Friday, 8 April 2011


Modern man can split the atom through nuclear fission, but unlike me, or my philosophy, he hasn’t learnt to split such terms as ‘freedom’ and ‘sanity’ from their atomic, virtually androgynous worldly traditions into gender-differentiated categories that permit a contrast, either side of liberal relativism, between, say, ‘outsanity’ and ‘insanity’, or ‘somatic freedom’ and ‘psychic freedom’, the former female and the latter male.

Hitherto people have contrasted sanity with insanity and regarded the latter as equivalent to ‘mad’ or psychologically undesirable and, in some way, anomalous, largely, I suspect, because of the traditional female dominance of society, particularly in the West, which has enabled what I call ‘outsanity’, and identify with somatic (bodily) licence, to be solely identified with sanity, and any departure from this, or alternative to it, to be denigrated with the perjurative epithet ‘insane’. But, in reality, insanity, as I define it, has long been the male alternative, centred in psyche, to the outsanity of the female disposition, and therefore has long been at variance, to varying degrees, with its female counterpart, even when engaged in what may appear to be ‘outsane’ behaviour.

Much of the behaviour by ‘males’ that could be characterized as ‘outsane’ is actually pseudo-insane, since the pseudo-male counterpart to female outsanity, as in pseudo-physics to chemistry at the southwest point of the intercardinal axial compass at the phenomenal (corporeal) foot of what would traditionally be the church-hegemonic axis, or, on noumenal (ethereal) terms, pseudo-metaphysics to metachemistry at the northwest point of said compass at the head or what would traditionally be the state-hegemonic axis. One might say that the proverbial ‘sonofabitch’, chasing around after a football or what have you on some sports field, is more pseudo-insane than outsane to the extent that the somatic outer, or physical, aspect of the game is compromised by the psychic inner aspect or, in strictly pseudo-male terms, the pseudo-somatic outer aspect by the pseudo-psychic inner aspect in terms of the extent to which somatic behaviour is regulated by a plethora of rules and regulations, coupled, at the most professional level, to tactics and strategems which owe more to mind or, in this case, pseudo-bound psyche than to pseudo-free soma in the pseudo-bound and pseudo-free aspects of a pseudo-physical and/or pseudo-metaphysical disposition largely due to female hegemonic pressures in chemistry and/or metachemistry, as the axial case may be, which ensure that the pseudo-male mirrors, on opposite ratio terms of soma to psyche, the prevailing female free soma and bound psyche (2 1/2:1 1/2 in phenomenal relativity and 3:1 in noumenal absolutism) of the hegemonic gender, so that his behaviour is largely in consequence of female pressure and not a reflection of his gender disposition, as when left to his own devices, of psyche preceding and preponderating over soma in one of two ratios (relative or absolute), depending on his class integrity and/or axial ethnicity.

Be that as it may, if insanity or, rather, pseudo-insanity is the pseudo-subjective or pseudo-convergent subordinate counterpart of the objectivity and divergence of outsanity, as a female-based freedom, then the converse of this will be the hegemonic sway of insanity over the pseudo-outsanity of a pseudo-objective and pseudo-divergent disposition as germane to either pseudo-chemistry under physics (phenomenal relativity) or to pseudo-metachemistry under metaphysics (noumenal absolutism), and such a sway, characterized by male-hegemonic criteria centred in subjectivity and convergence, can only result in the somatic subjugation of the female to a pseudo-female subordinate standing in which culture, epitomized by the male, is triumphant over civility, be it the genuine culture and pseudo-civility in metaphysics and pseudo-metachemistry, respectively, which accord with righteousness and pseudo-justice, or the pseudo-culture and genuine civility in physics and pseudo-chemistry that accord with pseudo-righteousness and justice, with contrary axial and therefore ethnic implications.

Few would deny that culture and civility, in whichever permutations, are preferable to barbarity and philistinism, likewise in whichever axial permutations. Yet we live in an age in which the latter are if not all-prevalent or pervasive, then certainly largely prevalent and capable of excluding, in all but exceptional contemporary cases (notwithstanding bourgeois anachronisms of a decidedly Western and usually Protestant disposition), a bias towards culture and civility, not least in terms of genuine culture and pseudo-civility, which are the modes of insanity and pseudo-outsanity, subjectivity and pseudo-objectivity, according with the noumenal planes of time and pseudo-space, upon which metaphysics and pseudo-metachemistry are the elemental norms equivalent to the lamb and pseudo-lion and/or wolf (neutralized lion and/or wolf) of Biblical note, the Saint and pseudo-Dragon (neutralized dragon) of the structure in which male psychic freedom (insanity) is hegemonic for all Eternity over pseudo-female pseudo-somatic binding (pseudo-outsanity) in the pseudo-Infinity of pseudo-metachemical subjection to the hegemonic triumph of metaphysics.

Truly, for that to transpire the gender atom will have to have been split apart from any worldly androgynous cohesiveness such that accords, in this post-worldly day and age, with a pre-nuclear Western anachronism suited to the mixed congregations of Christian churches but not, assuredly not, to the otherworldly religion of what will hopefully one day be the Superchristian centres of ‘Kingdom Come’.

As an afterthought, let me add this. Sanity seems to be a liberal concept suited to those who, in mixed curricular fashion, are outsane now and insane later, physical now and mental later, before returning, via some form of physical activity, to outsanity again, and so on, in a perpetual alternation between somatic and psychic behaviour. Neither overly athletic nor overly sedentary and intellectual, such ‘androgynous’ types can only really prevail in a worldly age or society, when atomic relativism is the norm or, at any rate, mean. That ceased to be the case when man split the atom, and to this day it remains split or capable of being split, as of course does the atom of sanity into its respective components – outsane over pseudo-insane in chemistry over pseudo-physics at the southwest point of the intercardinal axial compass and insane over pseudo-outsane in physics over pseudo-chemistry at the southeast point of said compass, to take but the phenomenal (corporeal) cases alone. We cannot go back to a compromise way of thinking of these opposite types of freedom, nor should we, since they are, in any case, incompatible.


In the Alpha of Metachemistry, Hell is in the Devil as, in positive terms (free soma), Love in Beauty, or Hell the Clear Spirit in Devil the Mother and, in negative terms (bound psyche), Hate in Ugliness, or the Clear Soul of Hell in the Daughter of the Devil, with a 3:1 ratio favouing the positive factor.

In the Omega of Metaphysics, by contrast, God is in Heaven as, in positive terms (free psyche), Truth in Joy, or God the Father in Heaven the Holy Soul and, in negative terms (bound soma), Illusion in Woe, or the Son of God in the Holy Spirit of Heaven, with a 3:1 ratio favouring the positive factor.

Therefore Metachemistry and Metaphysics, the alpha and omega of the noumenal planes of space and time, are as antithetical as it is possible for any two absolutes to be, Hell being in the Devil, whether as Love in Beauty (positive) or as Hate in Ugliness (negative), no less than God being in Heaven, whether as Truth in Joy (positive) or as Illusion in Woe (negative), Hell being no less the inside of the Devil than God the outside of Heaven.

Paradoxically, one conceives of Hell through the Devil, whether as Love through Beauty or as Hate through Ugliness, but perceives Heaven through God, whether as Joy through Truth or as Woe through Illusion. Nevertheless, Metachemistry is more about the Devil than Hell, Metaphysics, by contrast, more about Heaven than God.

In that respect, Hell is no less a kind of ‘quantitative’ detraction from the Beautiful Appearance of the Devil (through free will) than God is a kind of ‘qualitative’ detraction from the Joyful Essence of Heaven (through free soul), to take the respective majority ratio factors corresponding, in their positivities, to free soma in the metachemical context and to free psyche in the metaphysical one.

Man’s tendency to personify Heaven through a personal God, or the concept of ‘God as Person’, bespeaks an egotistical shortfall from an accommodation with soul that always leaves religion exposed to idolatrous abuse, as and when the concept of God takes precedence, through the Person, say, of Christ, over Heaven. Moreover the crucified Christ is arguably a poor reflection of Heaven, serving merely to illustrate Woe through Illusion.

For Joy through Truth, on the other hand, one must go beyond (transcend) the Crucifixion paradigm of metaphysical bound soma – something Christianity has been reluctant to do in view of its extrapolative dependence upon the Judaic anchor, so to speak, of the Metachemical Creator, wherein Devil the Mother hyped as God the Father precludes all but the negative side of metaphysics (as a kind of straining on the resurrectional leash towards what is metaphysically antithetical to the Creator) by dint of its own Creatoresque association with the Beauty of Metachemical free will and, through that, the Love of Metachemical free spirit which is the Hell that resides within the Devil (Devil the Mother).