VICTORS AND VICTIMS

Whether in relation to metachemistry over antimetaphysics at the northwest point of the intercardinal axial compass, to chemistry over antiphysics at the southwest point of the said compass, to physics over antichemistry at its southeast point, or to metaphysics over antimetachemistry at the northeast, each point is divisible between a hegemonic gender position and a subservient, upended gender position in such fashion that we can distinguish between victors and victims, the hegemonic victors and the subservient victims. For life would seem to be divisible between these two options, even though there are a number of different permutations in which they materialize or operate. Either soma gets the better of psyche in sensuality, and we have a distinction between the Not-One and the Anti-One at both noumenal and phenomenal points of the intercardinal axial compass, or psyche gets the better of soma in sensibility, and we have a distinction between the One and the Anti-Not-One at both phenomenal and noumenal points of the said compass, the former divisible between the sensuality of the Not-One and the antisensibility of the Anti-One; the latter between the sensibility of the One and the antisensuality of the Anti-Not-One. Therefore victors, corresponding to the hegemonic positions, will be either metachemical, chemical, physical, or metaphysical, while their victims, corresponding to the underplane subservient positions, will be either antimetaphysical, antiphysical, antichemical, or antimetachemical, depending on the exact point of the intercardinal axial compass. The victory of free soma over bound psyche is a victory for heathen values, whether noumenal or phenomenal, ethereal or corporeal, at the expense of antichristian values, whereas the victory of free psyche over bound soma is a victory for Christian values, whether phenomenal or noumenal, corporeal or ethereal, at the expense of antiheathen values. Our age is one in which, thanks to medial like television and film, heathen values tend to prevail at the expense of antichristian ones, but a time must surely come when this situation will be reversed and Christian values, duly resurrected in a superchristian mould, will get the better of their antiheathen counterparts, obliging bound soma to defer to free psyche in the interests of all, including culture and civility, that is best in civilization. Then, as now, something of the hegemonic position will rub off onto the subservient, upended position, but the two positions will remain, as now, quite distinct according to gender. The Antimetachemical may not be as partial to truth and joy as the Metaphysical, but their opposition to beauty and love, not to mention ugliness and hatred, will ensure a deference to truth and joy, not to mention illusion and woe, that would not otherwise materialize or be possible. The Anti-Not-One will lie down with the One, as Anti-Vanity Fair with the Celestial City, and thus defer to the victor's triumph as an honourable victim, one who though not godly will be so far from anything devilish as to be effectively antidevilish in her antifemale subjection to male hegemonic criteria. The triumph of metaphysics over antimetachemistry will signify the triumph of the ultimate victor over the ultimate victim and, eventually, it will be the sole victor over the sole victim as God and the Antidevil supersede all that is not only axially polar to themselves in post-worldly manifestations of woman in chemistry (duly subverted to psychic emphasis) and antiman in antiphysics, but contrary and opposed to them on the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis of the Devil and Antigod in metachemistry over antimetaphysics and man and antiwoman in physics (duly subverted to somatic emphasis) and antichemistry. For the end of the world in relation to the triumph of Heaven and Antihell will also put an end to the netherworldly rule of Hell and Antiheaven over the world, both directly, in axial relation to physics and antichemistry, and indirectly, in inter-axial exploitative relation to chemistry and antiphysics, whose worldly standing - excluding axial subversion - is less omega and anti-alpha than alpha and anti-omega and is therefore directly capable of being overcome once the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis gets its act together so conclusively as to provide a lasting salvation and counter-damnation to all who, identifiable with the phenomenal not-one and the phenomenal anti-one, can be delivered from their lowly plight at the southwest point of the intercardinal axial compass to the divine and antidiabolic heights of its northeast point as a matter of moral and eschatological necessity. Then the victimized 'last' of antiphysical anti-self will be metaphysically 'first' in noumenal self, while the victorious 'first' of chemical not-self will be antimetachemically 'last' in noumenal anti-not-self, the psychically bound becoming psychically free and the somatically free somatically bound. So be it!

THE ONE AND THE ANTI-NOT-ONE

Not so long ago, in an aphoristic entry entitled 'Concerning a Distinction between the Religious Few and the Religiously Sovereign One', I made the mistake, unusual for me, of subsuming the antifemale position in antimetachemistry into the concept of Oneness in relation to the male hegemonic position in metaphysics, and this in spite of customary differentials between the two supra-human contexts, such as time and antispace or, indeed, the Celestial City and Anti-Vanity Fair. Doubtless part of the reason for this was the existence of the concept Few in relation to the serving elite, who would constitute an administrative aside, so to speak, to the religious rights and experiences of the religiously sovereign supra-human entities of the Centre-proper; but another reason was that I just hadn't formulated an adequate distinction, at the time, between the two supra-human contexts that would have done justice to it in terms of what properly appertained to the One, namely the metaphysical, and what was correlative of it in relation to the antimetachemical. Since then, however, I have had plenty of time in which to revaluate the situation and, true to my long-standing methodology, I have come up with the ingenious concept of the Anti-Not-One as the most appropriate description of that which, appertaining to the upended female in antimetachemistry (the noumenal antifemale) should be regarded as complementing the One of those for whom metaphysical self-realization is the name of the church-hegemonic game. Therefore not just a distinction, at the northeast point of the intercardinal axial compass, between the Few and the One, the serving and the served, but a further distinction between the One and the Anti-Not-One, the latter of whom, being antimetachemical, will be contrary to Not-Oneness, as typifying that which appertains to metachemistry in relation to free soma. Therefore the metaphysical/antimetachemical complementariness of noumenal male and noumenal antifemale elements at the northeast point of our intercardinal axial compass is most assuredly more and less than just the One: it is to be thought of in terms of metaphysical oneness and antimetachemical anti-not-oneness, the latter of which is contrary, in bound soma, to all that is freely somatic at the northwest point of the said compass, with specific reference to the unequivocally hegemonic position of metachemistry, as appertaining to noumenal females. If Oneness has to do with the Self, with psyche, then Not-Oneness is most assuredly its somatic antithesis which, in the past, I have identified with the concept Not-Self. Hence the Not-Self is not only that which cannot be identified with the Self; it is contrary to it in relation to soma and therefore originates on a female-hegemonic basis in metachemistry in which soma takes precedence over psyche as Not-Self over Self, the former free and the latter bound to it in what, elsewhere, I have described as church-subordinate fashion. For the Not-Self is the root of all that is if not state absolutist then, at the very least, state hegemonic. But the Anti-Not-Self, having to do with bound soma and, by extrapolation, free psyche, can only materialize in relation to the hegemonic triumph of the Self and, hence, of metaphysics at the northeast point of the intercardinal axial compass, and where the triumph of the Self is primarily about free psyche, the vanquishing of the Not-Self in terms of the Anti-Not-Self can only be primarily, if not rhetorically, about bound soma, since the unequivocal hegemony of noumenal male criteria in metaphysics is only possible on the basis of the constraining of females to noumenal antifemale criteria in antimetachemistry, thereby not only upending them in relation to bound soma and free psyche (or the church-hegemonic rhetoric of free psyche and bound soma), but opposing them to whatever is contrary to that in metachemistry. Thus the overall context of the religiously sovereign would be divisible between the One and the Anti-Not-One, between free psyche (with a concomitant degree of bound soma) for noumenal males and bound soma (with a degree of spin-off free psyche) for noumenal antifemales, the cultivation of the Self to ever-greater degrees of universal Onenesss requiring the correlative curtailment, in antifemales, of the Not-Self to ever-greater degrees of what could be termed antipolyversal Anti-Not-Oneness. For whereas cultivation of the Self makes for increased unity in undifferentiated subjectivity of a wavicle cohesiveness, the curtailment of the Not-Self ensures that soma is not in a metachemical position to foster polyversal differentiation on the basis of particle disjunctiveness attendant upon a vacuous objectivity at its spatial roots. And whereas with metachemistry and antimetaphysics at the northwest point of the intercardinal axial compass one has a situation whereby the Not-One and what could be called, for the noumenal antimale, the Anti-One rule over the Few, or those whose aristocratic allegiance is to the prevailing royalty, with metaphysics and antimetachemistry at the northeast point of the said compass, by contrast, one has - or will have - a situation in which the Few, or those whose technocratic allegiance is to the religiously sovereign, serve under the One and the Anti-Not-One, pledged to protect and advance their religiously sovereign rights for all Eternity and Anti-Infinity, for all time and antispace, until such time as the metaphysical oneness of superbeing transcendence achieves its space-centre apotheosis, as it were, in an ultrabeingful universality of definitive Oneness, the ultimate godly individualism, and the antimetachemical anti-not-oneness of anti-superdoing antimaterialism likewise attains, in the slipstream of what properly obtains in metaphysics, an anti-ultradoingful antipolyversality of definitive Not-Oneness, the ultimate antidevilish anti-collectivism, as the Celestial City achieves the maximum of evolutionary being in the utmost psychic freedom and the Anti-Vanity Fair is correlatively brought to the maximum of counter-devolutionary antidoing in the utmost somatic binding. Then and only then will one have the Omega Point and the Anti-Alpha Point as the culmination of things Superchristian and Anti-Superheathen.

ANTIPHYSICAL AND ANTICHEMICAL ANTITHESES

To contrast the anticulture of antiphysical bound psyche and the anticivility of antiphysical free soma with the antibarbarism of antichemical bound soma and the antiphilistinism of antichemical free psyche, as one would contrast the anti-artificial with the antinatural across the relative gender divide - antimale and antifemale - of the subservient positions (duly subversive of the hegemonic ones under pressure from noumenally inclusive axial factors) of the southwest and southeast points of the intercardinal axial compass. Therefore to contrast the antiknowledge and antipleasure of antiphysical bound psyche and the anti-ignorance and antipain of antiphysical free soma with the antistrength and antipride of antichemical bound soma and the antiweakness and antiwoe of antichemical free psyche, as one would contrast sin and folly with goodness and punishment, the former pairing appertaining to Antiman the Antifather/Anti-earth the Unholy Soul and the Antison of Antiman/the Unholy Spirit of Anti-earth; the latter pairing to Antiwoman the Antimother/Antipurgatory the Unclear Spirit and the Antidaughter of Antiwoman/the Unclear Soul of Antipurgatory. In brief, both the sinfulness of antiphysical bound psyche and the goodness of antichemical bound soma are dark, that is to say, they appertain to contrary types of binding, whereas both the folly of antiphysical free soma and the punishment of antichemical free psyche are bright, which is to say, they appertain to contrary types of freedom. The former antitheses correspond to contrary orders - psychic and somatic - of work, whereas the latter antitheses correspond to contrary orders - somatic and psychic - of play. And, being phenomenal, they are relatively exclusive, appertaining, as noted above, to contrary axes, of which, as also noted, they are the subverting subservient factors - antiphysics under chemistry (at the behest of metaphysics over antimetachemistry) as antimass under volume, and antichemistry under physics (at the behest of metachemistry over antimetaphysics) as antivolume under mass.

CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL ANTITHESES

To contrast the philistinism of chemical bound psyche and the barbarism of chemical free soma with the civility of physical bound soma and the culture of physical free psyche, as one would contrast the natural with the artificial across the relative gender divide - female and male - of the hegemonic positions (duly subverted to uncharacteristic gender emphasis by inclusive axial factors) of the southwest and southeast points of the intercardinal axial compass. Therefore to contrast the weakness and humility of chemical bound psyche and the strength and pride of chemical free soma with the ignorance and pain of physical bound soma and the knowledge and pleasure of physical free psyche, as one would contrast pseudo-crime and pseudo-evil with pseudo-wisdom and pseudo-grace, the former pairing appertaining to the Daughter of Woman/the Clear Soul of Purgatory and Woman the Mother/Purgatory the Clear Spirit; the latter pairing to the Son of Man/the Holy Spirit of Earth and Man the Father/Earth the Holy Soul. In brief, both the pseudo-crime of chemical bound psyche and the pseudo-wisdom of physical bound soma are dark, that is to say, they appertain to contrary types of binding, whereas both the pseudo-evil of chemical free soma and the pseudo-grace of physical free psyche are bright, which is to say, they appertain to contrary types of freedom. The former antitheses correspond to contrary orders - psychic and somatic - of work, whereas the latter antitheses correspond to contrary orders - somatic and psychic - of play. And, being phenomenal, they are relatively exclusive, appertaining, as noted above, to contrary axes, of which, as also noted, they are the subverted hegemonic factors - chemistry over antiphysics as volume over antimass and physics over antichemistry as mass over antivolume.

ANTIMETAPHYSICAL AND ANTIMETACHEMICAL ANTITHESES

To contrast the anti-supercivility (noumenal anticivility) of antimetaphysical free soma and the anti-superculture (noumenal anticulture) of antimetaphysical bound psyche with the anti-superphilistinism (noumenal antiphilistinism) of antimetachemical free psyche and the anti-superbarbarism (noumenal antibarbarism) of antimetachemical bound soma, as one would contrast the anti-superchristian (noumenal antichristian) with the anti-superheathen (noumenal antiheathen) across the absolute gender divide - antimale and antifemale - of the subservient positions of the northwest and northeast points of the intercardinal axial compass. Therefore to contrast the anti-illusion and antiwoe of antimetaphysical free soma and the antitruth and antijoy of antimetaphysical bound psyche with the anti-ugliness and antihatred of antimetachemical free psyche and the antibeauty and antilove of antimetachemical bound soma, as one would contrast pseudo-folly and pseudo-sin with pseudo-punishment and pseudo-goodness, the former pairing appertaining to the Antison of Antigod/the Unholy Spirit of Antiheaven and Antigod the Antifather/Antiheaven the Unholy Soul; the latter pairing to the Antidaughter of the Antidevil/the Unclear Soul of Antihell and Antidevil the Antimother/Antihell the Unclear Spirit. In brief, both the pseudo-folly of antimetaphysical free soma and the pseudo-punishment of antimetachemical free psyche are bright, that is to say, they appertain to contrary types of freedom, whereas both the pseudo-sin of antimetaphysical bound psyche and the pseudo-goodness of antimetachemical bound soma are dark, which is to say, they appertain to contrary types of binding. The former antitheses correspond to contrary orders - somatic and psychic - of play, whereas the latter antitheses correspond to contrary orders - psychic and somatic - of work. And, being noumenal, they are absolutely exclusive, appertaining, as noted above, to contrary axes, of which, as also noted, they are the subservient factors - antimetaphysics under metachemistry as antitime under space, antimetachemistry under metaphysics as antispace under time.

METACHEMICAL AND METAPHYSICAL ANTITHESES

To contrast the superbarbarism (noumenal barbarism) of metachemical free soma and the superphilistinism (noumenal philistinism) of metachemical bound psyche with the superculture (noumenal culture) of metaphysical free psyche and the supercivility (noumenal civility) of metaphysical bound soma, as one would contrast the supernatural (noumenal natural) with the super-artificial (noumenal artificial) across the absolute gender divide - female and male - of the hegemonic positions of the northwest and northeast points of the intercardinal axial compass. Therefore to contrast the beauty and love of metachemical free soma and the ugliness and hatred of metachemical bound psyche with the truth and joy of metaphysical free psyche and the illusion and woe of metaphysical bound soma, as one would contrast evil and crime with grace and wisdom, the former pairing appertaining to Devil the Mother/Hell the Clear Spirit and the Daughter of the Devil/the Clear Soul of Hell; the latter pairing to God the Father/Heaven the Holy Soul and the Son of God/the Holy Spirit of Heaven. In brief, both the evil of metachemical free soma and the grace of metaphysical free psyche are bright, that is to say, they appertain to contrary types of freedom, whereas both the crime of metachemical bound psyche and the wisdom of metaphysical bound soma are dark, which is to say, they appertain to contrary types of binding. The former antitheses correspond to contrary orders - somatic and psychic - of play, whereas the latter antitheses correspond to contrary orders - psychic and somatic - of work. And, being noumenal, they are absolutely exclusive, appertaining, as noted above, to contrary axes, of which, as also noted, they are the hegemonic factors - metachemistry over antimetaphysics as space over antitime and metaphysics over antimetachemistry as time over antispace.

SUPERBARBARISM AND SUPERPHILISTINISM TO SUPERCULTURE AND SUPERCIVILITY

If the distinction - excluding for the moment the paradoxical emphases of axial subversion - between chemistry and physics in the sensuality and sensibility of phenomenal relativity is one of barbarism and philistinism in free soma and bound psyche vis-a-vis culture and civility in free psyche and bound soma, then the distinction between metachemistry and metaphysics in the sensuality and sensibility of noumenal absolutism could be described as one of superbarbarism and superphilistinism in free soma and bound psyche vis-a-vis superculture and supercivility in free psyche and bound soma. Clearly, if barbarism appertains to chemical free soma and philistinism to chemical bound psyche, then civility must appertain to physical bound soma and culture to physical free psyche, civility being the bound-somatic antithesis of barbarism no less than culture the free-psychic antithesis of philistinism. Likewise, if superbarbarism appertains to metachemical free soma and superphilistinism to metachemical bound psyche, then supercivility must appertain to metaphysical bound soma and superculture to metaphysical free psyche, supercivility being the bound-somatic antithesis of superbarbarism no less than superculture the free-psychic antithesis of superphilistinism. So far so good! But we also have underplane, or secondary, positions to bear in mind where each point of the intercardinal axial compass is concerned, namely antimetaphysics under metachemistry at the noumenal northwest, antiphysics under chemistry at the phenomenal southwest, antichemistry under physics at the phenomenal southeast, and antimetachemistry under metaphysics at the noumenal northeast, the actual state-hegemonic/church-subordinate and church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axial differentials being established on a northwest to southeast basis on the one hand, and on a northeast to southwest basis on the other hand, with the noumenal heights more or less dictating the terms of the phenomenal positions below. So much for that! What we have now to establish is that the secondary or 'anti' positions are less equivalent to the primary or 'pro' positions directly hegemonic over them than contrary to their corresponding primary or 'pro' positions in sensuality or sensibility, as the gender case may be. Hence it makes logical sense to regard antimetaphysics as anti-supercivil and anti-supercultural rather than, like metachemistry, as superbarbarous and superphilistine, since metachemistry is superheathenly supernatural and antimetaphysics anti-superchristianly anti-superartificial, after the respective fashions of noumenal objectivity and noumenal anti-subjectivity. Similarly it makes logical sense to regard antiphysics as anti-cultural and anti-civil rather than, like chemistry, philistine and barbarous, since chemistry is heathenly natural and antiphysics anti-christianly anti-artificial, after the respective fashions of phenomenal objectivity and phenomenal anti-subjectivity. Crossing to the sensible side of the phenomenal axial divide, it makes logical sense to regard antichemistry as anti-barbarous and anti-philistine rather than, like physics, as civil and cultural, since physics is christianly artificial and antichemistry anti-heathenly anti-natural, after the respective fashions of phenomenal subjectivity and phenomenal anti-objectivity. Similarly it makes logical sense to regard antimetachemistry as anti-superphilistine and anti-superbarbarous rather than, like metaphysics, supercultural and supercivil, since metaphysics is superchristianly super-artificial and antimetachemistry anti-superheathenly anti-supernatural, after the respective fashions of noumenal subjectivity and noumenal anti-objectivity. Thus, in overall axial terms, metachemistry and antimetaphysics form a gender-conditioned polarity with antichemistry and physics on the basis of somatic opposition between superbarbarism and anti-barbarism on primary state-hegemonic terms (free somatic metachemistry to bound somatic antichemistry) and anti-supercivility and civility on secondary state-hegemonic terms (free somatic antimetaphysics to bound somtic physics), with a corresponding psychic opposition between superphilistinism and anti-philistinism on primary church-subordinate terms (bound psychic metachemistry to free psychic antichemistry) and anti-superculture and culture on secondary church-subordinate terms (bound psychic antimetaphysics to free psychic physics). Contrariwise, metaphysics and antimetachemistry form a gender-conditioned polarity with antiphysics and chemistry on the basis of psychic opposition between superculture and anti-culture on primary church-hegemonic terms (free psychic metaphysics to bound psychic antiphysics) and anti-superphilistinism and philistinism on secondary church-hegemonic terms (free psychic antimetachemistry to bound psychic chemistry), with a corresponding somatic opposition between supercivility and anti-civility on primary state-subordinate terms (bound somatic metaphysics to free somatic antiphysics) and anti-superbarbarism and barbarism on secondary state-subordinate terms (bound somatic antimetachemistry to free somatic chemistry). Superculture is the salvation of anti-culture no less than supercivility the salvation of anti-civility for those who, as antiphysical, are neither cultural nor civil in physical fashion and therefore are in with the prospect of their noumenal counterparts. But if metaphysics is the salvation, in church and state, of antiphysics, then antimetachemistry is most assuredly the counter-damnation (a counter fall from hegemonic ascendancy in relative gender sync to antimetachemical underplane subservience in absolute gender upendedness) of chemistry, since anti-superphilistinism is the counter-damnation of philistinism no less than anti-superbarbarism the counter-damnation of barbarism for those who, having been philistine and barbarous in the phenomenal relativity of an equivocal hegemony, will be denied their noumenal counterparts in the absolutism of an unequivocal subjection to the metaphysical ascendancy of superculture and supercivility, the 'father' and 'son' of the super-artificial superchristianity of the truly blessed (with complete gender sync).

SYNTHETIC AND NON-SYNTHETIC ANTITHESES

Speaking in axial terms, one might note a fall, on the one hand, from synthetic naturalism (supernaturalism) to non-synthetic artificiality, as, in general terms, from metachemistry to physics, but a rise, on the other hand, from non-synthetic naturalism to synthetic artificiality (super-artificiality), as, in general terms, from chemistry to metaphysics. For the four main points, effectively hegemonic, of the intercardinal axial compass would seem to connote with synthetic naturalism at the northwest, non-synthetic naturalism at the southwest, non-synthetic artificiality at the southeast, and synthetic artificiality at the northest, the axes, of course, being determined according to a polarity between the northwest and the southeast on the one hand, and between the southwest and the northeast on the other hand, even with other - and subordinate - factors to consider in each case. However that may be, I have little doubt that the noumenal antitheses, in space and time, are equally synthetic, if in relation to supernature and super-artificiality respectively, which amounts to a distinction between metachemistry and metaphysics, superheathen objectivity and superchristian subjectivity, absolute alpha and absolute omega, whereas the phenomenal antitheses, in volume and mass, are equally non-synthetic, if in relation to nature and artificiality respectively, which amounts to a distinction between chemistry and physics, heathen objectivity and Christian subjectivity, relative alpha and relative omega. The pairings of metachemistry with antimetaphysics, of chemistry with antiphysics, of physics with antichemistry, and of metaphysics with antimetachemistry do not substantially alter this conclusion, although they modify the respective axial realities of what, in total, are state-hegemonic/church-subordinate and church-hegemonic/state-subordinate mutually exclusive traditions.

A BRIEF EXAMINATION OF THE MORAL DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN PLAY AND WORK

If it is not possible to categorically maintain that soma is invariably dark or black or shaded vis-a-vis psyche, and for the simple reason that brightness is determined by freedom, whether somatic or psychic, and darkness by binding, likewise irrespective of the faculty, then it should be possible to maintain that whatever is bound is dark and whatever is free, by contrast, is bright. Therefore brightness can be associated with either soma or psyche and darkness likewise, the chief determinant being the distinction between freedom and binding. But this distinction can be applied quite categorically to the dichotomy between play and work, since play is invariably free, or associated with freedom, whereas work is contractually obligated and is therefore a manifestation of binding. Since soma can be free or bound, so it can have associations with either play or work. The same holds true of psyche, which is only to be associated with play when free, not when bound. Therefore we can plot a distinction between play and work on the basis of freedom and binding, whether in relation to soma or psyche. Since metachemistry is the element of free soma and bound psyche par excellence, as germane to noumenal absolutism, we can maintain that metachemistry exemplifies somatic play and psychic work, its antimetaphysical corollary likewise, if on secondary terms, exemplifying somatic play and psychic work. Similarly, since chemistry is the element of free soma and bound psyche on phenomenally relative terms, we can maintain that chemistry exemplifies somatic play and psychic work, its antiphysical corollary likewise, if on primary terms in relation, traditionally, to the subversion of chemistry to bound psychic emphasis at the behest, axially considered, of metaphysics over antimetachemistry or, at any rate, of some degree of metaphysics, whether hyped or not, over antimetachemistry. Be that as it may, it should be possible to contend, for sensibility in contrast to sensuality, that since physics is the element of free psyche and bound soma on phenomenally relative terms, we can maintain that physics exemplifies psychic play and somatic work, its antichemical corollary likewise, if on primary terms, traditionally, in relation to the subversion of physics to bound somatic emphasis at the behest, axially considered, of metachemistry over antimetaphysics or, at any rate, of some degree of metachemistry over antimetaphysics. Finally, since metaphysics is the element of free psyche and bound soma par excellence, as germane to noumenal absolutism, we can maintain that metaphysics exemplifies psychic play and somatic work, its antimetachemical corollary likewise, if on secondary terms, exemplifying psychic play and somatic work. Hence the state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axis which stretches from northwest to southeast of the intercardinal axial compass would indicate a primary state-hegemonic polarity between the brightness of somatic play and the darkness of somatic work as far as the female contrast between metachemistry and antichemistry is concerned, but a secondary state-hegemonic polarity between the brightness of somatic play and the darkness of somatic work as far as the male contrast between antimetaphysics and physics is concerned, the contrast between the darkness of psychic work and the brightness of psychic play being primarily church subordinate in relation to metachemistry and antichemistry, but secondarily church-subordinate in relation to antimetaphysics and physics. By complete contrast, however, the church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axis which stretches from the southwest to the northeast of the intercardinal axial compass would indicate a primary church-hegemonic polarity between the darkness of psychic work and the brightness of psychic play as far as the male contrast between antiphysics and metaphysics is concerned, but a secondary church-hegemonic polarity between the darkness of psychic work and the brightness of psychic play as far as the female contrast between chemistry and antimetachemistry is concerned, the contrast between the brightness of somatic play and the darkness of somatic work being primarily state-subordinate in relation to antiphysics and metaphysics, but secondarily state-subordinate in relation to chemistry and antimetachemistry. Hence play-brightness has a work-dark antithesis on state somatic terms and work-darkness a play-bright antithesis on church psychic terms on the former axis, irrespective of whether on primary or secondary terms, while work-darkness has a play-bright antithesis on church psychic terms and play-brightness a work-dark antithesis on state somatic terms on the latter axis, again irrespective of whether on primary or secondary terms. Therefore in terms of metachemistry to antichemistry, evil is bright and goodness dark, for evil corresponds to somatic freedom of metachemistry and goodness to somatic binding of antichemistry, whereas crime is dark and punishment bright, since crime corresponds to psychic binding of metachemistry and punishment to psychic freedom of antichemistry. Likewise, in terms of antimetaphysics to physics, pseudo-folly is bright and pseudo-wisdom dark, for pseudo-folly corresponds to somatic freedom of antimetaphysics and pseudo-wisdom to somatic binding of physics, whereas pseudo-sin is dark and pseudo-grace bright, since pseudo-sin corresponds to psychic binding of antimetaphysics and pseudo-grace to psychic freedom of physics. In terms, by axial contrast, of antiphysics to metaphysics, sin is dark and grace bright, for sin corresponds to psychic binding of antiphysics and grace to psychic freedom of metaphysics, whereas folly is bright and wisdom dark, since folly corresponds to somatic freedom of antiphysics and wisdom to somatic binding of metaphysics. Likewise, in terms of chemistry to antimetachemistry, pseudo-crime is dark and pseudo-punishment bright, for pseudo-crime corresponds to psychic binding of chemistry and pseudo-punishment to psychic freedom of antimetachemistry, whereas pseudo-evil is bright and pseudo-goodness dark, since pseudo-evil corresponds to somatic freedom of chemistry and pseudo-goodness to somatic binding of antimetachemistry. Strange, but it is so.

NEVER SIMPLY BLACK AND WHITE

It is always tempting to see things in black and white or, shall we say, bright and dark, but, unfortunately, things are rarely that simple. For a start, there are two axes, one dominated by free soma in female fashion and the other led by free psyche in male fashion, and therefore there are fundamentally two kinds of bright and dark, or light and shade, even without class complications. Take metachemistry over antimetaphysics at the northwest point of the intercardinal axial compass. Free soma, the female ideal, is a brightness, whilst its bound psychic counterpart is somewhat of a dark shadow, trailing behind the leading string, as it were. Therefore a somatic brightness has to be contrasted, in each gender case, antimetaphysical as well as metachemical, with a psychic darkness. The same is true of chemistry over antiphysics at the southwest point of the intercardinal axial compass, free soma being bright and bound psyche dark. But on the sensible side of the moral divide things are quite otherwise. There free psyche is bright and bound soma dark, whether in terms of physics over antichemistry at the southeast point of the intercardinal axial compass or, up above, of metaphysics over antimetachemistry at its northeast point. The bright side of a male hegemonic coupling, being free, is certainly psychic, whilst its dark side, corresponding to the bound, is somatic. This has some interesting, if quite unconventional, moral ramifications, but I don't wish to enlarge upon that now. Suffice it to say that things are never simply black and white, least of all in terms of evil being somehow dark and good bright (the reverse is actually the case, bearing in mind the distinction between free metachemical soma and bound antichemical soma on primary state-hegemonic terms). To be sure, a distinction between the dark and the bright most certainly exists, and at all points of the intercardinal axial compass, but it is not simply in terms of soma being dark and psyche bright, or vice versa. That is why, with both the female ideal of free soma and the male ideal of free psyche corresponding to the bright side of things, one has a moral incompatibility between them which is no mere black/white dichotomy but a competition between alternative kinds of brightness that is likely to lead, in axial differentiation, to different types of society, depending on which kind of freedom is officially encouraged and regarded as alone right, and to keep those who believe in the one kind quite separate from those who believe in the other, both within and without their particular society. For mutually incompatible, as free females and free males, they respectively remain.