John O'Loughlin

The Ratios of Soma To Psyche and Vice Versa (Revised Version)



Posted: Monday, May 19, 2008

by
Centretruths

Soma and psyche 'hang together' as two aspects of the same gender or elemental or class reality, but they don't do so on an equal or equivalent basis! Either there is a 3:1 ratio of one of these factors over the other in the absolutism of noumenal objectivity (metachemistry) and noumenal subjectivity (metaphysics) or, alternatively and intermediately, so to speak, there exists a 2:1 ratio of one of these factors over the other in the relativity of phenomenal objectivity (chemistry) and phenomenal subjectivity (physics).

Of course, one could describe soma and psyche in other terms, like, for example, physiology and psychology, or nature and nurture, or even sensuousness and consciousness, and thus defy common usage (a philosophical duty!) in the interests of a logical parallelism and hence, the avoidance of the coupling of, say, nature with consciousness.

Thus the ratio of sensuousness to consciousness in the noumenal elemental contexts of metachemistry and metaphysics will differ not only from each other, but from their phenomenal counterparts 'down below' in the sphere of chemical and/or physical worldly relativity, and, in terms of plane, of volume and mass as opposed to space and time.

A 3:1 ratio within the noumenal objectivity of metachemistry, which, being a female element, is typified by free soma and bound psyche, will be equivalent to most particles and least wavicles and thus, in effect, to a distinction between the supersensuousness of free soma and the subconsciousness of bound psyche, or, put in alternative terms, the supernaturalism of free soma and the subnurturalism, so to speak, of bound psyche.

Conversely, a 3:1 ratio within the noumenal subjectivity of metaphysics, which, being a male element, is typified by free psyche and bound soma, will be equivalent to most wavicles and least particles and thus, in effect, to a distinction between the superconsciousness of free psyche and the subsensuousness of bound soma or, put in alternative terms, the supernurturalism, so to speak, of free psyche and the subnaturalism of bound soma.

On the other hand, a 2:1 ratio within the phenomenal objectivity of chemistry, which, being a female element, will be typified by free soma and bound psyche, is equivalent to more (relative to most) particles and less (relative to least) wavicles and thus, in effect, to a distinction between the sensuousness of free soma and the unconsciousness of bound psyche or, put in alternative terms, the naturalism of free soma and the unnurturalism, so to speak, of bound psyche.

By sensible contrast, a 2:1 ratio within the phenomenal subjectivity of physics, which, being a male element, will be typified by free psyche and bound soma, is equivalent to more (relative to most) wavicles and less (relative to least) particles and thus, in effect, to a distinction between the consciousness of free psyche and the unsensuousness of bound soma or, put in alternative terms, the nurturalism, so to speak, of free psyche and the unnaturalism of bound soma.

Sound strange? Yes, it is bound to! And yet we are probably nearer the mark here, with an acknowledgement of the difference between contrasts within the noumenal spheres of space and time, which are likely to be of the supernatural vis-a-vis subnurtural or, conversely, supernurtural vis-a-vis subnatual varieties and contrasts, on the other hand, within the phenomenal spheres of volume and mass, which are likely to be of the natural vis-a-vis unnurtural or, conversely, nurtural vis-a-vis unnatural varieties, always bearing in mind that the 'natural', whether noumenal or phenomenal, corresponds to somatic and/or physiological sensuousness and the 'nurtural', again whether noumenal or phenomenal, to psychic and/or psychological consciousness.

Thus a ratio of 3:1 particles to wavicles in metachemistry, the fiery element of noumenal objectivity par excellence , is bound to imply a contrast, equivalent to supremacy and primacy, between supersensuousness and subconsciousness, free will and/or spirit vis-a-vis bound ego and/or soul, somatic freedom and psychic binding, whereas such a ratio of wavicles to particles in metaphysics, the airy element of noumenal subjectivity par excellence , is going to imply a contrast, again equivalent to supremacy and primacy, between superconsciousness and subsensuousness, free ego and/or soul and bound will and/or spirit, psychic freedom and somatic binding.

Similarly a ratio of 2:1 particles to wavicles in chemistry, the watery element of phenomenal objectivity par excellence , is bound to imply a contrast, equivalent to supremacy and primacy, between sensuousness and unconsciousness, free will and/or spirit vis-a-vis bound ego and/or soul, somatic freedom and psychic binding, whereas such a ratio of wavicles to particles in physics, the vegetative (earthy) element of phenomenal subjectivity par excellence , is going to imply a contrast, again equivalent to supremacy and primacy, between consciousness and unsensuousness, so to speak, free ego and/or soul and bound will and/or spirit, psychic freedom and somatic binding.

I shall not complicate things with reference to axial subversion of the chemical and physical positions by their under-plane counterparts (antiphysics and antichemistry respectively) at the behest of their unequivocally hegemonic noumenal counterparts - metaphysics over antimetachemistry in the case of antiphysics and chemistry and, by contrast, metachemistry over antimetaphysics in the case of antichemistry and physics; for such a complication would distract from the main thrust of this weblog, which is to underline the differing ratios of somatic to psychic and/or of psychic to somatic factors according to gender and class that typify the respective hegemonic and under-plane positions on what I have customarily described, in past weblogs, as the intercardinal axial compass, that more general framework from which state-hegemonic/church-subordinate and church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axial alternatives can be extrapolated.

Suffice it to say that supremacy does not always have its way at the expense of primacy, the bright side at the expense of the dark, virtue, if you will, at the expense of vice, least of all in the phenomenal contexts of volume and mass, and that only in the noumenal spheres of space and time can there be a clear-cut distinction between 'super' and 'sub' factors to the advantage, every time, of supremacy, whether superheathen (and metachemical) or superchristian (and metaphysical), the distinction, after all, between supersensuous somatic freedom at the expense of subconscious psychic binding on the one hand, and superconscious psychic freedom at the expense of subsensuous somatic binding on the other hand, neither of which noumenal elements, coupled to their respective gender upended counterparts (antimetaphysics and antimetachemistry respectively), could ever be anything but absolutely incommensurate, and thus mutually incompatible, like the Devil (Devil the Mother/the Daughter of the Devil) and God (God the Father/the Son on God) of their respective - terminologically excluding for simplicity's sake the correlative orders of spirit and soul - free somatic/bound psychic and free psychic/bound somatic factors.

This and other searchwarp weblogs by the author can be downloaded in e-book form @ Literature and the Intercardinal Axial Compass

John O'Loughlin is a self-taught philosopher who has been writing mostly works of a philosophical nature for over three decades. Besides publishing himself through his company Centretruths Digital Media, he has been published by Lulu.com (ePub) and Clickbank.com (PDF), as well more recently by Amazon.com (Kindle), on the Internet, and considers himself to be the founder of the ideological philosophy of Social Theocracy and/or Social Transcendentalism, the former term having more political and the latter more religious significance, as though a distinction between state and church. Both, however, appertain to what he terms 'the Centre', a concept which transcends state/church relativity as we generally understand it. His works explain and justify Social Transcendentalism in relation to the concept of religious sovereignty, which he regards as the ultimate mode of sovereignty. Mr O'Loughlin is 58 and lives alone in north London.
This Article has been viewed 232 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
No comments yet.
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.