Tuesday, 24 February 2009
What I am especially interested in establishing is that neither axis is corrupt – although the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate one is the secular fruit of schismatic heresy and is therefore open to allegations of religious corruption – and that both axes are corrupt, though not, assuredly, in the same way.
In fact, they are corrupt and not corrupt in opposite ways – the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis in terms of male corruption in relation to an overall female dominance, and the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate one in terms of female corruption in relation to an overall male dominance.
But there are two ways of being corrupt, as of course of not being corrupt, and we can define them as absolute and relative, corresponding to noumenal and phenomenal, ethereal and corporeal axial polarities.
Let us take the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis first, where male corruption is absolute in pseudo-metaphysics (from out of antimetaphysics) under the female unequivocal hegemony of metachemistry at the northwest point of the intercardinal axial compass, and relative in physics over the female subordination of pseudo-chemistry (from out of antichemistry) at the southeast point of the said compass, the former order of corruption implying free soma and bound psyche under metachemical pressure and the latter … bound-somatic emphasis at the expense of free psyche in relation to pseudo-chemical subversion at the behest of the overall axial dominance of metachemistry - metachemistry and pseudo-chemistry constitutive of primary state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axial criteria, pseudo-metaphysics and physics their secondary state-hegemonic/church-subordinate counterparts.
Thus male corruption is absolute in pseudo-metaphysics and relative in physics, females not corrupted (uncorrupted) in metachemistry where, being unequivocally hegemonic, they are free to be absolutely true to their selves – free soma and bound psyche existing on a three-to-one-basis of mother-to-daughter-like state/church relativity, and only partially corrupted in pseudo-chemistry, since free psyche and bound soma, even with somatic emphasis, only follow from the equivocal hegemony of physics, a male element.
As regards the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis, we have the converse situation of relative female corruption in chemistry over the male subordination of pseudo-physics (from out of antiphysics) at the southwest point of the intercardinal axial compass, and absolute female corruption in pseudo-metachemistry (from out of antimetachemistry) under the male unequivocal hegemony of metaphysics at the northeast point of the compass in question, the former order of corruption implying bound psychic emphasis at the expense of free soma in relation to pseudo-physical subversion at the behest of the overall axial dominance of metaphysics, and the latter … free psyche and bound soma under metaphysical pressure - pseudo-physics and metaphysics constitutive of primary church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axial criteria, chemistry and pseudo-metachemistry their secondary church-hegemonic/state-subordinate counterparts.
Thus female corruption is relative in chemistry and absolute in pseudo-metachemistry, males only partially corrupted in pseudo-physics, since free soma and bound psyche, even with psychic emphasis, only follow from the equivocal hegemony of chemistry, a female element, and not at all corrupted in metaphysics where, being unequivocally hegemonic, they are free to be absolutely true to their selves – free psyche and bound soma existing on a three-to-one-basis of father-to-son-like church/state relativity.
Of course, males are relatively corrupted in pseudo-physics and females in pseudo-chemistry, but in overall axial terms it is still males in the one context and females in the other who are the dominant gender, and this is the distinguishing differentiation between church-hegemonic/state-subordinate and state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axial criteria.
Speaking as a male, I can only contend that is it preferable to live in a society in which the female is corrupted, since male dominance makes for the possibility, in metaphysics, of religious truth and joy and, hence, for godliness and heavenliness.
Neither of those factors are germane to state-hegemonic/church-subordinate societies, which, dominated by females, are less religious and more scientific, rooted, it could be argued, in empirical objectivity.
Yet they are also likely to be more economic and less political, which is not female and male respectively but a consequence, by contrast, of equivocal male and female hegemonies in physics (over pseudo-chemistry) and chemistry (over pseudo-physics), economics polar to science or, more correctly, to pseudo-religion … as physics to pseudo-metaphysics, and politics polar to religion or, more correctly, to pseudo-science … as chemistry to pseudo-metachemistry.
But the polarity on the one axis of economics to pseudo-religion is correlative, on secondary state-hegemonic/church-subordinate terms, with the primary state-hegemonic/church-subordinate polarity of pseudo-politics to science … as of pseudo-chemistry to metachemistry, whereas the polarity on the other axis of politics to pseudo-science … as of chemistry to pseudo-metachemistry, is correlative, on secondary church-hegemonic/state-subordinate terms, with the primary church-hegemonic/state-subordinate polarity of pseudo-economics to religion … as of pseudo-physics to metaphysics.
Therefore genuine science and economics only exist in polar relation to pseudo-politics and pseudo-religion respectively, whereas genuine religion and politics likewise only exist in polar relation to pseudo-economics and pseudo-science.
On the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis, one can be saved, as a male, from pseudo-economics to religion, as from pseudo-physics to metaphysics, meekness to righteousness, poetry to philosophy, and counter-damned, as a female, from politics to pseudo-science, chemistry to pseudo-metachemistry, pseudo-vanity to pseudo-justice, pseudo-drama to pseudo-prose.
Conversely, on the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis one can be damned, as a female, from science to pseudo-politics, as from metachemistry to pseudo-chemistry, vanity to justice, drama to prose, and counter-saved, as a male, from pseudo-religion to economics, as from pseudo-metaphysics to physics, pseudo-meekness to pseudo-righteousness, pseudo-poetry to pseudo-philosophy.
But the latter eventualities, corresponding with state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axial criteria, are only likely to transpire in the event of salvation and counter-damnation taking place to an unprecedented extent on the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis, not independently of it, and for that to happen something more than the Catholic tradition would be required, as I have often contended from a radically theocratic standpoint – the standpoint of Social Theocracy, about which I have theorized at some length in a variety of blogs and texts elsewhere.
Monday, 23 February 2009
To contrast the being of metaphysics with the pseudo-doing of pseudo-metachemistry, as one would contrast contentment with pseudo-power.
To contrast the giving of chemistry with the pseudo-taking of pseudo-physics, as one would contrast glory with pseudo-form.
To contrast the taking of physics with the pseudo-giving of pseudo-chemistry, as one would contrast form with pseudo-glory.
To contrast the devility of metachemistry with the pseudo-divinity of pseudo-metaphysics, as one would contrast hell with pseudo-heaven.
To contrast the divinity of metaphysics with the pseudo-devility of pseudo-metachemistry, as one would contrast heaven with pseudo-hell.
To contrast the femininity of chemistry with the pseudo-masculinity of pseudo-physics, as one would contrast purgatory with pseudo-earth.
To contrast the masculinity of physics with the pseudo-femininity of pseudo-chemistry, as one would contrast earth with pseudo-purgatory.
To contrast the positive absolute somatic predominance (over psyche) of metachemistry with the negative absolute psychic preponderance (over soma) of pseudo-metaphysics, as one would contrast elemental particle protons with elemental wavicle pseudo-photons.
To contrast the positive absolute psychic preponderance (over soma) of metaphysics with the negative absolute somatic predominance (over psyche) of pseudo-metachemistry, as one would contrast elemental wavicle photons with elemental particle pseudo-protons.
To contrast the positive relative somatic predominance (over psyche) of chemistry with the negative relative psychic preponderance (over soma) of pseudo-physics, as one would contrast molecular particle electrons with molecular wavicle pseudo-neutrons.
To contrast the positive relative psychic preponderance (over soma) of physics with the negative relative somatic predominance (over psyche) of pseudo-chemistry, as one would contrast molecular wavicle neutrons with molecular particle pseudo-electrons.
To contrast the evil (as against crime) of metachemistry with the pseudo-wisdom (as against pseudo-grace) of pseudo-metaphysics, as one would contrast beauty and love (as against ugliness and hate) with pseudo-illusion and pseudo-woe (as against pseudo-truth and pseudo-joy).
To contrast the grace (as against wisdom) of metaphysics with the pseudo-crime (as against pseudo-evil) of pseudo-metachemistry, as one would contrast truth and joy (as against illusion and woe) with pseudo-ugliness and pseudo-hate (as against pseudo-beauty and pseudo-love).
To contrast the pseudo-evil (as against pseudo-crime) of chemistry with the sin (as against folly) of pseudo-physics, as one would contrast strength and pride (as against weakness and humility) with pseudo-ignorance and pseudo-pain (as against pseudo-knowledge and pseudo-pleasure).
To contrast the pseudo-grace (as against pseudo-wisdom) of physics with the goodness (as against punishment) of pseudo-chemistry, as one would contrast knowledge and pleasure (as against ignorance and pain) with pseudo-weakness and pseudo-humility (as against pseudo-strength and pseudo-pride).
To contrast the absolute explosiveness of metachemistry with the absolute pseudo-implosiveness of pseudo-metaphysics, as one would contrast noumenal objectivity with noumenal pseudo-subjectivity.
To contrast the absolute implosiveness of metaphysics with the absolute pseudo-explosiveness of pseudo-metachemistry, as one would contrast noumenal subjectivity with noumenal pseudo-objectivity.
To contrast the relative explosiveness of chemistry with the relative pseudo-implosiveness of pseudo-physics, as one would contrast phenomenal objectivity with phenomenal pseudo-subjectivity.
To contrast the relative implosiveness of physics with the relative pseudo-explosiveness of pseudo-chemistry, as one would contrast phenomenal subjectivity with phenomenal pseudo-objectivity.
The absolute is always a three-to-one ratio in favour, depending on the element, of soma to psyche (female) or of psyche to soma (male), whereas the relative is always a two-and-a-half-to-one-and-a-half ratio, depending on the element, of psyche to soma (male) or of soma to psyche (female), thereby enabling us to categorically distinguish between the noumenal and the phenomenal, as between ethereal and corporeal alternatives on both particle and wavicle, female and male terms, with respect to both soma and psyche.
To contrast the science and pseudo-religion of the northwest point of the intercardinal axial compass … with the religion and pseudo-science of the northeast point of the said compass, as one would contrast metachemistry and pseudo-metaphysics with metaphysics and pseudo-metachemistry.
To contrast the politics and pseudo-economics of the southwest point of the intercardinal axial compass … with the economics and pseudo-politics of the southeast point of the said compass, as one would contrast chemistry and pseudo-physics with physics and pseudo-chemistry.
To contrast the evil and crime of metachemistry and the pseudo-folly and pseudo-sin of pseudo-metaphysics … with the grace and wisdom of metaphysics and the pseudo-punishment and pseudo-goodness of pseudo-metachemistry, as one would contrast barbarity and pseudo-philistinism with culture and pseudo-civility.
To contrast the pseudo-evil and pseudo-crime of chemistry and the folly and sin of pseudo-physics … with the pseudo-grace and pseudo-wisdom of physics and the punishment and goodness of pseudo-chemistry, as one would contrast pseudo-barbarity and philistinism with pseudo-culture and civility.
To contrast the superfemininity and submasculinity of metachemistry and the pseudo-subfemininity and pseudo-supermasculinity of pseudo-metaphysics … with the supermasculinity and subfemininity of metaphysics and the pseudo-submasculinity and pseudo-superfemininity of pseudo-metachemistry, as one would contrast materialism/fundamentalism and pseudo-idealism/pseudo-transcendentalism with transcendentalism/idealism and pseudo-fundamentalism/pseudo-materialism.
To contrast the femininity and unmasculinity of chemistry and the pseudo-masculinity and pseudo-unfemininity of pseudo-physics … with the masculinity and unfemininity of physics and the pseudo-femininity and pseudo-unmasculinity of pseudo-chemistry, as one would contrast naturalism/pantheism and pseudo-realism/pseudo-humanism with humanism/realism and pseudo-pantheism/pseudo-naturalism.
To contrast the superheathenism and subchristianity of metachemistry and the pseudo-subheathenism and pseudo-superchristianity of pseudo-metaphysics … with the superchristianity and subheathenism of metaphysics and the pseudo-subchristianity and pseudo-superheathenism of pseudo-metachemistry, as one would contrast vanity and pseudo-meekness with righteousness and pseudo-justice.
To contrast the heathenism and unchristianity of chemistry and the pseudo-christianity and pseudo-unheathenism of pseudo-physics … with the Christianity and unheathenism of physics and the pseudo-heathenism and pseudo-unchristianity of pseudo-chemistry, as one would contrast pseudo-vanity and meekness with pseudo-righteousness and justice.
To contrast the supersensuousness and subconsciousness of metachemistry and the pseudo-subsensuousness and pseudo-superconsciousness of pseudo-metaphysics … with the superconsciousness and subsensuousness of metaphysics and the pseudo-subconsciousness and pseudo-supersensuousness of pseudo-metachemistry, as one would contrast free will and bound soul with free soul and bound will.
To contrast the sensuousness and unconsciousness of chemistry and the pseudo-consciousness and pseudo-unsensuousness of pseudo-physics … with the consciousness and unsensuousness of physics and the pseudo-sensuousness and pseudo-unconsciousness of pseudo-chemistry, as one would contrast free spirit and bound ego with free ego and bound spirit.
To contrast the supernaturalism and subnurturalism of metachemistry and the pseudo-subnaturalism and pseudo-supernurturalism of pseudo-metaphysics … with the supernurturalism and subnaturalism of metaphysics and the pseudo-subnurturalism and pseudo-supernaturalism of pseudo-metachemistry, as one would contrast protons and pseudo-photons with photons and pseudo-protons.
To contrast the naturalism and unnurturalism of chemistry and the pseudo-naturalism and pseudo-unnurturalism of pseudo-physics … with the nurturalism and unnaturalism of physics and the pseudo-naturalism and pseudo-unnurturalism of pseudo-chemistry, as one would contrast electrons and pseudo-neutrons with neutrons and pseudo-electrons.
To contrast the virtuously (free) and viciously (bound) clear morality of metachemistry and the pseudo-virtuously (pseudo-free) and pseudo-viciously (pseudo-bound) pseudo-unholy pseudo-unmorality of pseudo-metaphysics … with the virtuously (free) and viciously (bound) holy morality of metaphysics and the pseudo-virtuously (pseudo-free) and pseudo-viciously (pseudo-bound) pseudo-unclear pseudo-unmorality of pseudo-metachemistry, as one would contrast space and pseudo-time with time and pseudo-space.
To contrast the pseudo-virtuously (pseudo-free) and pseudo-viciously (pseudo-bound) pseudo-clear pseudo-morality of chemistry and the virtuously (free) and viciously (bound) unholy unmorality of pseudo-physics … with the pseudo-virtuously (pseudo-free) and pseudo-viciously (pseudo-bound) pseudo-holy pseudo-morality of physics and the virtuously (free) and viciously (bound) unclear unmorality of pseudo-chemistry, as one would contrast volume and pseudo-mass with mass and pseudo-volume.
Although both metachemistry and pseudo-metaphysics on the one hand and metaphysics and pseudo-metachemistry on the other reflect parallel distinctions between the genuine and pseudo elements, as regards an unequivocally hegemonic and an unequivocally subordinate gender position, the same cannot be said of chemistry and pseudo-physics on the one hand and of physics and pseudo-chemistry on the other, since in each case the hegemonic position is merely equivocal and the subordinate position likewise, if subject to primary (as against secondary) polar interplay with its corresponding gender element in the unequivocally hegemonic position to which it is axially polar, which element, whether metachemical or metaphysical, indirectly causes a subversive switch of emphasis on the subordinate position from soma to psyche or from psyche to soma, as the gender case may be, in consequence of which the equivocally hegemonic element, be it chemical or physical, is forced into a secondary (as against primary) polar relationship with its corresponding gender polarity in the unequivocally subordinate position contrary to it, making for either secondary (as against primary) church-hegemonic/state-subordinate or state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axial relativity vis-à-vis its primary counterpart on the opposite side of the gender fence, be that male or female.
Hence the secondary standing of chemistry and pseudo-metachemistry to pseudo-physics and metaphysics on the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis stretching from southwest to northeast points of the intercardinal axial compass, and hence, too, the secondary standing of physics and pseudo-metaphysics to pseudo-chemistry and metachemistry on the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis which stretches, by contrast, from the southeast to the northwest points of the said compass.
But even without overall axial relativity, or interaction between the noumenal and phenomenal like-gender positions, chemistry would be pseudo-clear vis-à-vis the clearness of metachemistry, while pseudo-physics would be unholy vis-à-vis the pseudo-unholiness of pseudo-metaphysics, if only because two genuine or, for that matter, pseudo positions cannot co-exist as noumenal or phenomenal, ethereal or corporeal, absolute or relative pairings.
And the same, of course, applies to the pseudo-holiness of physics vis-à-vis the holiness of metaphysics on the one hand, and the unclearness of pseudo-chemistry vis-à-vis the pseudo-unclearness of pseudo-metachemistry on the other hand.
The clearness of metachemistry is vain, whereas the pseudo-holiness of pseudo-metaphysics is pseudo-meek. Hence the viable co-existence of vanity with pseudo-meekness, like space with pseudo-time, devilishness/hellishness with pseudo-godliness/pseudo-heavenliness, elemental particles with elemental pseudo-wavicles.
Conversely, the holiness of metaphysics is righteousness, whereas the pseudo-unclearness of pseudo-metachemistry is pseudo-just. Hence the viable co-existence of righteousness with pseudo-justice, like time with pseudo-space, godliness/heavenliness with pseudo-devilishness/pseudo-hellishness, elemental wavicles with elemental pseudo-particles.
Likewise, the pseudo-clearness of chemistry is pseudo-vain, whereas the unholiness of pseudo-physics is meek. Hence the viable co-existence of pseudo-vanity with meekness, like volume with pseudo-mass, womanliness/purgatory with pseudo-manliness/pseudo-earthiness, molecular particles with molecular pseudo-wavicles.
Conversely, the pseudo-holiness of physics is pseudo-righteousness, whereas the unclearness of pseudo-chemistry is just. Hence the viable co-existence of pseudo-righteousness with justice, like mass with pseudo-volume, manliness/earthiness with pseudo-womanliness/pseudo-purgatory, molecular wavicles with molecular pseudo-particles.
Thus the primary state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axial polarity of metachemical vanity and pseudo-chemical justice, with the axial polarity of pseudo-metaphysical pseudo-meekness and physical pseudo-righteousness secondarily state-hegemonic/church-subordinate.
One can be damned from vanity to justice and counter-saved from pseudo-meekness to pseudo-righteousness.
Likewise, the primary church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axial polarity of metaphysical righteousness and pseudo-physical meekness, with the axial polarity of pseudo-metachemical pseudo-justice and chemical pseudo-vanity secondarily church-hegemonic/state-subordinate.
One can be saved from meekness to righteousness and counter-damned from pseudo-vanity to pseudo-justice. For, in ‘Kingdom Come’, the chemical ‘first’ (equivocally hegemonic at the southwest point of the intercardinal axial compass) will be pseudo-metachemically ‘last’ (unequivocally subordinate at the northeast point of the said compass), whereas the pseudo-physical ‘last’ (equivocally subordinate at the southwest point of the intercardinal axial compass) will be metaphysically ‘first’ (unequivocally hegemonic at the northeast point of the said compass), as though in the final triumph (global) of St George over a prone (neutralized by counter-damnation) dragon, a pseudo-dragon of absolute pseudo-metachemical subordination to the metaphysical triumph of our proverbial saint.