THE ATOMIC LIMITATIONS OF SANITY

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.

HELL IS IN THE DEVIL AS GOD IS IN HEAVEN

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).

NOUMENAL AND PHENOMENAL CONTRASTS IN HEGEMONIC AND SUBORDINATE MODES

The Apparent Doing of the Will in Space.

The Quantitative Giving of the Spirit in Volume.

The Qualitative Taking of the Ego in Mass.

The Essential Being of the Soul in Time.

To contrast the Apparent Doing of Will in the Protonic Heat of Space with the Essential Being of Soul in the Photonic Light of Time, as one would contrast the Noumenal Objectivity of Metachemistry in the Elemental Particle Absolutism of Spatial Space with the Noumenal Subjectivity of Metaphysics in the Elemental Wavicle Absolutism of Repetitive Time.

To contrast the Quantitative Giving of Spirit in the Electronic Motion of Volume with the Qualitative Taking of Ego in the Neutronic Force of Mass, as one would contrast the Phenomenal Objectivity of Chemistry in the Molecular Particle Relativity of Volumetric Volume with the Phenomenal Subjectivity of Physics in the Molecular Wavicle Relativity of Massive Mass.

The pseudo-Apparent pseudo-Doing of the pseudo-Will in pseudo-Space.

The pseudo-Quantitative pseudo-Giving of the pseudo-Spirit in pseudo-Volume.

The pseudo-Qualitative pseudo-Taking of the pseudo-Ego in pseudo-Mass.

The pseudo-Essential pseudo-Being of the pseudo-Soul in pseudo-Time.

To contrast the pseudo-Apparent pseudo-Doing of the pseudo-Will in the pseudo-Protonic pseudo-Heat of pseudo-Space with the pseudo-Essential pseudo-Being of the pseudo-Soul in the pseudo-Photonic pseudo-Light of pseudo-Time, as one would contrast the Noumenal pseudo-Objectivity of pseudo-Metachemistry in the Elemental pseudo-Particle Absolutism of Spaced Space with the Noumenal pseudo-Subjectivity of pseudo-Metaphysics in the Elemental pseudo-Wavicle Absolutism of Sequential Time.

To contrast the pseudo-Quantitative pseudo-Giving of the pseudo-Spirit in the pseudo-Electronic pseudo-Motion of pseudo-Volume with the pseudo-Qualitative pseudo-Taking of the pseudo-Ego in the pseudo-Neutronic pseudo-Force of pseudo-Mass, as one would contrast the Phenomenal pseudo-Objectivity of pseudo-Chemistry in the Molecular pseudo-Particle Relativity of Voluminous Volume with the Phenomenal pseudo-Subjectivity of pseudo-Physics in the Molecular pseudo-Wavicle Relativity of Massed Mass.

With Metachemistry and pseudo-Metaphysics at the northwest point of the intercardinal axial compass, the Apparent Doing of Will in the Protonic Heat of Space is hegemonic over the pseudo-Essential pseudo-Being of pseudo-Soul in the pseudo-Photonic pseudo-Light of pseudo-Time, like Vanity over pseudo-Meekness.

With Chemistry and pseudo-Physics at the southwest point of the intercardinal axial compass, the Quantitative Giving of Spirit in the Electronic Motion of Volume is hegemonic over the pseudo-Qualitative pseudo-Taking of pseudo-Ego in the pseudo-Neutronic pseudo-Force of pseudo-Mass, like pseudo-Vanity over Meekness.

With Physics and pseudo-Chemistry at the southeast point of the intercardinal axial compass, the Qualitative Taking of Ego in the Neutronic Force of Mass is hegemonic over the pseudo-Quantitative pseudo-Giving of pseudo-Spirit in the pseudo-Electronic pseudo-Motion of pseudo-Volume, like pseudo-Righteousness over Justice.

With Metaphysics and pseudo-Metachemistry at the northeast point of the inercardinal axial compass, the Essential Being of Soul in the Photonic Light of Time is hegemonic over the pseudo-Apparent pseudo-Doing of pseudo-Will in the pseudo-Protonic pseudo-Heat of pseudo-Space, like Righteousness over pseudo-Justice.

STARS AND CROSSES

The Bolsheviks repeated the Jewish or Judaic religiously scientific position in their combination of hegemonic star and subordinate cross-like emblem (hammer and scythe) which, in Judaism, is a kind of candlestick or candelabrum called a menorah. Both of these false religions, that of cosmos-based religious science and, in the case of the Bolsheviks and their Soviet successors, of Marx-based dialectical materialism, appertain to the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis stretching from the northwest (Judaism) to the southeast (Communism) poles of the intercardinal axial compass, extreme poles that in the one case are anterior to Anglican Monarchism and in the other case posterior to Puritan Parliamentarianism, though naturally sharing many values in common with the ‘Protestant’ polarities, which necessarily operate along less extremist lines.

But it would be difficult not to believe that English Protestants, not least, have a tolerance for Jews and even Communists, including radical Social Democrats, that derives from their common axial orientations, since Jews and Bolsheviks are simply more extremist manifestations, as noted above, of state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axial criteria, manifestations that can become, as in Soviet Russia, state absolutist, and therefore against any form of religion, no matter how true or false.

In relation to what could be called the Judaic/Bolshevik polar parallelism, however, it needs to be remarked that a noumenal/phenomenal distinction exists between the two positions, or false religions, such that enables us to distinguish the absolute from the relative, not least in respect of the absolute star, or so-called ‘Star of David’ (which I believe to be a misnomer), with its six points deriving from two interlocked triangles, and the relative, or five-pointed star deriving, in its origins, from a lunar rather than a stellar paradigm, such that has more applicability to the corporeal than to the ethereal, and which, like its absolute counterpart ‘upstairs’, represents a female bias towards soma, a bias favouring the body – and hence in this particular case manual labour – at the expense of the mind.

The only ‘good star’, from a Social Theocratic standpoint, will be the contiguously-encircled absolute star (six-pointer) under the free-standing supercross of Y-chromosomal intimation and symbolism, the Saint-like supercross of metaphysics over the neutralized dragon-like pseudo-superstar of pseudo-metachemistry, which will remain forever subordinate as, in representative ratio terms, the pseudo-infinite pseudo-death that ‘lies down’ with or, rather, under Eternal Life – the eternity (in the preponderating ratio factor of free psyche) of metaphysical supremacy. That will be the opposite, in every respect, of Judaism, never mind Bolshevism and its subsequent communistic offshoots.

Incidentally, the all-too-prevalent use of 'relative' stars to denote value or merit, as with films and discs, is sadly reminiscent of my experiences at infant school, when teacher - usually if not invariably female - gave one a star of one colour or another as the equivalent of a mark or tick, so that one's product or behaviour was graded accordingly. It seems that the age has infantile predilections in this regard, insofar as the ubiquitous marking system of the star has continued - in a sense rightly - to characterize what are more usually female-dominated products and lifestyles.