Any particular "reality" is a contraction of the infinite - which is why there is no reality - only realities or worlds. And no logic only logics. The logics or rules of the game which found these worlds are axiomatic - they are decided as an event - and thus are not separate from the very foundational existence of these worlds. One can only excavate them after the fact through the micropolitics of analysis - but an analysis submitted to Lacan, Foucault, and Guattari until it is unrecognizable as a stinking church.

What Lacan calls the object a is an excellent example of a founding event inaccessible to the logic of the particular world (in this case a human one) built on this. In category theory mathematics this is called a central object which determines the relational logic of identities and differences of a particular world or neighborhood or set. Badiou removed the transcendental from the ontological absolute outside above and placed it in the absolute inside local where it founds the phenomenological appearance of a world.

An event is the dissolution of solidity of the rules of a particular set which opens this contraction onto the infinite real expansiveness of pure possibility, potential, or power. The infinite is void or nothing because it is no-thing. It is not a thing or set. In a Hegelian sense then, the real or void is spirit or negation of thingness and identity, and to the extent that this remains within the human it is his negating, voiding, spiritual action which continues to open closed sets or things to the real of power (in the Nietzschean sense). Thus with the "end of history" and the "death of God" we have the overman or beyond-human free spirit - for the power to destroy is the power to create.

In fact this is the real meaning of karma. Karma is usually interpreted from the limited point of view of cause and effect in terms of reward and punishment. But one can really only understand the meaning of karma with access to the transpersonal, holographic, or synchronistic world of creative destruction or the will to power. Steiner saw that Hegel and Nietzsche had taken philosophy and human experience as far as it could go to the brink of the true meaning of karma in the free spirit when he wrote his book on the "Philosophy of Freedom." To move beyond is to become other than human but actually to fulfill the movement of spirit which Hegel could only see as human or the will to power or eternal return by which Nietzsche tried to grasp this inhuman experience. While this experience had always been open to certain fortuitous cases through human history, Hegel and Nietzsche were harbingers of the time when rapid technological evolution would force the species as a whole to confront the dissolution of its world. Deleuze and Guattari simply updated the story of the onset of "Capitalism and Schizophrenia," but few grasp the true meaning and gravity of the current situation.

While the baroque is a particular historical period or world which demonstrates some of these characteristics, it is also a recurring period in cyclical process which manifests such a creative destruction woven of infinite play. I have often counterposed the baroque to the postmodern as two forms of aftermath to an event (such as modernity). While the postmodern is marked by a cynical nostalgiac cool (cold) defense mechanism, the baroque is marked by ironic acceptance, open pathos and infinite regeneration which looks much like Nietzsche's concept of the eternal return of history as a playground of myth and mask. For in the end all of these different worlds are only multiple versions of the infinite void which is only experienced as lack or no-thingness in a world of appearance, but which recalls us to the real which - as Deleuze and Guattari would say - is not absence but pure presence, potency, and potential.

Hegel's attempt to resolve the subject/object dualism is the same task that Advaita Vedantists, Zen Buddhists and other nondualists have attempted throughout "history." What is novel is the stress on history and the idea of man as a whole completing this task. Is it necessary for man as whole to complete this task for it to be complete?

The unfolding of Being as objective natural space by means of Negation as subjective historical time so beautifully recapitulates the whole trajectory of philosophy (and of man), we could only wonder what would be left other than Bataille's "unemployed negativity," or the "painful tooth in Hegel's mouth." If the first is Europe in the 30s or America in the 70s catching a glimpse of this real, then the second is the symptom by means of which we as a species keep avoiding the end.

Enter Freud the scientist discovering this symptomatic state by which the master-slave dialectic is carried on beyond war and even beyond political economy toward (what Hegel and Marx could not foresee) the question of meaning itself - the individual myth of the neurotic and the real-imaginary-symbolic war of a body-mind in turmoil.

Even this individual myth of the neurotic is quaint in comparison to the post-60s emergence of "techonology and nihilism," the pure war of adult toys trying desperately to outrun the void.

The working bourgeois who is slave to capital is now (also) the castrated subject dialectically revolving around desire and repression in a fashion-oriented society of the spectacle, "Japanized" into petty wars of "snobbery," hipsterism, and the "art world" filled with anything but artists - pseudo-subjects traded on the market of "objective" beauty, style, and fame in which the stakes change every 15 minutes because of course nothing is true (only cool) even as their biopathic bodies betray them to the false surprise of everyone around.

The question: is this divided subject of the "unconscious" inevitable or is there an end to analysis in which Freud's Drive and Lacan's Desire of the Analyst provide an answer to Hegel.

If Man is the negation/subtraction of infinite multiple Being, then Spirit is the self-conscious negation/subtraction of infinite multiple being.

If Man disappears at the end of History, he does not sink back into the natural space of being. Rather he mutates like a butterfly into what he always was (becoming) - Spirit - and the natural world of Being is taken up into this Spirit which is nothing other than the infinite multiple and its other name, the void, as what continues to negate that which appears. The body and its natural environment is taken up into the spirit-man as the voiding animal who has consciously and voluntarily introduced death into his existence.

The Warrior is not (only) the working bourgeois become citizen of the absolute state, but the divided subject become spirit-man living the drive as creative simulacra, the sinthome as desiring production, the sovereign of nothing, the zen samurai without a lord, the overcoming of man in the ubermensch - and its world is neither global psychoanalytic communism, nor animal night, nor the city of god but ... the advent.

Alain Badiou "Logics of Worlds"
Georges Bataille "Sovereignty"
Gilles Deleuze & Felix Guattari "A Thousand Plateaus"
Leonard Cohen "Beautiful Losers"
Philip Dick "Valis"
Marguerite Duras "Destroy She Said"
Pierre Klossowski "Nietzsche and the Vicious Circle"
Rudolph Steiner "Philosophy of Freedom"
Wilhelm Reich "Cosmic Superimposition"

This refers to Nietzsche's project of eternal return as affirmation - and creative destruction as affirmation - rather than negation as critical disjunction and separation. "And-and-and" rather than "either-or." This is a mathematical concept of the continuum as distribution of intensities and affirms the failure of Cantor's continuum hypothesis to be tamed by discrete countable constructible sets. We are left with the infinite multiple and its various sets which appear as worlds - seemingly discrete components but actually rearrangements of relations of elements. But these elements themselves are only further relations so all that actually appears are relations of relations of...the infinite multiple or void - the empty set. The will to power as open intensity is real or infinite while the intentional singularity or sovereignty is an expression or appearance of this infinite but it is "no thing" - it continues to participate in the infinite intensity even as it appears to have singular existence.

Our ontological error - which becomes moral, scientific, aesthetic, political, clinical error - is to signify - to become slaves to things as meaningful - including self, world, and god - rather than participating in process - expressionism in philosophy: simulacra as creative manifestation of intensity in an eternal return, refrain, or miming of the intensity itself.

The end of dualism shows us that the void is the infinite and only stops at the one, the two, the three, and the many along the way - that being is becoming and that matter is form. The dialogue between Alain Badiou and Gilles Deleuze recapitulates a dialogue initiated by Plato and Aristotle which can now be resolved with reference to the mathematical-poetic biophysics of Wilhelm Reich's Orgonomy and Rene Thom's Semiophysics (not to mention the Surrealism of Bataille, Artaud, Breton, and Duchamp).

Along with analytic philosophy, scientific and poetic analysis, we leave behind the theological content of psycho-analysis and follow only the topological diagrammatic formation of schizo-analysis until we are left with analysis itself which subsumes philosophy, psychology, medicine, theology, ethics, politics, physics, metaphysics, mathematics, poetics - and in the place where poetics and analysis meet, the sovereign subject or event invents analysis anew each time, for all analysis is lay analysis and is signed by the proper name: Freudian Analysis, Lacanian Analysis, Joyceian Analysis, Duchampian Analysis, Nietzschean Analysis, Deleuzeian Analysis...

1. From the very beginning no-thing is.

2. There is void - empty set - potential, also known as substance - matter - continuum - the infinite infinite or infinite multiple.

3. Within the continuum of matter, a difference of relations of relations of this matter is what is called form, and form containing matter is an act(ualization) containing potential or an event which creates a set defined only immanently - generically - as what it is.

4. This event installs a set of relations of relations of matter (or empty potential - void) to itself by virtue of form.

5. This act of form-ation or per-form-ance installs a topological analytic object a, central object, or transcendental regime (a=c=t) axiomatically and locally.

6. Thus there is no One but only ones and the void is thus no lack or absence (from some-thing) but a pure affirmation of being becoming.

7. All events - or sets - remain topologically linked to the "ontological" infinite substance-matter-void while appearing as "phenomenological" things.

8. Thus the continuum of Number (or numericity) appears as discrete numbers, the Real appears as Imaginary-Symbolic structure, the ontological appears as the phenomenological.

9. Philosophy has nothing left to do other than analyze the axiomatic appearance and disappearance of sets, forms, worlds, or events - actualizations of the potential - finite numbering of the infinite - topological diagramming.

10. Analysis is.

Taking up again the question of sovereignty.

It is the sovereignty of the other which would attract (one like) you in the first place and yet it is exactly this sovereignty which threatens to destroy you if it remains but a distancing device where one follows the other. Who looks for recognition? The sovereign was the King, God, the One - transcendental Other by which all other subjects were determined. It is only in recent history that the radically "individual" subject has posed itself. The history of the human species is from a real biological organizing principle to a symbolic cultural organizing principle - from mass to mass - yet with increasing differentiation or individuation. The symbolic itself inevitably leads to the individual subject. But there is as yet no individual subject - just the phantasm of the egobody and the discourse of the person regulating the theology of the current moment.

Yet in the alchemical transference of the dyad this is questioned. The rules break down and the sovereignty of the subject is revealed. That which escapes in the symptom - break down, crack up, disease, madness, stress, neurosis, crime, violence - so many emergent moments of subjectivity. The sovereign subject either degenerates into a master-slave dialectic in the functional couple or crashes and burns. We would rather start over with another lover than face the real.

Nietzsche posed the question long ago (and yet so recently). God is dead - and now? Bataille pointed out that Nietzsche's only limitation was not to restitch the end back to the beginning by speaking from the "I" - to reinscribe himself, his moment. Deleuze, Foucault, Baudrillard, and Lyotard have all elaborated a philosophical discourse of the real without managing to reinsert themselves through the axiomatic gesture. Poetics has considered this question, yet only within the safely sealed off domain of art. The issue is made clearest in Thierry de Duve's brilliant treatise on contemporary art "Kant after Duchamp": the only imperative is to invent the imperative. Without reinscribing his position into his work either this looks easy. But we can follow this dark night of the soul in something like Leonard Cohen's "Beautiful Losers" - while relieving ourselves that it is just a novel. Following Freud, Lacan waged war against philosophical closure through the eruption of the real in the contingent placement of the subject only to end analysis with this poetic gesture.

In "Inner Experience" Bataille alone speaks the universe from his limited point of the infinite. Klossowski's "Nietzsche and the Vicious Circle," Guattari's "Chaosmosis," and Badiou's "Logics of Worlds" are the first manuals on the production of subjectivity. As such they put the final piece of the puzzle in place. Not only even is it necessary to reinscribe oneself as the moment of creation back into the pure diagram of libidinal economy through the sovereign act of poetics, but this event is all that there ever is. The ontological real of being is the logical diagramming of relations of appearance - the symbolic as contingent symptomatic embrace in the amor fati of an eternal return. A Moebius trip

At the locus where these investigations of philosophy, analysis, and poetics have taken place the appearance of the new awaits itself. The fragments lay around us yet no one dares pick them up. Easier to invent a new theology of nihilism. I for one am seduced by the love of creative destruction. The Moebius strip is already posed in the yin-yang diagram of involution-evolution, intimate-extimate, enstasis-exstasis, thought-matter. I who am but a part of the furniture found this moment.

The symbolic in the real or symbolically real is the symptom. But the symptom is that which is defined by the Other. Whereas Lacan says that anxiety is the only real emotion or only true symptom. I would add that depression is but the mirror of anxiety and the pair anxiety-depression reflect the true confrontation with the real (which Melanie Klein made the reality of the initial ground of the subject in her schizoid and depressive phases.) When not symbolized in the mirror of the Other this encounter leads no longer to the symptom but to subjective destitution. Where anxiety - or the schizoid - is the confrontation with the infinite multiple - the oceanic fusion of too-much - depression is the ultimate castration, aphanisis, or fading of the subject before the empty void of too-little which underlies the real, and which Lacan called subjective destitution. This is one end of analysis.

But there is another end of analysis. The real in the symbolic or really symbolic as Lacan calls it is "lying." This is what is meant by the statement that analysis is not a falsifiable or verificationist science. It does not intend to prove anything. Rather it shows that what is false can nevertheless be said, acted, and lived. To consciously lie already leads us to this fact, but the liar still believes in the truth of the Other as the pervert believes in the law. Analysis leads us to will this fact - to poetics and mathematics which consciously take up this practice of writing the impossible - that which does not stop not writing itself - the real. What Lacan calls the sinthome is none other than the symptom purified from being defined by the field of the Other and rather becoming the invention of the really symbolic. This shift in Lacan's thinking is illustrated in the subtle change in his late seminars from his famous statement that a signifier represents the subject for (pour) another signifier - which connotes the subject of meaning and the Other - to the statement that a signifier represents the subject "in contrast to" (aupres de) another signifier - which connotes the immanent meaninglessness of the sovereign subject of pure difference of one sign from another.

The idea of the sinthome or sovereign subject was already suggested by Nietzsche and taken up by Klossowski in his concept of the simulacrum - that which does not stop willing itself as the invention of the new (meaning) from the insistence of the real impulse or drive. The key is not to let these simulacra become mistaken for the Truth - not to allow the Other to efface the creative subject. For Klossowski the artist of simulacra did not make this mistake. What Baudrillard calls symbolic exchange or poetic reversibility - a process akin to Joyce's poetic practice - liquidates the signified and signifier alike - it sacrifices the referent by carving up the sign.

"Normal lying is different from performative creation both because for it to remain undetected, it merely has to maintain consistency, and because it maintains the belief in a preexistent referent; while for performative creation the test of success is not the absence of logical contradictions between the different versions - these contradictions can certainly be accommodated more or less easily by the one who keeps performatively creating himself - but the ability not to believe in and get sucked by the referent it secretes....To be the artist of one's life is a matter of being connected by some means with the diagram and managing not to succumb to the temptation to consider what it reveals as belonging to a world. (Jalal Toufic)

The artist's stroke of paint on the canvas, the poet's line of ink on the page, the dancer's gesture, and the mathematician's arrows and letters are all diagrams of the simulacra of poeticscience in which the sovereign subject of nothingness performatively creates worlds which disappear without a sign.

Throughout his philosophical writings Dick wavers between the monist "Spinozist-Deleuzian" pantheism of the one manifesting itself in myriad facets and the more dualistic "Platonist-Badiouian" conception of worlds being created out of an infinite unnameable. Finally Dick links these through a kind of Kantian-Hegelian feedback loop in which the ultimate ground or Urgrund becomes seduced into the games it plays as simulations. The ultimate lesson of these games is not to get caught into believing in the reality of these games - a kind of "objectivist" or "intellectualist" error. The key point is that this is an ontological error not a moral error. What is at stake here is that karma is not retribution but manifestation: you get what you put in. What you believe is true will condition your experience. This is born out in the frame of the modern scientific method which never achieves anything but the results it expected - a hypothesis confirmed or not but nevertheless within the frame predetermined. Thus the act of openess to the new or absolutely other is an act that literally "changes the world" - changes the conditions of the conditioned world.

Of course there is never just one world - or even many worlds - but an infinite multiple of worlds as Badiou describes in his mathematic ontology. Practically there are worlds within worlds overlapping and intersecting. So what is the human world - or the world of one human within that world for that matter. Dick explored alternate and parallel worlds through his science fiction until he began to experience them, and his experience brought forth the following structure. Although humans experience irreversible linear time, Dick believed that time could be made to move backwards or that we could elevate our perspective to the level beyond linear causal time. In this schema every time we experience an event - or "concrescence" as Whitehead would call it - with beginning, progression, and end, and feel unsatisfied with the outcome we relive this experience but with the subtle awareness of the failed event. This is remarkably similar to Freud's idea of the repetition compulsion and to karma but with the subtle difference that we can tap into the repressed memory through a process of anamnesis - negation of forgetting or re-membering. This process of anamnesis which was practiced by the Gnostic Christians can be found at the source of homeopathy and psychoanalysis but it has already become obscured by the fixation on the past or symptom itself rather than practicing the PROCESS of being in the present which allows the past to reveal itself and free itself toward the future in a new way. This subtle difference was outlined in Nietzsche's practice of the eternal return and further elaborated by Klossowski and Deleuze. Lacan also moved psychoanalysis in this direction in his late work on the purification of the symptom and the invention of the new signifier.

Dick who wrote a story called "Simulacra" had no knowledge of Nietzsche and Klossowski's concept of this word, but Baudrillard was familiar with all of them and has popularized the idea with regard to postmodern culture. For Dick, the ultimate simulacrum was the machine-world to which humanity was enslaved by virtue of letting themselves believe in it as God, Truth, Morality, Science. Rather than recognizing ourselves as creator of manifestation, we allow ourselves to be enslaved to our creation. To break free of this, Dick posited a two step process. First, by "groove override" we can break break away from the programed track of repetition compulsion, and second, we then have the opportunity to create a "new free merit deed" by which we can rewrite the past. As Zizek has pointed out this is the radical core of Christianity (and Buddhism) which breaks the chains of the Old Testament slave morality of an eye for an eye and wipes clean the slate with absolute forgiveness or absolution. Deleuze also describes this process as the eternal recurrence of the same yet always new as opposed to the hell of exact exchange dependent on a general equivalent such as money as in capitalism. Each event is a free act in itself, unique but manifesting the one.

An amazing example of this process is demonstrated in Charlie Kaufman's story for the film "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind." The film takes place in 4 parts.
In the first part we are in Track B of the relationship between Joel and Clementine. It opens just after they have had their memories erased of their relationship so they will no longer suffer and can move on with a "spotless mind." Paradoxically though they are both immediately drawn to Montauk where they are destined to meet again just like the first time. Although we do not know this at this point in the viewing, this will become significant later when we realize that a "groove override" has occured and that some transpersonal morphic field has brought them together again which operates beyond the somatic-neural program. After two days of the event of falling in love (in the Badiouian sense) Part 1 of the film ends at her front door as she enters her house to get her toothbrush so she can go to his house and they can "sleep" together for the first time.

At this point the film shifts to part two where Joel is also in his car but now weeping to the theme "Everybody's Gotta Learn Sometime" by the Korgis (but rerecorded by Beck). Part 2 takes place in the Post-Track A period where they have just broken up and Joel is suffering. He finds out through his friends that Clementine has had her memory of the relationship erased, and after first disbelief and then rage, he finally demands the procedure for himself from the doctor. Through pills and computers and talking a kind of neuro-psychotherapeutic erasure begins to take place while he is "unconscious." We should take note of the collaboration of the medical institution to maintain our enslavement to the repetition compulsion through its powerful technologies now developed far beyond what Foucault could have imagined.

Now we are in Part 3 where we see Track A of their relationship but in reverse order. The paradox is that in order to erase or suppress the memories, an anamnesis must take place. Joel must remember the memories in order to eradicate their "emotional core" which causes the suffering. In the midst of this process he is so overwhelmed with a jouissance beyond suffering that he wants to call off the procedure. The only problem is that he is in his mind and cannot stop the procedure taking place outside on his body which stores this Track A of experience. There is now a dialogue between Joel in the present and his memories and even with some form of Clementine. They try to hide their memories in areas of his brain where she never was such as his childhood. This part has a poignant and overwhelming effect on the viewer especially if he has experienced psychoanalysis or psychedelic/homeopathic substances which create a new dialogue among past and present. Thus although the specific memories of the past ultimately cannot be saved, Joel (and Clementine) is forever changed on a superordinate level. What is this level: the transpersonal, the morphic field, the soul? Dick says that the older time tracks persist as a presence of our own experience or awakening self to guide our present limited self in future actions. As the procedure reaches the end and the anamnesis reaches the begining of their relationship in Track A they both achieve a kind of becalmed tragedy in which the solidity of memories and the physical world begin to collapse and wash into each other - literally as the sea enters the house and the sand buries him in the car. This might remind us of the experience we have when in trying to recall where a relationship went bad, we trace it all the way to the beginning: it was always going bad because we had not yet overriden the groove of repetition and declared a new free merit deed. But now Joel literally rewrites the past by hiding memories of their relationship in other memories. While he cannot save the memories, this causes the procedure to stall long enough that the doctor must be summoned to the procedure and encounter his secretary stoned enough to confess her love for him which forces him to tell her they have a past relationship which has been erase. In her traumatized state she sends all the files to their clients exposing the procedures including those of Joel and Clementine, and this paves the way for the free merit deed.

As Track A washes out she whispers deafeningly for him to "meet me in Montauk" at the beginning again. And now as he awakes from the procedure we are in Part 4 of the film. We now see how all four parts are connected as Part 4 begins where Part 1 opened the beginning of the film. We now know that Joel's sudden impulse - against his usual behavior - to skip work and jump on a train to Montauk is a groove override and that it was happening as the doctor and his technicians were finishing their own business fresh from his procedure. The event of the encounter with Clementine at the beginning of the film was them meeting again - despite the procedure - for we have already seen in his memory that they met a different way the first time. Now we get to see what happened when Part 1 ended at the point where she went to get her toothbrush upon only knowing each other for two days. When she enters the house she receives her file from her procedure which has been sent by the clinic secretary devastated because she had learned of her own procedure. She does not know what it is and puts the tape into Joel's car. The tape is her talking about all the memories of what she hated about joel from Track A of their relationship. They are both confused and he feels fearful and paranoid that she is playing a joke on him and she is hurt that he does not trust her so they separate. In a state of desperation though she seeks out his house and finds him - now listening to his own tape of his negative memories of her. Now they have some sense of what is going on. Even as his words insult her for everything he hated about her he denies it in the present saying he loves her for those things. It is too much for her to hear and now she leaves. But he runs after her and tells her to wait. There are no words - no arguments here. The "wait" is the stopping of time and the stopping of the mind. The wait is the moment of openness to the outside - the unknown. The way is now cleared for the new free merit deed. When she recapitulates all his and her patterns and how they will just play them out again he says "OK" and she stunned for a moment before starting to cry and laugh. The present is now suspended and the past bleeds into the future: they are shown playing on the Montauk beach in a repetition of same but different until they fade to white. Is awareness of their symptoms enough to finally allow the new to emerge or is the acceptance, affirmation, and enjoyment of the symptoms themselves the new? Enjoy your symptom in the eternal return.

The extent to which we can think the real as infinite threatens the local universe of our "sanity" or "health". From this point of view anxiety and depression are inevitable consequences of being at the edge of consistency with regard to our being-as-appearance here in our local world. The experience of "anxiety" which as Lacan says is the only true emotion, presented by Klein as a primal paranoid-schizoid phase that all human subjects pass through initially, may be seen as the inundation by the real as infinite multiplicity: too much for the locally closed and screened off "human" world to come. Hence the appropriate concept of jouissance as primordial experience of what is left over of the drive to the extent that the drive precedes and exceeds the closed world of the human subject coming to be initiated into a symbolic universe of categorical relations. And the complementary experience of depression can be seen as the experience of the real as void as Badiou echoing Parmenides and Hui Neng proclaims "being as being is one void" or "from the very begining no thing is." Thus anxiety as the barrier or final phenomenological experience of coming apart or exceding the boundaries of our set - ecstasy or madness by another name. And depression as this feeling of death, loss, isolation - the flat and empty nature of all things - all being as appearance which reveals to us the truth behind appearance - the void is and it is infinite. The modern medical model still conspires to conceal this from us.

To the extent that an event takes places actualizing and axiomatizing any local set, this set is held together by a transcendental regime ordering its relations: what is called the central object in topological category theory and what is similarly described by Lacan as the fundamental phantasm or quilting point of primal repression which bootstraps the subject retrospectively through a kind of autopoetic feedback loop. Mae-Wan Ho and Francisco Varela describe this event in self-organizing biology in a way similar to Freud's description in the Project of psyche as the function of man that allows him to withdraw from the orgiastic cycle of communicational exchange of consumption and sexuality that determines nature and bind a certain quantity of this energy-matter for a time being. This is before sublimation and repression are differentiated as positive and negative aspects of this binding in the further elaboration of human psychoanalysis. To the extent that something infinite of being, drive, or spirit is insufflated into a human body ever-integrated as it is into its physical and social environment, this being as being is localized in a world of worlds within worlds - sets in which various transcendental phantasms operate to organize the symbolic rules of the sets.

Foucault traced the history of medical-psychiatric-legal systems holding in place transcendental regimes disallowing the emergence of the event as dissolution of the boundaries of local worlds and the reemergence of new worlds. This is but a further elaboration of what Nietzsche and Bataille had described as a long history of the ossification of various transcendental regimes of power maintaining local worlds no longer in flux with being as being or the infinite. Psychoanalysis is a kind of human topology or category theory that allows us to investigate the local worlds of our psyche but tells us nothing ontologically true, whereas analysis itself is but pure process that gives us access to the infinite. Being human is a local event constantly shifting and only an appearance of the infinite which itself can only be thought in an inhuman way through pure analysis, a kind of mathematical set theory of the infinite or ecstatic poetic philosophy of the void.

S(2.......?)
-------------
S(1)

or

S
--
I

The whole S/I or S2/S1 complex is itself floating on nothing but the Real - made up of bits of the Real. "We" do not know this.

S(2......?)
------------
S(1)
------------
R

or

S
--
I
--
R

S1 the master signifier founds and props up "reality" in a given locale - screening out the Real - but it (necessarily) must have been repressed or forgotten. When the master signifier loosens, the real (R) erupts. When it dissolves madness might ensue as too much of the real. But navigate the real and write it directly from the Real to the Semiotic - this is another writing - writing the real - with letters, gestures, diagrams.

...to perform theory like Nietzche or Lacan - miming the real - signing the drive: "I am not a poet but a poem being written." (Lacan)

Klossowski makes this clear in his elucidation of Nietzsche - the aphoristic style is to make a stab - little stabs at happiness - the gay science - another role of the dice - but a role of the dice will never abolish chance. The impulse wills, but in the human the impulse wills the phantasm which is then signified - one, two, three. What is the difference between this phantasm signified and signed. The master signifier emerges simultaneously with its representations - the signifying chain of the symbolic. Whose phantasm is the master signifier's. This imaginary that stops up the hole of the real - necessarily repressed to set the game in motion. But once and for all? Of course not. Hence the symptom - which insists.

To honor the symptom by giving it a name is to count to four - or vice-versa. It is because the symptom IS, that we need to count to four. It will not be contained in any balanced account of three, two, or one dimension. Is counting to four enough to recognize the plus-one? Is counting to four enough to count 4, 5, 6 .... to the infinite multiple. Lacan thought so. Culturally and clinically counting to four puts the whole structure of 3-D civilization into question: "Why is everything swallowed up in the most mundane kinship? Why do the people who come to speak to us in psychoanalysis speak to us about that? Why does psychoanalysis orient the people it calms towards memories of childhood? Why isn't it oriented towards an alliance with a poate...." (Lacan) If the analyst holds the place of uncertainty then he does not see the symptom as a failure of the symbolic order but something new - the emergence of a particular creation finding no outlet in the meaning of the Other - rather a meaningless signifier that cannot find its place in the collective agreement - seeking a minor language. If the symptom is the drive defined by the Other, then the sinthome is the drive signed, mimed, sung and danced.

"Language is first of all the simulacrum of the external resistance of others." (Klossowski) In that case the symptom is a particular resistance to that resistance - perhaps the real knocking at the window - the drive unconvinced of the symbolic. So instead the simulacrum: poetics as "a concerted action by man which puts into effect the treatment of the real by the symbolic" (Lacan) - provided that this symbolic is the larger semiotic of the simulacrum and certainly not the symbolic of the Other - rather the hyper-symbolic - not a preverbal one or two but a hyperverbal four. How is it that we can count to four if not by poetics or mathematics - letters and diagrams - signed by a proper name - a meaningless signifier.

"I try to say that art is beyond the symbolic. Art is a kind of know how, the symbolic at the heart of creating. I believe that there's more truth in the saying that is art than in any amount of blah-blah-blah. That doesn't mean that it's created in any old way. And it's not pre-verbal. It's verbal to the second power." (Lacan)

Brion Gysin and William Burroughs found that there were certain techniques of making a cut in the image(inary) and symbol(ic) which would reveal the real - allow the new to emerge. They were aware that they had stumbled on to certain practices used by occultists of other cultures - not to mention the dadaists and surrealists who were their peers. Here are poet-artists elucidating their practic. Of course one does not have to elucidate a practice for it to work as Lacan said of the unnamed analyts...

Act: Rub out the word
Result: Exteriorization from the body
How: At first automatic excercise
Act: Cut up - the word, the image
Result: T(un)ravel ... the real

"Mental automatism is normal! If one begins to say something to himself...why shouldn't that slip towards mental automatism? All the same...nature isn't as natural as all that. That's even what the rotting that we generally call culture consists of. Culture in a Petri dish, as I already mentioned to you." (Lacan)

Lacan reverses the stakes at the end. What's mad is normal and what's natural rots - along with culture - eventually it rots and the new feeds on the death of the old. The drive insists.

"The question is worth asking - at what point is one mad?" (Lacan)

Lacan reminded us of this by restoring the radical gesture of Freud to develop a process-oriented practice of listening, relating, and experiencing the event of subjectivity which places analysis beyond hard and soft science into the realm of quantum or transpersonal science. Where the observer and observed mutually affect one another an ethical-aesthetic paradigm prevails. The one-to-one encounter without the mediation of an abstract grand narrative of scientific truth, morality, or cultural/familial tradition emerging out of the analytic, political, and artistic discourses of the twentieth century is the continuation of Jung's recognition of "individuation" as the prime archetypal movement of modern man (beginning 2000 years ago with Christ). Individuation takes place in relation to the other as subject beyond object relations - still a rare occurrence in ontogenetic or phylogenetic development, but - as Jung showed - one in which the gnostics, alchemists and troubadors were involved before analysis. The postmodern promise of multiple selves often implies a rational ego. The so-called sane and insane selves may be equally alienating constructions of the Other in the patient - good and bad selves negotiated as identity with the therapeutic adjustor. To love and trust the essence, soul, or drive of the patient may allow it to emerge and construct itself of the pieces of the biological real and social symbolic as so many masks of jouissance in play with others. Lacan conceived of the end of analysis this way: one can do without the name of the father (of hierachical truth, law, or morality) provided that one can make use of it as symbolic construction linking one subject of the drive to another. Otherwise health and sanity are just the complement of illness and madness - and desire is entrapped by its need to transgress the law of constraint.

"Let us take the hatred toward one's father in Oedipal family tension: as we see again and again, this hatred disappears, and a new understanding for the father emerges, the moment the son, in effect, gets rid of the shadow of paternal authority - in short, it disappears the moment the son perceives his father no longer as the embodiment of his socio-symbolic function, but as a vulnerable subject 'unplugged' from it. It is in this sense that, in true love, I 'hate the beloved out of love': I 'hate' the dimension of his inscription into the socio-symbolic structure on behalf of my very love for him as a unique person." (Slavoj Zizek)

"The true problem is not (only) how to pass from preorganic matter to life but how life itself can break its autopoietic closure and ex-statically start to relate to its external Other (where this ex-static openness can also turn into the mortifying objectivization of Understanding). The problem is not Life but Death-in-LIfe ("tarrying with the negative") of the speaking organism." (Slavoj Zizek)

Freud discovered a self destructive tendency in his patients over and over which he eventually named the death drive. But what if this so called death drive was only the inevitable process of the return to the flow of a greater "life" beyond the limited ego-body. Ecstasy means to leave the stasis of the body - as the mystics of all times have consciously sought. For Lacan the jouissance or ecstasy of the drive remains in each of us as our symptomatic way of relating to the world beyond animal survival. From the beginning we develop in a body in relation to the Other (parents, culture, language) which leaves its particular imprint on us. The ecstatic beyond of the drive remains in us despite being conditioned in particular ways to survive in relative stasis. If the excess of death, spirit, mind, and the beyond is not honored with some cultural ritual (as Bataille showed in his social analysis) then it will manifest unconsciously in the form of physical, psychic, or social symptoms. In the symptom path to enlightenment we don't suppress them but follow them to the truth - the truth being the unique way in which each one enacts this desiring production - this affective subjectivization which ultimately leads beyond the body and the ego.

Physiological - Incorporation/Expulsion
Affective - Attraction/Repulsion
Mental - Unconscious/Conscious

How do the above continuums take part in a process of the real?

Let us examine the idea (presented by Libet, Penrose and others) that actions begin to take place for the human being - and can be registered neurally - before conscious awareness. What is this conscious awareness? Perhaps some observer watching the automaton. If the observer does not originate the action what does - will, drive, unconscious, God. What kind of veto power does this awareness have to alter the action. When people ask if the mind is in the body or if the body is in the mind I offer that for the human the mind(2) is in the body is in the mind(1). But what is mind(1) and how does it relate to mind(2).

Zizek discusses this in his new book on Deleuze and autopoesis:

"So, with regard to Libet's experiment, from the Freudian standpoint, the basic underlying problem is that of the status of the Unconscious: are there only conscious thoughts (my belated conscious decision to move a finger) and "blind" neuronal processes (the neuronal activity to move the finger), or is there also an unconscious "mental" process? And, what is the ontological status of this unconscious, if there indeed is one? Is it not that of a purely virtual symbolic order, of a pure logical presupposition (the decision had to be made, although it was never effectively made in real time)?" (Slavoj Zizek)

To take another position...

1. The materialist-nihilist approach sees all things - including consciousness - as an accidental epiphenomena - and challenges the real to exist. (Hysterical discourse of modern science)

2. The constructivist-monist approach presents a great chain of being or evolutionary ladder of becoming in an ordered universe. (University discourse of pagan holism)

3. The theological-dualist approach would posit the Tao, God, or Noumena as the substance and initiator of all things - humans being partial objects only capable of registering part of the phenomena. (Master discourse of cartesian monotheism)

4. Another position: autopoetic (Maturana, Varela), sovereign (Bataille), nondualist (Zen, Advaita), generic (Badiou).

(This position is related to Lacan's discouse of the analyst and Badiou's discourse of the mystic.)

Zizek goes to great lengths to push the Hegelian-Lacanian approach over into this position. In fleeting moments he - like Hegel and Lacan - counts to 4 - at which point counting ceases and becomes the zero-void of infinity. You can see it in the above quote. Zizek presents Hegel's concept of positing the presupositions as a conscious (retroactive) assumption of the creation of the present after the fact. He recognizes that this is what Lacan made of Freud's practice of analysis. Not the conscious of passive awareness (now I know about my symptom) but the conscious as the decision, the embrace, the autopoetic bootstrapping - the event that dissolves the unconscious set of presuppositions and founds a new set of logics - topologics - or shiftings of the symbolic relations of relations of ... (void) - which is the real. This is Badiou's event and its categorical morphisms. This is Deleuze and Guattari's fold and its schizoanalytic diagrams. This is the ultimate artistic and political act - a way of recarving the real - the way a set of molecules form a membrane out of differences of speed and solidity and create a cell (Reich, Varela), the way a body holds these cells in symphony apart from the cycle of exchange (Freud, Ho), the way self-reflective consciousness undermines the presuppositions of the body to become more than human (Nietzsche, Steiner). Bataille sought to pick up where Hegel left off - at the point of his becoming mad with the completion of the phenomenology of mind. From seminar 11 on, Lacan stalked the position of the subject at the end of analysis to the point where colleagues proclaimed his symptomatic topological practice "a dialogue of confusion." Though he looked to Joyce for an example of the new man, he might have looked to Nietzsche had he been of a different inclination.

"Such is the world as it appeared to Nietzsche under the monumental aspect of Turin: a discontinuity of intensities that are given names only through the interpretation of those who receive his messages; the latter still represent the fixity of signs whereas in Nietzsche this fixity no longer exists. That the fluctuations of intensities were able to assume the opposite name to designate themselves - such is the miraculous irony. We must believe that this coincidence of the phantasm and the sign has existed for all time, and that the strength required to follow the detour through the intellect was "superhuman". Now that the agent "Nietzsche" is destroyed, there is a festival for a few days, a few hours, or a few instants - but it is a sacrificial festival. (Pierre Klossowski)

Alain Badiou "Short Treatise on Philosophy"
Georges Bataille "The Accursed Share"
Gilles Deleuze "The Fold"
Sigmund Freud "Project for a Scientific Psychology"
Felix Guattari "Schizoanalytic Cartographies"
Mae-Wan Ho "The Rainbow and the Worm"
Pierre Klossowski "Nietzsche and the Vicious Circle"
Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela "Autopoesis and Cognition"
Friedrich Nietzsche "The Genealogy of Morals"
Wilhelm Reich "The Cancer Biopathy"
Rudolf Steiner "Fundamental of Therapy"
Francisco Varela "The Emergent Self"
Slavoj Zizek "Organs without Bodies"

For Verhaeghe mutilation, anorexia, addiction, panic and other symptoms can be described as "actualpathological" attempts to deal with the drive where psychic processing is unable to create "psychopathology."

If we return to Freud's early work we can find the elaboration of actual neurosis versus psychoneurosis. Verhaeghe links this to the early transformation of the bodily drive in relation to the response of the Other and sketches out a map of how and why a more bodily response to the core anxiety-depression cycle (similar to Klein) develops when there is no imaginary and symbolic elaboration (or mentalization). In my work I have found a continuum from physiopathology to neuropathology to psychopathology that links medicine and psychoanalysis to understand the evolving human bio-neuro-psychic metabolizing immune process.

After reaching conclusions similar to Verhaeghe some years ago, I decided to undertake training and research that would allow me to work directly with the drive and create a "Clinic of the Real" which could treat neurological, immune, psychosomatic and borderline syndromes from an analytic position. Verhaeghe calls for this in his book when he describes Lacanian discourse theory and how to act from the position of the analyst in therapy (or medicine) while not yet being able to perform classical psychoanalytic methods - because in such patients psychic processing is not yet available. I try to create an environment where subjectivization or "subject amplification" is facilitated by the analytic position while working on the bodily drive with methods that do not override and suppress (pharmaceuticals) but support and detoxify (homeopathy, naturopathy, acupuncture) the deposited physical and psychic intrusions of the Other. Sometimes patients who begin here end up transforming their physical or "actual" symptoms into psychic ones and undertaking a more "pure" analysis.

In Lacan's later work he focuses on the drive caught between bodily jouissance and the desire of the Other (mother, culture, language,etc.). The development of gender and sexual difference in the social will reenact this more primal split of being human, such that the "choice" of gender is a form of defense against primordial jouissance. The hysteric's body and relation to the Other is "carved up" in such a way that this choice is far from clear. Paradoxically, Lacan believes this is closer to the analyst's position than most "normal" neurotics in its lack of fixation - to the extent that analysis must often hystericize a rigid character structure to achieve a new breakthrough.

The case is very different for "borderline" or "actualpathological" conditions

What Verhaeghe calls "subject amplification" or I call subjectivization refers to the original relation between the subject which comes to be through signifiers of the Other (parents, culture). In a case in which this did not take place and bodily jouissance or anxiety remains at the level of actual physio- or neuro-pathology (since it could not be processed into psycho-pathology), one may recreate a relation in which new imaginary-symbolic signifiers are offered - not imposed - from what Lacan calls the position of the analyst.

In investigating the historical reconstruction of psychosomatic symptoms such as neurasthenia, psycheasthenia, possession, delusions, borderline syndromes, autoimmune dysfunction, addiction, panic, chronic fatigue, ADD..., I found (as the periods of elipsis indicate) no clear cut gap where so called physiological medical symptoms and psychiatric symptoms divide, so I have tried to develop an Analytic Medicine alongside "pure" analysis. The techniques used must be practiced within Lacan's position of the analyst.

With homeopathic medicine and acupuncture we are able to contain symptoms without suppressing them and producing toxic side effects. Simultaneously we offer new signifiers for patients to process the experience of illness - what Verhaeghe calls "subject amplification." Most important the therapeutic relationship is made from the position of the analyst - not the medical master or medical knowledge of the symptom. This leaves room for the demand for analysis to emerge through further imaginary-symbolic elaboration and the creation of new subjectivities and new social links.

[Evolution-Purusha]
^
| Spiritual (?)
| -----------
| Mental-Egoic (+below=Humans)
| Emotional-Astral (+below=Animals)
| Vital-Etheric (+below=Plants)
| Physical-Dense (+below=Matter)
v
[Involution-Prakriti]

The question of what energy is comes up a lot in my lectures - does it belong at a certain stage on the integral yoga continuum - or does it encapsulate everything. It depends on what you mean.

I like to think of Prana, Qi or Vital Energy as corresponding to the Etheric or Vital body - the layer between Dense-Physical and Astral-Emotional, Mental-Egoic, and higher Spiritual layers. Of course we could call them all Energy but this is just a matter of semantics. Clinically, scientifically, and experientially, I'll say why this makes a difference.

The more superordinate levels of mind and emotion affect the vital energy and its physical constituents. Of course a knife can cut your skin or toxic food eat away your insides but the more subtle yet superordinate level of vitality should heal this through the "immune system," with a little physical help if necessary (emergency medicine). Unfortunately modern allopathic medicine is nihilistic-materialist and intrudes on the healing process and deprives the mind of its power to heal and to be, making it more dependent.

The biochemistry of cells has to be organized by the kind of vital etheric field memories discovered by Burr and Sheldrake. However, the mental and emotional layers of humans affect these for both health and disease - this is the placebo effect, the power of prayer and meditation, and psychosomatic illness and healing demonstrated in hypnosis and analysis in Freud. Much of our illness today depends on the depletion of vital energy and intrusion on the functioning of its fields. We have now seen clinical and scientific proof of how the mind dis-eases and heals matter - we just don't really believe it enough yet - and that is what "matters". A positive affirmation or prayer or someone else's hypnotic suggestion (in therapy) usually is not enough to really change the underlying BELIEF.

Prana "underlies" physical and mental events but as a backdrop or transitional substance for the insubstantial power of mind to translate or manifest in the theatre of physical force. This is important, for while acupuncture, qi gong, hatha yoga, and pranayamic breathing will heal the L-fields of our bodily organs (and this is already a huge step over materialist medicine) we really have to get to the level of mind to make larger longer changes. At present mind is usually controlled from below by materialist belief systems programmed by family, society, media and institutions, but when mind recognizes itself for what it is it turns the tables on the physical. Some psychoanalytic, philosophical and artistic movements of the past century pushed this as far as it would go. Now it's a matter of crossing the abyss to the other side - actually experiencing the superpositioned wave of the transpersonal infinite and sitting in the sovereign transformer of mind which collapses this beyond into what it chooses.

This is a powerful kind of involution or actually evolution towards involution - transcendence in the service of regression. Playing.

With specific reference to neuroscience, Roger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff describe the quantum coherence effects of the microtubules of cell cytoskeletons which operate at a more subtle yet more superordinate level of will and consciousness to the more linear discrete operations of neuronal firing. In their research they were able to disrupt simple external tasks with mild electrical current through the brain too subtle to effect the actual neurochemical transmission.

In my own doctoral research I argued that the quantum coherence of the cytoskeleton was able to translate nonlinear transpersonal events of consciousness and will before the further linear specification of neural mapping which requires the later (ontogenetically and phylogenetically) developed sheathed neurons for many of the logical symbolic behaviors which our particular external culture prizes.

Indeed I saw how the demyelinization accompanied decreasing ability to perform specific motor and memory tasks and increasing free associative behavior which was radically honest to the discomfort and/or amusement of others. With very little judgement this person entered childlike or mystical states which appeared to be pleasant. The negativity or guilt was in those who were observing.

Your comments neurologically parallel Aulagnier's findings on the creation of schizophrenia from violent interpretation and intrusion which robs the ability of the psyche or self to evolve. The brain simultaneously is intruded upon and develops autoimmune defenses. Lack of the culturally normal specificity of tasks, pain from self-destruction, and fear of external judgement are often accompanied by heightened creative and paranormal abilities which have not been lost the way they are through normal development in this culture. This has led to an unfortunate dualism among those struggling for an enlightened approach to schizophrenia in many ways. There are BOTH biological causes and effects AND psychosocial causes and effects AND they are structurally coupled. One can have BOTH sympathy for the pain of "schizophrenic" subjectivity AND struggle for an understanding about how cultural judgement and medical labelling of "schizophrenia" as a disease caused by some bad gene or microbe perpetuates an inability to see how it develops and heal it.

For more general background reading I recommend.

Roger Penrose "Shadows of the Mind"

Wilhelm Reich "The Cancer Biopathy"

Klaus Dumke "AIDS: The Deadly Seed"

Ernest Rossi "The Psychobiology of Gene Expression"

Mark Seem "Bodymind Energetics"

Piera Aulagnier "The Violence of Interpretation"

I recently read what I felt was a good description of the effect of drugs by a spiritual practitioner, mystic, and scientist. Drugs don't add anything - they cancel out the lower vibrations on the scale temporarily so that one only experiences the higher ones. My own addition to this is that drugs and practices can alter the semiotic-somatic filters which screen out the infinite multiple real (or "God"). The problem is that when they wear off that taste of elevated joy and consciousness is gone followed by an often deeper depression, disappointment or entrenchment in linear cause-effect, matter-energy space-time existence. Those moments cannot produce lasting change if one returns to the same filters held in place by the cultural symbolic order.

Which is why I see the political-economic institutions and cultural-linguistic media as the prime block to further development and healing. I am a communist of old old fashioned sort. The young Marx's experience of alienation in the industrial exchange of work and consumption was nothing but the natural development of the spiritual principles of christianity and buddhism. This could never be mandated through enforced state socialism but must develop from the individual experiences like those of the post-sixties generation toward new forms of groups - the communities of radical sovereignty based on nonjudgmental unconditional love, individual desires, and the impossibility of the gift.

In Harris Coulter's 3000 page 3000 year history of medicine in the West "Divided Legacy" he describes the common priniciple running through it of a dialectic between "empiricist" and "rationalist" medicine. Empiricist could also be called vitalist or spiritualist in that in every case the physician with humility believes there is something larger going on in illness that he cannot master - whether this is the mathematical infinite, the cosmos, or god. Empiricist medicine includes those approaches that intuitively develop hypotheses and test them out clinically, learn from the results, and remain open to the truth. Rationalism attempts to formulate complete answers, to master the truth with human knowledge and fit the anomalous experiences of individual patients into those fundamentalist beliefs.

From the time of the pre-Socratic and Hippocratic physicians to the early Roman Galenic period (app. 500 bc - 500 ad) empiricism diminished while rationalism grew. The next 1000 years of the dark ages was of course dominated by extreme rationalist fundamentalism until Paracelcus restored vitalist empiricism to serious practice and study - although there were always empiricist naturopaths underground attacked as witches. This tradition has been growing ever since - reaching a high point through the 1800s with Hahnemann's development of homeopathic medicine, and the development of structural-energetic methods of osteopathic medicine and chiropractic medicine - based on traditional Oriental medicine. Simultaneously, the scientific technology has reinforced the fundamentalist rationalism of the biochemical mechanical paradigm.

The 20th century saw the application of political-economic control structures made up of the guild controlling AMA and high-profit pharmaceutical and HMO corporations to maintain a monopoly on a profit-producing, rationalist-mind assuaging medical industrial complex expelling empiricism to the margins. Simultaneously what is left of the "free" market has allowed some truth and freedom to emerge so that patients now spend more out of pocket on holistic "alternative" empirical medicine then on orthodox medicine, but this schism remains to the detriment of all.

Osteopathic medicine was absorbed into the allopathic model in America, losing its essence - accept for the rebirth of craniosacral therapy through Upledger. Chiropractic medicine survived only by becoming a minor specialty and shedding its holistic empiricism. Naturopathic medicine is becoming a recognized approach only by becoming increasingly allopathic and rationalist. Even Oriental medicine which has remained a holistic vitalist empiricism throughout half the world for millenia is at this moment threatened. While Oriental and Western allopathic medical schools and hospitals coexist side by side in the East, the seduction of Western rationalism and profit is strong.

Homeopathic medicine which had its own hospitals and medical schools, had more proven success treating epidemic diseases than allopathic medicine throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, and developed most of the medicinals which allopathy has adulterated in the laboratory for its coercive formulas was nearly completely erased - still now transmitted only through apprenticeship, autodidacticism, and small seminars.

My Practice:

As a result of my previous and ongoing philosophical, poetic, psychoanalytic, and spiritual practice, coming from the point of view of the infinite unknown as it unfolds through the spirit, psyche, mind, and body integrally and continuously, I have studied and empirically practiced the best of what exists of holistic vitalist medicine from traditional Taoist Chinese, Ayurvedic Indian, and Buddhist Tibetan forms of Oriental medicine up to the modern forms of homeopathic, naturopathic, energetic, and psychosomatic medicine, and I have come to the conclusion that the greatest difficulty in helping patients heal is the structural institutions and media which maintain the belief systems and practices of a medicine that continues to hurt people more than it helps. Allopathic medicine has been proven to kill more people yearly than any other disease (garynull.com). Is this ignorance or destructive sadism? Sometimes it is hard to tell one from the other. The unconscious death drive relieves us of the burden of cocreative survival and existence in the plurality of worlds within worlds of the multiverse. The simultaneous fear and relief that we are only this material body and its accidental epiphenomenon of neural consciousness and that we will thus cease to exist when it dies supports a cynical, defensive, nihilistic, abusive approach to life that permeates our healthcare system with as much or more grave consequences than our ecology or government, yet few recognize it. Activists cry out for more heath care coverage without being aware that the treatment they are receiving contributes to their ignorance, illness, debilitation, and control. Paradoxically those without health coverage are better off as they do not have the money to have unnecessary toxic procedures and pharmaceuticals applied to them for the sake of fear and profit.

Reckeweg and some European homeopathic physcians demonstrated the homeotherapeutic healing modality and the dangers of allopathic suppression biochemically in the laboratory as well as clinically. Bacteria is often part of the healing process. Bacteria colonize various areas of the body - especially the digestive tract - with important health purposes. When there is a disturbance of a certain terrain of the body there is also a change in bacteria. Often bacteria help to digest toxins along with the facilitation of the excretion and inflammation phases of the immune system healing process. They showed how antibiotics, anti-inflammatories, aspirin, and other common allopathic drugs interrupt the natural healing process, kill beneficial bacteria, block enzymes, suppress excretion which expels toxins, suppress inflammation which burns up viruses and other toxins. In this case the original toxins - including natural and chemical allergens from food and environment and the body's own waste products - remain in the body and have to be walled off in the deposition phase. For example suppressing diarrhea and colitis with antibiotics and other allopathic pharmaceuticals can actually produce an abscess. Furthermore, the toxins remaining in the body as a result of suppressing rather than supporting the natural homeotherapeutic process of healing, and the new toxins from the pharmaceuticals create mutant proteins, wild peptides and other antigens which circulate the tissues and enter the cells altering the genetic expression, causing progressive auto-immune reactions. They can even enter the cells and alter genes. Perhaps this is the basis of Hahnemann's discover of the basic miasms or disease tendencies which he saw passed on from generation to generation in the human species.