, and thus be objectively
ranged against subjectivity either from the viewpoint of metachemical
evil or of chemical good, materialism or realism.
23. It
is not inconceivable that the term 'gentleman', as especially applied in
England to those categories of men who are conspicuously of 'the good' and/or
'the great' (this latter equivalent to 'the evil', or powerful) is synonymous
with being 'bent', and thus less of a man than someone who effectively
functions as a woman ... in due objective fashion.
24. A
society with an abundance of 'gentlemen', in the aforementioned sense, can only
be one in which heathenistic values take precedence
over Christian values, the secular over the ecclesiastical, as objectivity
'rides high', in due female fashion, at the expense of subjectivity.
25. In
such a society, the Kingdom (noumenal) and/or the
State (phenomenal) will be genuine, while the Church (phenomenal) and/or the
Centre (noumenal) will be 'pseudo', and thus
deferentially subordinate to the prevailing secularity, with its emphasis on
freedom.
26. A
society in which the secular institutions are free and the religious
institutions 'pseudo' ... is a free society, or one which is primarily
characterized by free will rather than by natural determinism.
27. Free
societies are much more likely to be 'once born' and heathenistic
than 're-born' and Christian, given the female hegemony of objectivity which 'rides
high' at the expense of subjectivity, tongue at the expense of phallus in the
phenomenal context of watery (chemical) realism, eyes at the expense of ears in
the noumenal context of fiery (metachemical)
materialism.
28. In
Britain, however, 're-born' metachemistry is
combined, via the 'Blood Royal', with 'once-born' chemistry, the monarchy with
the parliamentary, and truly genuine, mode of democracy.
29. America,
on the other hand, is more characterized, through the '
30. By
rights, a pseudo-democracy in a pseudo-State should be deferential, through
republicanism, to the genuine Church, the Roman Catholic Church, but the
American paradox is such that, rooted in Puritan-based colonial rebellion
against Anglican-based British rule, the pseudo-State of democratic
republicanism defers back to the metachemical
hegemony of the eyes, symbolized by the 'Liberty Belle', and thus to what is in
effect a pseudo-Kingdom rooted in a presidential executive having, amongst
other things, ultimate control of the armed forces.
31. Whatever
the respective paradoxes of Britain and America, both countries, being
objective, espouse freedom, not least of all in relation to 'freedom of speech'
and a 'free press'.
32. In
theory, this may seem desirable, but, in practice, what it means is freedom for
the objective, and hence female side of life, to affirm secular and
fundamentally immoral values at the expense of everything religious and moral.
33. The
parliamentary democracy affirms 'freedom of speech' as its inalienable feminine
right in a context where the tongue is free, and free to lord or, rather, lady
it over the phallus (cynosure of the flesh), in due verbal fashion.
34. The
presidential Kingdom affirms 'freedom of the press' as its inalienable superfeminine right in a context where the eyes are free,
and hence free to lord or, rather, lady it over the ears, in due photographic
fashion.
35. Whether
the freedom is chemical or metachemical, watery or
fiery, emotional or instinctual, the net result will be the entrenchment of
free will at the expense of natural determinism, of female objectivity at the
expense of male subjectivity, and the consequent domination of society by heathenistic values.
36. Whether
'Britannia' rules the waves, the watery context of chemical realism, or the
'Liberty Belle' rules the stars, the fiery context of metachemical
materialism, the only consequence for males is the subversion of nature by
civilization in the one case, and of culture by barbarism in the other, as
germane to the dominion of female objectivity.
37. Frankly,
Christ is no more the 'man-god' of the British than the Holy Ghost is the
'Spirit-Heaven' of the Americans. The
former people are dominated by a heathenistic form of
Mary, viz. the parliamentary 'Britannia', while the latter people are dominated
by the superheathenistic form or, rather, power of
the Creator, viz. the presidential '
38. Things
have accordingly regressed from the purgatorial glory of 'Britannia' to the diabolical
power of the 'Liberty Belle', as, on the positive side, from supreme water to
supreme fire, the tongue to the eyes, pride to beauty, and, on the negative
side, from primal water to primal fire, the moon to the stellar cosmos,
humility (if not humiliation) to ugliness, and in neither case is there much
scope for authentic commitments, uninfluenced by the prevailing norms, to the
earthy form, necessarily crucified, of Christ or to the heavenly content,
necessarily beatified, of the Holy Ghost.
39. For
form and content (in both phenomenal and noumenal
terms) can only be twisted and corrupted, if not effectively eliminated, when
power and glory hold sway in due objective fashion.
40. As a
rule, religions do not transplant; they simply become corrupted by
countervailing pressures which typify the lands and climes to which they were
brought.
41. America
may call itself Christian, but, in actuality, it is a Superheathen
society both characterized and dominated by the '
42. No
genuine Christian would identify with stars or anything cosmic, but would have
turned away from both fire and water in response to a Christ-motivated
vegetative aspiration towards air.
43. The
fact that most Christians remain 'bogged down' in vegetation to the detriment,
if not exclusion, of air ... does not invalidate the proposition that
vegetation leads to air rather than to either water or fire.
44. In
fact, any attempt to reconcile vegetation to either water or fire, if not both
water and fire, is anti-Christian and effectively heathenistic
in a Protestant if not Oriental way.
45. What
prevents the Christian from becoming Superchristian,
and thus properly spiritual through the metaphysical element of air, is his
Biblical adherence to Creatoresque primitivity, which constrains him from 'going the whole
religious hog', as it were, in due meditative vein.
46. Thus
Christianity is itself corrupted by delusory adherence to Creatoresque
primitivity, which keeps things theistically subservient
to the Cosmos and thereby bedevils attempts to further natural determinism at
the expense of free will, the sort of free will which the Cosmos most blatantly
exemplifies!
47. Had
Christianity been a perfect religion instead of a manifestly imperfect one,
centred not in joy but in knowledge, not in the grace of noumenal
content but in the sin of phenomenal form, the 'modern age' of rampant Superheathenism would probably never have materialized.
48. Christian
ambivalence, owing as much if not more to the Biblical divisions between Old
and New Testaments as to the paradoxical teachings of Jesus Christ, has always
made it possible for (some) people to pursue free will at the expense of
natural determinism.
49. So
much so, that Christianity was fated to overcome itself and to languish, as it
now does, in the shadows not only of Protestant-based Heathenism but of
Orient-based Superheathenism - a Superheathenism
characterized by the metachemical reign of the
'Liberty Belle'.
50. Some
would regard her and equivalent symbols as the 'Queen of Heaven', but there is
no, nor ever could be any, 'Queen of Heaven', only a 'Queen of Hell', of which
the stellar cosmos is epitome.
51. The
'Goddess of
52. Hence
it is not even collective freedom such as 'Britannia' could be said to
illustrate in relation to 'House of Commons' democracy, but individual freedom
in relation to 'White House' autocracy, the presidential executive of an
elected autocrat.
53. Since
freedom is rooted in power and glory, whether these be individual (and metachemical) or collective (and chemical), it has
everything to do with evil and good, and nothing to do with folly and wisdom.
54. Only
that which is rooted or, rather, centred (in due subjective vein) in form and
content ... has anything to do with folly and wisdom, whether in relation to
the collectivity of the physical or to the
individuality of the metaphysical.
55. Such
an actuality is the opposite of freedom, since it appertains not to free will
but to natural determinism, not to the female (and objective) side of life but
to its male (and subjective) side, and has reference, in consequence, to
binding.
56. And
just as freedom can be collectivistic or individualistic, phenomenal or noumenal, so binding can be collectivistic or
individualistic, phenomenal or noumenal, according to
whether it pertains to vegetation or to air, the Church or the (coming) Centre
of 'Kingdom Come'.
57. When
people revolt against binding, as they have done in the anti-Christian past,
they do so in the name of freedom, and achieve liberation from the Old Order
(of binding) via revolution, which is the violent methodology serving a free
and hence disordered end.
58. Liberation
from binding is a female-oriented actuality which leads, via revolutionary
upheaval, to state freedom, the republican state and/or kingdom that is
independent of the Christian Church and immorally ranged, under the
light-shedding objective guidance of the 'Liberty Belle' or equivalent symbols
of freedom, against Christian morality and just about anything moral.
59. It
is this free state and/or kingdom which is responsible, in its disordered
newness, for the 'false progress' of Heathen-to-Superheathen
modernity, and which upholds the dominion, in consequence, of free will at the
expense of natural determinism, of female liberation at the expense of male
salvation.
60. Freedom
is characterized, as already noted, not by form and content(ment)
but by power and glory, and is therefore a choice and/or struggle between evil
and good, fire and water, barbarity and civility, the id (unego)
and the soul (unconscious) for objective control of men's lives.
61. People
- and men in particular - can be delivered from freedom to binding, albeit to a
new order of binding which will be Superchristian
where the Old Order was Christian, and such deliverance is achievable via
evolution, which is the peaceful methodology serving a bound and very
structured end.
62. If
one is damned to freedom by revolution, then one is saved to binding by
evolution, and such an evolution as I have in mind will necessitate recourse to
democratic procedures, in order that the peoples of, in particular initially,
Ireland, Scotland, and Wales ... may opt for religious sovereignty, and thus
the right to religious self-determination in relation to the triadic Beyond of
the Centre, which would be served and maintained by a pseudo-kingdom, the airy
kingdom of a Gaelic federation (of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales) in 'Kingdom
Come'.
63. Only
Social Transcendentalism, the ideological philosophy of 'Kingdom Come', and
hence of the genuine Centre, can provide the basis whereby the People may seek
deliverance from worldly freedoms to the otherworldly bindings of the Centre,
and thereupon embrace a structure in which form and content are uppermost in
their lives, as they enter into the evolutionary salvation of the triadic
Beyond in which folly and wisdom, vegetation and air, nature and culture, the
ego and the mind would take hierarchical precedence over what was left to the
female side of life in the watery goodness - and soul - of civilization.
64. For
civilization must be 'pegged down' if nature is to rise up as an adequate
support for culture, the airy flower rising from the vegetative stem of
something rooted in watery goodness.
65. Thus,
in ascending order, would mass, volume, and space be reconciled to Eternity,
the context of the genuine Centre which is beyond the domination of time, or
'Father Time', although served and maintained from a basis of transmuted time
via the pseudo-kingdom of 'Kingdom Come'.
66. For
every 'plant' requires a sun to help it grow, and the pseudo-kingdom of
'Kingdom Come' would be the 'sun' that helps the 'plant' of the triadic Beyond
to grow throughout Eternity.
67. Such
a supernatural 'plant' would eventually grow beyond the earth to the
space-centre contexts of a definitive Heaven, where it would exist at an
absolutely antithetical remove from the stellar cosmos and all that pertained
to stars in general.
68. But
by then 'man' would have been superseded, via a cyborg-like
transition, by post-human life forms which were destined to take the
evolutionary journey to its most bound end.
69. When
we think in terms of the planes of space, time, volume, and mass, the first two
noumenal and the latter two phenomenal, it seems
appropriate (contrary to my customary procedures of late) to equate space with
transcendentalism, time with fundamentalism, volume with nonconformism,
and mass with humanism, irrespective of whether in relation to the Beginning or
the End, the sensual or the sensible manifestations, of the planes in question.
70. Hence
to distinguish the materialist transcendentalism, in metachemistry,
of spatial space from the idealist transcendentalism, in metaphysics, of spaced
space - the former the sensual and the latter the sensible manifestation of the
supernoumenal plane of space.
71. Hence
to distinguish the idealist fundamentalism, in metaphysics, of sequential time
from the materialist fundamentalism, in metachemistry,
of repetitive time - the former the sensual and the latter the sensible
manifestation of the subnoumenal plane of time.
72. Hence
to distinguish the realist nonconformism, in
chemistry, of volumetric volume from the naturalist nonconformism,
in physics, of voluminous volume - the former the sensual and the latter the
sensible manifestation of the upper-phenomenal plane of volume.
73. Hence
to distinguish the naturalist humanism, in physics, of massive mass from the
realist humanism, in chemistry, of massed mass - the former the sensual and the
latter the sensible manifestation of the lower-phenomenal plane of mass.
74. Since
we have the possibility, due to objective factors, of a diagonal descent, in metachemistry, from space to time, one could characterize
space-time objectivity in terms of a regression from materialist
transcendentalism to materialist fundamentalism on the photon-photino axis of fiery metachemistry.
75. Since
we have the possibility, due to subjective factors, of a diagonal ascent, in
metaphysics, from time to space, one could characterize time-space subjectivity
in terms of a progression from idealist fundamentalism to idealist
transcendentalism on the proton-protino axis of airy
metaphysics.
76. Since
we have the possibility, due to objective factors, of a diagonal descent, in
chemistry, from volume to mass, one could characterize volume-mass objectivity
in terms of a regression from realist nonconformism
to realist humanism on the electron-electrino (if
conventional) and/or positron-positrino (if radical)
axis of watery chemistry.
77. Since
we have the possibility, due to subjective factors, of a diagonal ascent, in
physics, from mass to volume, one could characterize mass-volume subjectivity
in terms of a progression from naturalist humanism to naturalist nonconformism on the neutron-neutrino (if conventional)
and/or deuteron-deuterino (if radical) axis of
vegetative physics.
78. One
could also turn each of the aforementioned connections around and speak of a
diagonal descent, in metachemistry, from
transcendentalist materialism, the materialism of space, to fundamentalist
materialism, the materialism of time, while speaking, conversely, of a diagonal
ascent, in metaphysics, from fundamentalist idealism, the idealism of time, to
transcendentalist idealism, the idealism of space.
79. Similarly,
one could speak of a diagonal descent, in chemistry, from nonconformist
realism, the realism of volume, to humanist realism, the realism of mass, while
speaking, conversely, of a diagonal ascent, in physics, from humanist
naturalism, the naturalism of mass, to nonconformist naturalism, the naturalism
of volume.
80. The
emphasis in the latter two aphorisms would, I believe, be more scientific
and/or political than economic and/or religious, since unlike
transcendentalism, fundamentalism, nonconformism, and
humanism, the terms materialism, idealism, realism, and naturalism have more
applicability to the relationship between self and not-self, psychology and
physiology, than to that between selfless and unself,
therapy and psyche.
81. In
fact, I originally derived the concepts of materialism, idealism, realism, and
naturalism from the respective elements of fire, air, water, and vegetation
(earth), holding to the view that the elements proceeded, in due chronological
order of devolutionary and/or evolutionary development, from fire to air via
water and vegetation, and that materialism accordingly corresponded to fire as
the most basic/least advanced element, realism corresponded to water as the
more (relative to most) basic/less (relative to least) advanced element,
naturalism corresponded to vegetation as the less (relative to least)
basic/more (relative to most) advanced element, and idealism corresponded to
air as the least basic/most advanced element.
82. In
subatomic terms, this meant that the most basic/least advanced subdivision of
an element, viz. elemental particle, corresponded to materialism; that the more
(relative to most) basic/less (relative to least) advanced subdivision, viz.
molecular particle, corresponded to realism; that the less (relative to least)
basic/more (relative to most) advanced subdivision, viz. molecular wavicle, corresponded to naturalism; and that the least
basic/most advanced subdivision, viz. elemental wavicle,
corresponded to idealism.
83. Where
an exact correspondence existed between the most basic/least advanced
subdivision of an element and/or elementino and fire,
then one had the materialist per se of photons (in sensuality) and/or photinos
(in sensibility); where an exact correspondence existed between the more
(relative to most) basic/less (relative to least) advanced subdivision of an
element and/or elementino and water, then one had the
realist per se of electrons and/or electrinos
(if conventional) or positrons and/or positrinos (if
radical); where an exact correspondence existed between the less (relative to
least) basic/more (relative to most) advanced subdivision of an element and/or elementino and vegetation, then one had the naturalist per
se of neutrons and/or neutrinos (if conventional) or deuterons and/or deuterinos (if radical); and where an exact correspondence
existed between the least basic/most advanced subdivision of an element and/or elementino and air, then one had the idealist per se
of protons (in sensuality) and/or protinos (in
sensibility).
84. Hence
each element had a subatomic correspondence which enabled us to describe it
either in terms of materialism (if having an elemental particle per se), realism (if having a molecular
particle per se), naturalism (if having a molecular wavicle
per se), or idealism (if having an elemental wavicle
per se).
85. I
therefore came to the conclusion that fire was the metachemical
element of materialism, water the chemical element of realism, vegetation the
physical element of naturalism, and air the metaphysical element of idealism.
86. It
also became clear to me that both fire and water, having a per se subatomic correspondence, in
elemental and molecular terms, to the particle aspect of their respective
elements, were objective, and thus of a female disposition, whereas both
vegetation and air, having a per se subatomic correspondence, in
molecular and elemental terms, to the wavicle aspect
of their respective elements, were subjective, and thus of a male disposition.
87. Hence
not only were photons and electrons (to take but elements as opposed to elementinos) objective, and hence of a female disposition
in their negative charge; they had a per se correspondence to fire and water.
88. Hence
not only were neutrons and protons (to take but elements as opposed to elementinos) subjective, and hence of a male disposition in
their positive charge; they had a per se correspondence to vegetation and air.
89. Of
course, it is always tempting to regard water as subjective and vegetation as
objective, but I don't believe that something relatively subjective could stem,
like water, from the absolutely objective element of fire. Nor, by a converse token, can I believe that
something relatively objective could be the next best thing, like vegetation,
to the absolutely subjective element of air.
90. That
which, as vegetation, is elementally contiguous with noumenal
subjectivity could only be phenomenally subjective, while, conversely,
that which, as water, is elementally contiguous with noumenal
objectivity could only be phenomenally objective.
91. Yet
we find ourselves with the logical paradox that the two particle-based elements
as defined by me, viz. fire and water, differ in relation to the position of
the perfect attribute on the basis of a particle/wavicle
distinction - power being perfect in fire but imperfect in water, glory being
perfect in water but imperfect in fire.
92. Likewise,
the two wavicle-centred elements as defined by me,
viz. vegetation and air, differ in relation to the position of the perfect attribute
on the basis of a particle/wavicle distinction - form
being perfect in vegetation but imperfect in air, content being perfect in air
but imperfect in vegetation.
93. Thus
if water is objective, and hence particle-based, while vegetation is subjective,
and hence wavicle-centred, how can the one have a wavicle-biased perfection in glory (pride) and the other a
particle-biased perfection in form (knowledge)?
94. It
seems to me that the question begs an equally paradoxical answer, in that there
is more gender interaction on the phenomenal planes of mass and volume than on
the noumenal planes of time and space, in consequence
of which vegetation is bent, through the countervailing objective influence of
water, towards an objective fulcrum, so to speak, in form, whereas water is
bent, through the countervailing subjective influence of vegetation, towards a
subjective fulcrum, as it were, in glory.
95. Yet
neither of these fulcrums or focal-points of perfection would be particularly
stable, in view of the countervailing dispositions of the elements in question,
so their respective perfections are always going to be exposed to abandonment
for the more complete, and intrinsically element-conditioned, perfections of
power in the case of fire and of content(ment) in the
case of air, the genders tending farther apart on the noumenal
planes of time and space in relation to particle- and wavicle-biased
orders of perfection that owe more to the respective particle-based and wavicle-centred orientations of their respective elements
than ever they do to any phenomenal-like molecular interrelativity,
and hence collectivistic interaction.
96. Short
of dismantling my philosophy in favour of a subjective theory for water and an
objective theory for vegetation, this is the only explanation I have for the
seemingly paradoxical fact that, in the cases of water and vegetation, the
fulcrum of perfection does not exactly coincide with the subatomic structural
origins of the elements in question.
97. However
that may be, I am convinced that nothing that was of a contrary gender
disposition, as it were, to the noumenal elements of
fire and air could exist in a devolutionary and/or evolutionary relationship of
elemental contiguity with them.
98. So I
return to my original position that water stems from fire as a phenomenal order
of objectivity from a noumenal order, whilst,
conversely, air stems from vegetation as a noumenal
order of subjectivity from a phenomenal order.
99. There
is accordingly, in general terms, a devolutionary regression from the unclear
to the clear, as from fire to water, on the one hand, but an evolutionary
progression from the unholy to the holy, as from vegetation to air, on the
other hand.
100. Yet,
in actuality, fire and water are both typified, in their objective dispositions
towards power and glory, by unclearness and clearness, since unclearness stands
to clearness on any objective plane as particle to wavicle,
vice to virtue, barbarity to civility, and hence in more general terms as will
to spirit.
