Spirit and Society

(EXCERPT FROM PRIDE)

1.

Body is the driving force of personality in the world. If it is overshadowed, slowed down and stiffened by other peculiarities, then it will not have the power to manifest them articulately and synergistically in the world. Often the body is susceptible to an awkward character, or to some ugly trait that creeps in too transparently and openly through self-expression. In the introductory book we cited three examples that showed us how and what it means for the subject, together with the body, to get lost in the mixture of prevailing pathological peculiarities, powers, impressions and lights. Περι dissected θάνεια, distributed it among the peculiarities depending on their object-around-object formation. Θάνεια was spilling out uncontrollably from the framework of a peculiarity. In its dense “plasma” it captured, hid and disfigured other peculiarities, local constellations and configurations. Or it turned them into things around by highlighting individual peculiarities without clarifying their identity. All the examples, some to a lesser, some to a greater degree, some continuously, some in waves, acted and carried out systematic practices that looked more like ugly parodic habits-procedures than measured acrobatics. They followed a predictable trajectory that was confusing and unpleasant, although it clearly had a deliberate course. Whichever of the subjects we choose, he will have to fight to make the body independent and allow it to articulate the other characteristics, so that it can enable the subject to manifest himself articulately and normally in the world. Therefore, we will take a paradigmatic subject, a subject that represents weakness in general, regardless of whether it exists in a lighter form like fragilitas (vulnerability) or in a more severe form like dissolutio (breakdown). We will experiment with the paradigmatic subject. We will put him on the rails of narcissistic transformation to see if self-love will offer a formula that will pull the subject out of the circulus vitiosus of weakness.

Self-love is to the subject’s psychic world what the body is to his presence in the world. It stimulates the elements of the soul and at the same time tries to give them direction and organize them. First thing that preoccupies the narcissist, in addition to the affect of being in love with himself, is the feeling that he is master and that he is master of something. He has no concept of domination. His feeling is vague and yet it manifests itself as a powerful impersonal impulse. The arousal prompts the subject to immediately identify self-love, the feeling of dominance, and himself with the body. He senses that the body is only instrument that can satisfy this impulse or urge, although he does not know its form, nor does he know what it can prompt him to do. Self-love and the sense of domination arise as a counterbalance to the weaknesses that manifest themselves through peculiarities and devalue self-expression. They are deep reactive drives; affective forms of disappointment in oneself, and later, in others and in existence. They cannot take over the body and encourage it to behave confidently and courageously while the subject acts disorganized in the atmosphere of a phobic circumstance. But once alone, the subject calms the storm of negative emotions and compensates for the psychic damage with the help of the two pseudo-dispositional drives. The drives are constantly reactive. But the new safe and harmless atmosphere encourages the subject to treat them as peculiarities inherent in him in every life occasion and as subjective affects that he has adapted to all life environments equally. Often, the experienced circumstance throws him into extreme agony, he cries bitterly, he curses his fate. But at the same time, his heart is flooded with wild ferocity, and an undirected need for revenge. All the apoplectic impulses suddenly awaken in him. Thus, the subject gains a stormy motivation to face future challenges, but cannot visualize his goals.

In the absence of any meaningful goals of domination, he turns to the body. The body replaces the necessary representation. The subject attributes all possible future victories to it. The body is perceived as an end in itself that will enable him to achieve a series of fateful and indisputable victories. Finally, a catastrophic fusion occurs. The complex representation of dominance, which must include numerous strategic-operational perspectives, is equated with the body, which is itself a relief figure-of-flesh; a framed biological substance. The body is the central instrument, but the subject puts it in the place of the intentional representation of domination. His potential adequate movements crowd out extensive operational initiatives from the representation. The body as an object replaces the goal and intentions that are embodied in the imagination as structured and implemented actions. With this, the subject again and in a new way distances himself from the ancient understanding of pride which implies περι and θάνεια to be perfectly harmonized. Peculiarities, all without exception, should crystallize to objects around other objects, so that the light can spread evenly in them and illuminate their perfect synergistic cooperation. Pride, according to the ancient mind, should become the epitome of such a perfectly harmonized impression. The subject must consciously encourage the comprehensive impression, maintain it and nurture it in order to be proud in the true sense of the word. The paradigmatic subject, on the other hand, introduces dissonance into the structure of self-expression, by identifying the presented overcoming of the challenge with the potent figure of the body. Moreover, he has not coped with the manifestations of weakness. He artificially compensates for them without fighting them, he compensates for them by running away from them. He fabricates victory in the most primitive way possible. This drastically worsens the general situation. The subject emphasizes the body radically, thanks to self-love and a vague sense of domination. But this does not solve any of the problems. But this does not solve any of the problems. He does not privatize the disturbed peculiarities, he does not use their extreme manifestations to his advantage, i.e. to perceive their functional value, to tame and appropriate them. On the contrary, he runs away from the initial problem and adds new contradictions to it, which will worsen it when it arises again. The subject gets drunk with his own body. The body does not connect him with the intentional representation of domination, but elevates him to an end in itself that he has seemingly already achieved. He compresses the operative representation in the body. He reduces the organized actions towards domination to potential bodily dynamics. All this mini-ritual confusion is due to the fact that the subject cannot sublimate the feeling of domination. He knows that he must compensate for defeats with victories. But the concept of domination that animates his motives is so distant from him that his motivations turn into a desire to banish the problems of disturbed behavior¹ from his life. The body, its physical structure and its physical strength, are what most reminds the subject of the possibility of domination and dominating as such, and at the same time supplies him with the most primitive anticipations of domination. By transforming the representation into an apoleptic entity² the subject provides the object with its own destiny. If the subject creates an intentional representation full of operations for domination, he will reorient his life from space to the objective goal. If he remains at this, the subject will become increasingly infected with primitive pride. He will live simply self-confidently. From every pore of the same self-expression self-love will shine through and it will erupt most when the subject stands still. This pride will last for a while, especially in the life of the aggressive-vengeful subject, until the pathogen attacks him, and tension, apoplectic urges and nausea enslave his being in its entirety. This subjective state cannot take root in the schizoaffective-neurotic. He is too vulnerable, fragile and weak to place himself in a superior position while he is thrown into the world. He experiences weakness strikingly, even then it does not attack him at all. However, the schizoaffective-neurotic subject has a greater chance of making pride subtle and accepting it as the existing inner value, on condition that he gets rid of weakness. To be subtle, the subject must be suitably soft. Appropriate softness encourages subtlety. Cowardly inferiority is an exaggerated softness that needs to be smoothed out and reinforced by merging with feelings and self-experiences of domination. If the subject constitutes pride as the ancient Greeks understood it, he will appropriate a highly sophisticated affect. This affect will smooth out all the shortcomings of behavior. In fact, περιθάνεια is one of the semantic perspectives of what we call vainglory, that is, highly sophisticated, or subtle pride. The subject can become vainglorized only if he succeeds in realizing it and thereby identifying himself with the ego-ideal. The ego-ideal is network of challenges that will satisfy self-love and confirm the feeling of domination. We will universally call this type of challenges ego-forms). In this sense, περιθάνεια simplifies this normative framework. It reduces it to the aesthetic relations between the peculiarities and the impressions they leave with their harmony or disharmony. It is a measure of how much the subject manages to become vainglorized. The subject will be visible from the perspective of περιθάνεια if he succeeds in reaching the self-ideal. The more successfully the Ego-ideal is attained, the more the fundamental qualities of Ego-expression are harmonized. The subject who has reached, or is realizing, the Ego-ideal manages to articulate self-love, smooths out the feeling of domination, and provides the body with the place that naturally belongs to it in the intentional representation of dominion challenges, that is, in the representation of Ego-forms. Challenges turn into forms of the Ego, because the subject attributes every inch of progress to his Ego predisposed for domination. The body plays a huge role in this, but the operation of domination cannot be reduced to the body alone. In fact, the Ego is born and replaces the body immediately after the subject has created a representation of dominance for himself and begins to anticipate more thoroughly the essence of domination. Before that, narcissism is as opaque as the feeling of domination. The Ego does not emerge from its affective pool until the subject begins to create an operational representation; until it finds its place in the expanse of possibilities of domination. The ego begins to self-identify and stand out from the sea of ​​states, after seeing itself in the mirror of operational needs for dominance.

In order to continue to develop (at least this is what the trajectory of narcissistic development suggests), the subject must eradicate the first delusion: body cannot replace and place itself above the representation of domination. When confronted with the stereotypical event, the subject’s body is lost in the rainforest of antagonistic peculiarities. Once alone, the subject turns the body into a representation of dominance. Such a biologically present representation does not teach the subject how to dominate, but shows him how strong he is without truly revealing to him the essence of domination. Either he traps the possibilities of domination in the experience of the representation of the domineering body, or he immerses the body in inferior affective states while or after surrounding himself with worldly presences. The first situation gives him hope that, at least, he has started to draw confidence from somewhere and become mentally strong. Despite this, his embryonic approach is only a pleasant delusion. It figuratively ruins his dignity where it should be most real, in order to give him a phantom dignity that he will enjoy without real effects. His coexistence with the representation of the domineering body, that is, with the body transformed into an acute representation, brings the subject into a situation of extreme loss-of-experience-of-himself. So much so that he will be equated with schizophrenics who experience the entire body aphasically³. The subject experiences himself extremely and hyperhedonic⁴ because he identifies the domineering body with the representation, and the representation of the body with himself. But his feelings are not based on real merits, events and consequences. He does not make operational plans, nor does he materialize imaginary representations. Therefore, he loses more of his self-experience in an unfavorable circumstance than he enjoys hyperhedonic solitude, identifying himself with the sublimation of the body and the representation. Thus, he deepens the mental crisis: he hyperstimulates the inferior states and gets the body stuck in them more and more. Finally, he suffers the consequences of the integral bodily aphasia characteristic of schizophrenics. While acting, or existing in the environment that frightens him, the subject does not feel his body as if he were in darkness. The aphasic schizophrenic has a similar experience. Both forget what the function of their bodies is, despite the fact that the subject completely surrenders to systematic practice and burns in action, and the aphasic schizophrenic numbs and does not use his body because he does not feel it as part of his being.

2.

The aphasic subject cannot control his body unless he learns the functions that are symmetrical to its natural use. The subject focuses so much on the conceived pathological urges and encourages them through immanent concentration that his bodily self-awareness gradually fades away. The extinguished bodily self-awareness plays the role of darkness, with the difference that the subject automates bodily actions, practices them unconsciously in collusion with oppressive affects. The dense obscure practice stifles bodily self-experiences. Both are in similar states of blindness and numbness. But the holistic aphasic state forces the schizophrenic to learn and repeat. The repressive system of affects forces the subject to feel his body less and less, although the body reveals the inner pathological influences to the subject and receives their blows. The aphasic schizophrenic can learn to move and operate with the body if he sees it with his own eyes, if he learns by heart the scheme of basic movements and actions and if he apperceive the model of action. He cannot practice the learned pattern and the apperceived model spontaneously and instinctively. He must first recall them, re-study their mechanics, devote time to the technique they represent. He cannot introject them, but he can relatively quickly restore their function. The body completely, repeatedly, and always depends on the representational patterns of functioning. His learning is ever refreshing and ever restoring. They help him artificially and illusory to get out of the state of complete sensory disintegration only to forget what he was doing the next time he collapses in the darkness. The body is rehabilitated as long as it remembers the functional patterns. After that he falls into a deep lethargy again. It does not exist either as a hylomorphic object, which the soul anticipates as part of the subject’s mental apparatus; nor as a physical object which the subject perceives as part of objective reality. The aphasic schizophrenic observes the gradual activity of another body and gradually moves his own according to it. The foreign body embodies the objective mechanical pattern. The aphasic body repeats the pattern imitating the other body. While he repeats the practical pattern successfully, the bodily self-experiences and the sense of the body are not restored. He knows that he is successfully completing the work without referring to his body. It remains incognito, despite the fact that it is the central being-at-hand which rushes ahead of itself to accomplish the task. The aphasic schizophrenic perceives and recognizes only the trajectory of practical development and the dynamic image of development that the trajectory represents. Simply put, while repeating the body pattern, the schizophrenic does not feel the body. For him, it is not even “something around.” The body as a material agent of action does not exist. It is equated with the vivid pattern of practice. It is depersonalized in the practice along with other complementary elements. For him there is no order of objects that cooperate, but a dynamic picture that shows the moments of action inseparably. The schizophrenic has a holistic representation of function, trajectory, and action. In doing so, he compensates for the lack of holistic bodily experience. Practical objects around other coherent objects (including the body) are encapsulated, i.e., melted beyond recognition, into the gestalt pattern of action. If he were aware of the body, the practical pattern would help him perceive the body pre-reflexively and self-reflexively regardless of whether he would feel it sensorily. Sensory numbness results in mental blindness.

The subject does not have to be literally put in a dungeon to forget the function of his body. In a dungeon we cannot see our own body. The effect of a darkness symbolizes the literal inability of the subject to feel, see and recognize his body. While we are in a darkness we know what our body is for and how we can use it. Darkness does not abolish experience and standard anticipation. The problem is that in conditions of darkness there is no appropriate occasion that will help us to use the body productively. The aphasic schizophrenic is deprived of the opportunity to use the body productively because he does not feel it, sees it but does not recognize it as a real object, even though the object is visible. In this sense, darkness is symbolic. The potential of the right hemisphere of the brain that serves to produce gestalt projections and receive gestalt contents is not damaged⁵. For the normal subject, his body is something that wanders around with him automatically. The consequences for the body will be consequences for the subject as well. Being placed-in-a-symbolic-darkness does not favor the schizophrenic with the property of experiencing the body as something around, because he does not treat it as a real co-entity. For something to have a contradiction, or incognito mode, it must at least exist and be acknowledged as such regardless of experience. The situation destroys the existential value of the body. The schizophrenic person is not oriented by how the body performs the stimulated actions and practical patterns but by an integral approach that includes all aspects. The body is not only not completely disjunctive, but it is completely dissolved. It is a trivial element of the practical pattern, or it is a relative vivid unit in the picture of action. The symbolic darkness breaks down the appearance of equiexistent peculiarities⁶; suddenly cuts off the peculiarities from the image of reality and their various synergistic connections; disjunctive and conjunctive. The aphasic schizophrenic does not know that the body is a body that functions this way or that. He learns to recognize and use various practical processes. Since he has no direct experience of his role, but only of what the role emphasizes, he does not experience the body either as “something around” nor as a virtual representation of itself. The body is not a vague concrete object whose operational role the schizophrenic must master in order to clarify the representation of his own body. The schizophrenic is like a pure mind that sets material processes in motion only in accordance with their schematic nature: by adopting the pictorial laws of imitation or by repeating the mechanical patterns of behavior. In this case, the behavior represents the patterns, not the body. The body is a huge functional entity at the center of action on which everything depends, but which is neglected due to brutal pathophysiological disorders and anatomical-optical damages in the brain.

Each of the three types of subjects from the previous book allows the affects to drown the body in their machine. The aggressive-vengeful subject withdraws into himself, but focuses on the presence of the superior other and on his own failures that prevent him from effectively opposing him. In a moment of someone else’s masterful exaltation, he throws out the anger he has collected within himself, becomes ecstatic, falls into a craze state and uses the frenzy technique⁷ peculiar to him. Feeling of bodily self-awareness is transformed into indecent ecstatic behavior. He breaks the sensory connection with the body, despite the fact that he bases all aggressive outbursts on the massive actuality of the body. He feels the body strongly and sharply but forgets the fundamental sense because he devotes himself entirely to aggressive outbursts and their ecstatic influences. Due to the weak bodily self-experience, his bodily self-awareness also weakens. He completely identifies with the web of appearance-speech peculiarities. The “three-in-one” subject establishes a balance between bodily self-experience and a state of identification with the environment he observes. While he is considering his surroundings lucidly, he is partly united with the impressions he receives from them and with their natural influences. But the lucid character trait does not allow him to forget about himself. It connects him with his flexible Ego. This continues until the circumstance surprises him unpleasantly. After that, his harmonious self-reflexive relationship with the environment completely and as such collapses into a feeling of loss and confusion. The subject literally embodies his own disavowal. The body helps us to see this. But for the subject the body itself plays no role, because his self-consciousness is extremely disintegrated and destroyed in the vortex of rapid and chaotic forlornness in the world. The body of the schizoaffective neurotic disperses into the environment, while the affective structure of the symptoms grows and develops. But since the subject cannot truly separate itself from its body, extreme dispersion is a borderline state. The subject feels the state strongly at the moment of complementary pathogenic self-expression⁸ of the peculiarities. Self-manifestation is not consistent because it tends to fully decompose organic processes through the disjunctive relations of peculiarities.

Thus, we have typologized the disintegrative relationship of subjects with their bodies to show once again that they can form a paradigmatic pattern. Now, we will connect this pattern to the complex challenges that arise as the subject attempts to fight for its place in the world.

The first amateur mistake that every psychotype who loves himself infinitely and has an immense need to dominate (knowing the bitter state of extreme inferiority) makes is that he identifies the body with the representation of domination, that is, he turns the body itself into a representation of dominance. If he loves himself infinitely, the subject will have an immense need to truly dominate. If he loves himself infinitely, the subject will have an immense need to truly dominate. Most often, personality disorders arise from excessive self-love. It introjects hypochondriac ideals into the subject’s being, until reality shakes their ideal image. By the hypochondriacal ideal we mean the immanent feeling of superiority, which arises from eudaemonic self-experiences. The subject feels like a master by the very fact of existing. Body is experienced as a presence-on-himself that has an a priori domination value. Thus, primitive pride infects the subject even before he has had any experience with the world. The primitive pride rooted in the immanent feeling of domination forces him to forget that he is not ready to face the world. The fall at the first life exam is so severe that the bitter experience forms embryonic and ineradicable pathogens. In fact, the subject’s urge to identify the body with the representation of dominance is a retrograde act. The subject tries to save self-love and restore the immanent feeling of domination with its help. He remembers that he had previously underestimated the body. Before acting retrogradely, the subject is proud, in love with himself and feels like a master, in an aphasic way. His body is present on him. The subject is a hidden entity (a subject in the true sense of the word) that draws narcissistic-dominance experiences from this self-referential peculiarity. But although the body is self-referential, at the same time, it does not have a great affective value in itself. The subject experiences his body and experiences himself as a body constantly, sharply and directly due to ecstatic feelings (which can also be subtle). His bodily self-awareness is expressed thanks to them. This expressiveness originates from the deep personal states of the subject that erupt from within. The subject recognizes his body as a presence-on-himself because the narcissistic-dominance feelings and states characterize it as a formally prevailing peculiarity. The body prevails formally because it stands on the front lines in\against the world. But if the subject experiences the body as a formally-dominant feature, it will blur the consciousness of it as a presence-on-the-subject. While the subject perceives the body as a presence-on-himself, he makes a delineation between himself and the world. Bodily self-awareness is born after the subject focuses his consciousness on the body. Bodily self-awareness grows by revealing the body as a presence-on-the-subject. But bodily self-awareness does not reveal this mode of the body in the primordial narcissist by itself. This mode of the body is also not revealed as a consequence of the synchronized cooperation between the consciousness of the value of the body and the ecstatic narcissistic-dominance moods. After suffering, the subject returns to the body. He experiences it intensely in order to transform it into a presence-on-himself. Before that, the body as a presence-on-oneself, or presence-on-the-subject is completely dependent on narcissistic-dominance moods. They even dull bodily self-awareness; they energize and spiritualize the body; they directly transform it into one of the airy elements of their ecstatic influence.

While enduring the narcissistic-dominance moods, the subject feels free. He provides himself with space for personal maneuver, until he is confronted with the painful experience. Empathizing with the body as with a representation of dominance throws him into a dead end, because the body in which operational potentials and visions are annulled, destroys the perspectives of domination and narcissistic impulses. The subject will focus his consciousness on the body and will experience it as an absolute domineering entity. Bodily self-awareness will grow so much that it will allow the subject to experience the body to the extreme as a presence-on-himself. But this presence-on-oneself will have no other function than to strengthen the subject’s endless belief (delusion) that he is the master par excellence. He will lose the connection between the world and himself. The body should have connected the essentially operational potentials and the action in the world. In this coagulation, the subject would have found the meaning of his difference with the world. The body as a representation of dominance absorbs the narcissistic-dominance experiences, but they die like a nerve in a tooth whose pulses extinguished naturally and spontaneously. Is there a way out, and if so, what is it?

3.

The paradigmatic subject is preoccupied with the body that has become a representation of dominance. He experiences the body strongly as a presence-on-himself because the representation of dominance allows him to empathize deeply with the bodily self-awareness. While acquiring the idea of ​​the body, the subject sharpens the sense of his own body: he intensifies interoceptive experiences. They capture for him the immediate relief figure-of-flesh; they show him that the body is not only a presence-on-himself, but a presence that belongs to him originally precisely because it is on him and he experiences it as if it were on him. Thus, bodily self-awareness grows and at the same time sharpens. This systematics, or local procedure, is a specific act of fixation on the body. The subject does not focus on the body and does not try to experience it as a simple existential presence-on-himself. He modifies and exalts it by transforming it into an absolute entity of dominance. The subject fixes himself on the domineering body, i.e. on his representation contained in its actual biological presence. He fixes himself on the body until he captures the imagination and cognitive abilities in the representation inherent in the body. Thus, the body is transformed into a framed entity, that is, into a peculiarity whose proportions are brought to a perfect geometric order. θάνεια gushes from it, overwhelms it, overflows through it, but cannot abolish his consciousness of the perfect frames or the frames themselves as one of the generalized interoceptive impressions of the subject. θάνεια is not the light of sacred transformation with its symbol in the ritual torches of Dionysus, but the light of human habitus. This light differs from the light inherent in the rest of nature, understood cosmologically, called θωηόρ (photos). Although, θωηόρ is a naturalistic and cosmological category, it has one thing in common with the anthropomorphic light θάνεια. Both lights are put into the function of expression in general. Θάνεια intensifies the impressionability of psychosomatic and subjective peculiarities and manifestations. Θωηόρ initiates and illuminates the unfolding of natural events. Θάνεια is not a simple instrument of the subject who has the power to influence and change his states and impressions. It is not just an impersonal substantial matter that shows the degree of impressionability. The subject uses its power as a special force, to enhance a certain anthropomorphic peculiarity and to properly utilize its function. The idea that awareness of the value of peculiarity is essential if we are to appropriately apply the function of peculiarity⁹ is based on awareness of the influence of independent light and the possibility of using light as a higher power.

Mental disorders help the subject to upgrade his cognitive abilities. First of all, they help him to sharpen his sense of specific sectoral disorders of all kinds. It is no coincidence that whenever we meet an unfortunate person, he, in addition to knowing his own problems to perfection, has excellent views on many disorders related to humanity and the world in general. It is indicative that Hegel connects misfortune with consciousness and creates the phrase das unglückliche Bewußtsein (unhappy consciousness). The subject also, perhaps not immediately, but soon becomes aware that the cohabitation with the body is like a representation of dominance. He lacks an entity that will help him move the essence of the representation of dominance from the body into himself. The subject calls this mysterious entity that he does not possess an object of greatness. This is logical, because the representation of dominance should contain Ego-forms that will help the subject, first to acquire, and then to build the self-ideal. Through the Ego-forms the subject becomes more and more powerful and gradually forms and builds the self-ideal. While the subject builds, or forms the self-ideal, he acquires power. In objective-observational sense of the word, this means that he becomes great. The subject does not yet know that the self-ideal is a supreme object of which he must be at least immediately aware, in order to experience greatness appropriately. Without awareness of the operational and dominance contents of the representation, the subject cannot gain awareness of the self-ideal. Without the self-ideal, however, he cannot even come close to knowing (the subjective experience of) power and its objective correlate – greatness.

The very fact that the subject experiences the body as the absolute center of imperial affect that he does not know shows that the subject experiences power and greatness in two ways. Once as proprioceptive units of the body; as units that the subject identifies with the body regardless of whether the reason for this is that he has previously associated them with something in the world or with his own subjectivity. At other times, as ecstatic moods that completely take over his soul. Most of the time, the methods encourage each other. The subject does not advance the understanding of the object of greatness and does not know how it is inherently united with the representation of dominance. Therefore, these strong affects and proprioceptive associations remain in the domain of the unconscious.

To save himself from this mess, the subject must systematize his actions and perceptions. He must learn that the representation of dominance includes all the complex operational approaches that are grouped and distributed in as many sets as there are Ego-forms. Every significant step that he has to take and every significant outcome that he has to achieve are sequential objects of greatness. Ego-forms are trajectory fields of development that allow sequential goals to manifest as distributed systemic correlates. The systematic and compartmentalistic relationship of goals with Ego-forms produces the representation of the self-ideal; they sublimate the Ego-forms into the self-ideal which turns into an integral object of greatness. The subject becomes aware of power as he acquires the sequential objects of greatness; at the moment when he becomes aware of the greatness of the narcissistic-dominance role of the self-ideal, or after he acquires the self-ideal. In the latter case, the self-ideal will reveal the power to the subject epiphanically at the speed of light. Thus, the subject acquires an exteroceptive awareness-of-power. He gains power by trying to establish a relationship with the world that will help him gain dominance and expansive-operational experiences. But let us not forget that the subject is extremely inferior and cannot just develop the instincts of dominance.

The above-described sensory-conscious map of knowledge is not so easily revealed to the subject. Solitary confinement gives him a taste of dominance possibilities. This is not enough. The subject must struggle to know the expansive-operational structures that awaken the awareness-of-power. Self-love and the feeling of dominance suppress the awareness-of-power, although they are themselves strong but extremely indefinite correlates of power. The subject will truly become aware of power only after he has convinced himself that the life function of power is infinitely significant. In order to become aware of power, he must develop a narcissistic-dominance subjectivity. As he develops this subjectivity, he will be inspired to act in the world like master. The revelations contained in subjectivity will conceive the expansive-operational structures and open the way for them to victory in the world. In this way, the subject will begin to gain interoceptive awareness-of-power.

The subject is at a deep impasse. The dominance affect of the body destroys the other narcissistic-dominance experiences. The subject loves himself and feels subconsciously like a master only through the prism of the body. On the other hand, he becomes aware only of the object of greatness, which is as indefinite as the unconscious feeling of power. The feeling of dominance is not as sophisticated as it seems to us. While feeling like a master, the subject imagines that he has received a mysterious and unusual power, which will help him to cope with the possibility-of-being. This feeling is not crystallized and does not inspire much hope. This vague balance at the heart of unbalanced correlates, inhibits the dominance development of the subject, just as much as the body as a representation of dominance.

Fortunately, as the subject becomes intoxicated with the body that has become an acute representation, he intensifies its θάνεια. Θάνεια intensifies to such an extent that it becomes a catalyst. It catalyzes processes rooted in the actual correlations that the actual experience suppresses. They develop at the expense of the experience that suppresses them. The subject experiences the body as a representation of dominance. It is his current and prominent experience. On the other hand, the subject is aware of two situations that he has belittled and devalued by surrendering himself entirely to the specific bodily ecstasy. First situation is that the body has operational potentials. This means that the body can become part of the representation of dominance and that it does not have to unnaturally reduce the representation to itself¹⁰. The second situation is that the representation of dominance must embody the operational potentials regardless of whether they originate from the body, the mind, the meaningful strategy, the collective efforts, etc. θάνεια intensifies and reveals this difference, but does not develop it. Interestingly, θάνεια does not intensify so much, it does not become so striking that it must spill over into another peculiarity and co-form it, re-form it, or further-form it. For example, a person with stage fright begins to have his lips quiver. The stage fright becomes so unbearable that it attacks his nerves, and the nervous disorder is reflected in spicy seismic locations. In this way, a part of the light is moved to a new field and creates new impressions, which in turn reveal and actualize new peculiarities. Here, exaggerated θάνεια allows the subject to see the cognitive differences that existed but were suppressed by the exclusive ecstasy. This θάνεια, which gives a somewhat unexpected outcome, functions according to the principle of heterogeneous catalysis¹¹. Body becomes the reactant with which light enters into a transcendent interaction to produce an intermediate product. In other words, θάνεια is so identified with the body that the subject cannot help but notice that there is a dissonance between the body as a representation of dominance and the body as an operational entity. Θάνεια reveals all the appropriate and inappropriate impressions associated with the body in a given situation. In this case, it is inappropriate for the body to be a representation of dominance rather than an operational entity. The body does not possess any natural predispositions that would make it the center of the dominance essence. It enters into the essence of dominance and promotes the operational possibilities, but it has no right to absorb them and attribute them to itself ante festum (too soon). His obligation is to materialize and justify the essence of dominance, but not to impose it a priori. This actual inadequacy reveals the most useful potential correspondence: the body must be identified with the operative essence. This obligation turns into a sequential object of magnitude; it becomes an intermediate product created by the actant and the reactant.

The body and θάνεια, together, unearth the first, but not the last object of greatness with a presented form. The body and θάνεια, together unearth the first, but not the last object of greatness with a presented form. Such an object of greatness is more propositional than operational. The mode of action towards dominance within the Ego-form is an operational sequential object of greatness. The subject does not identify the body with its practical function operationally, but by persuasion. Thus, it verifies the propositional sequential object of greatness. Moreover, here subjectivity directly advocates for expansive-operational structures. It does not create a psychic complex of narcissistic-dominance affects, feelings and states with the help of which it will exterminate inferiority and embrace dominance principles of living¹². Subjectivity supports material initiatives and biological endeavors blatantly. It greatly simplifies its psychological function, sacrificing it to what is of obvious benefit to the subject.

4.

With this, the subject loosens the bonds of primitive pride. How, will show us the relapse of pride: μαηιοdoξiα (vanity).

The subject feels significant because he manages to advance the worldview of dominance with which he instinctively encounters and experiences in solitude. His sense of the body is no longer as rigid as before, because he is refocused on its function. The subject is no longer disgustingly inflated, full of himself and his bare significance because he experiences himself as a superior body. He feels a relative ease, he rises above bodily solitude. Feeling of own importance that grows in the subject due to his basic narcissistic-dominance progress, we call μαηιοδoξiα. Its second characteristic is that it loosens pride. Vanity is not exclusively a reactive drive that awakens as a consequence of others not treating the subject as he considers he deserves to be treated. The separation from the specific bodily essence and the distribution of part of the psychic and attentional energies on the newly created peculiarity¹³ relieves the body as a presence-on-oneself from the burden of the self-loving and power-loving self. The self is no longer fully identified with the frontal peculiarity. It does not have to imitate the essence of the body which is rigid, inert and meaningless if it is not put in relation to the operational representation of dominance and the narcissistic-dominance appetites. The subject became primitively proud because the only peculiarity, the only light and the only impression, was the body and its inert dominance essence. The body was an object around and an object without surrounding objects. The representation of dominance was inherent to it, and therefore, it was not considered an object around the body. It was an object around as much as the body. But the catalytic θάνεια succeeded in transforming the two objects (the operational essence and the mastery representation) that are naturally, neglectedly and convergently separated from the body into objects around the body as another object related to them.

In the Byzantine “psychological” tradition, μαηιοδoξiα has four lucid forms related to the distorted practice¹⁴. A vain person is one who: a) uses a vocabulary of meaningless words, b) boasts about a goal that he cannot achieve but believes he has achieved, c) gives up on work if he believes he cannot finish it in the near future; and as a consequence d) replaces difficult work with easier work so as not to have to struggle¹⁵. Our understanding of μαηιοδoξiα is different and is based on the cognitive experiences of the bodily status of the subject who wants to dominate. He believes endlessly that he dominates. In this sense, he practices the third form of distorted practice. If we take the body as a representation of dominance in itself, it is incorporated into the meaningless vocabulary of the subject, because it does not enable him and does not lead him to a productive outcome. But the subject, as we have seen, makes an effort and tries to remove any setback he notices. Therefore, the last two forms of Byzantine vanity do not apply to him.

While the body was the primordial and absolute object of interest for the subject, regardless of its dominance and representative status, the subject radiated an unusually simple θάνεια. This θάνεια was self-catalyzed so intensely that it was turning into an almost tangible material entity; it was physicalistic in natura. In fact, the anthropomorphic light, the light of habitus, the light of the system of recognizable human habits, was “dangerously” approaching θωηόρ, the natural-cosmological light. More precisely, θωηόρ integrated into θάνεια. It transformed it into a “natural object”, into something that had a material essence just like the body, with the difference that it was not solidly material, but fluidly and airily material, that is, physicalistic. Πεπιθεεγγια is a concept of light in which the natural light and the light of habitus, θωηόρ and θάνεια, are equally represented. The high and one-dimensional power-flow of θάνεια does not absorb θωηόρ, but produces it from within thanks to the reached degree of power. The primitively proud subject radiates with such light. Peculiarity and light become identified with each other and grow as a common impression to such an extent that the light acquires a materiality independent of the body, and the body is energized to the point that it falls to the level of objective physicalistic characteristics. Power-flow merges with its form and overwhelms the subject. Πεπιθεεγγια mythologizes radiation and the body, makes them so pompous, so crudely exalted that they are repulsive to others. Thus radiates the subject who submits to it and becomes intoxicated with his body as with a representation of dominance. Once θάνεια is catalyzed, it strives to create new peculiarities, disperses its essence and eo ipso dilutes θωηόρ, which the subject draws upon himself by empathizing with primitive pride. In light catalysis, the power-flow spreads and forms other tributaries. In Byzantine philosophy, vanity has a negative context. The subject escapes from real responsibility and boasts of the endless faith in his own fantasies. This is how the pathological liar acts. Πεπιθεεγγια plays a similar role within the framework of light relations and categories. It devalues ​​light per se, just as the inherent domineering body degrades the behavior of the subject.

The object of greatness, that is, the intermediate product, or the “body that is identified with the operative essence,” helps θάνεια to dilute and weaken the impression of a natural light rooted in the universe, not in man. It is partially displaced from the body into the new representation of its role, and relatively balances the power-flow. Thus, it not only purifies itself from external influences, but also smooths out the impression of every peculiarity that will arise hypothetically. This does not mean that the subject has succeeded in reaching the ancient criterion for a proud life, for a life in pride. This does not mean that the subject has succeeded in reaching the ancient criterion for a proud life, for a life in pride. He pretastes that life, but exists at a great distance from it. The subject is still far from the self-ideal. Therefore, he cannot develop narcissistic-dominance experiences. The experiences he feels now cannot be compared with vainglory, i.e. with the complex and consequently subtle correlate of pride. If the subject does not develop narcissistic-dominance experiences, he will not balance the lights, their power-flows, and the impressions that the particularities leave. Consequently, pride will not expand to its appropriate aesthetic proportions.

In fact, there is a danger that the subject will be satisfied with this initial state of affairs. He could equate the first “ironing” of pride, the first balancing of lights, power-flows and impressions with ultimate and long-term desired states. If the subject believes endlessly (delusionally) that the initial state is equal to the ultimate, he will develop a special experience. In order to describe the experience vividly, we will have to experiment with two new concepts: επιθάνεια (revelation) and περιθερεια (periphery). The concepts become cogenitives because they are semantically very similar from the perspective of experience. Once we discover the semantic connection between επιθάνεια and περιθέρεια, we will be convinced that they represent the subject who exaggerates his self banally.

Driven by the idea that he has reached narcissistic-dominance perfection, the subject constantly identifies the sequential object of greatness with his self. Having identified the self with object of greatness, the subject feels unusually powerful and falls in love with himself acutely. Such experiences are outbursts that characterize the essential επιθάνεια. As he previously worshipped the body, he now worships this abstract unity of the newly found peculiarity and the intellectual center of the self. After this, the body falls to a peripheral value. All its everyday manifestations are a pale reflection of the abstract unity that the subject feels alive in himself. Although the body represents the operational role, it devalues ​​because it represents the role at the basic level. It is a tool of the essence of dominance that should manifest itself through operational action. But the subject gives the body another chance. He wants to transform the object into his self, but he cannot do that because the self is immanently and ineradicably self-centered. The object of dominance cannot absorb and overcome self-love. No matter how much the subject prefers the object of dominance, he will always return to his native hearth, to self-love. The subject sees salvation in the body. He attributes the experiences of abstract unity to the body and its system of habits, regardless of whether they are dominance-oriented or not. He wants somehow to embody the experience. By doing so, he believes that he will unite the object of greatness and the self figuratively, although he knows that the supplement of the real and impossible unity is symbolic. The body is a symbolic περιθερεια with which the subject unites the content of επιθάνεια. He can imagine what the true unity between the object and the self would look like, but the feeling of a dual residue always awakens that will distinguish the values ​​from each other. Bodily self-awareness entitles the subject to believe that two values can be equated absolutely. He wants to assign to the abstract demarcation what is possible for the sphere of experiences. The body does not become peripheral simply because the subject gives priority to the new peculiarity. The body manifests itself in the capacity of περιθερεια because the subject imagines the body as the last limit of his own being in which the physiognomic expressions, volume, muscle shape, relatively hard surface of the skin, etc. merge, mix and disfigure. This periphery unifies the individual bodily models. The subject is absolutely convinced that this experience of the body, this monization of the separate parts, will help him to abolish the feeling of a dual residue. It is enough for him to identify the self with the object of greatness, so that, in meantime, he will remember what it means to experience the body as a peripheral unit. But this addition triangulates the relation of values. By adding περιθερεια to the relation of the object and the Self, the quality of the body creates another abstract entity: it multiplies επιθάνεια. Revelation is not intuitive, but abstract. But although the experience of the body as a peripheral unit is rooted in the senses, it becomes an object of consciousness because of the relationship it establishes with abstract correlates. Once sensory experiences are added to the field of abstract relations, the abstract influence spreads over the senses. Unlike περιθερεια, θάνεια multiplies productively in the case of the same subject because it creates abstract entities and does not arise from them. By including περιθερεια in the relation of epiphanic values, the subject mortifies his own exaltation. He deepens the gap between what he imagines and the ecstasy he wants to reach through the imagination. Therefore, the subject desperately grasps the correlate of self – the body, that is at the same time the closest and the most distant to him. It is its closest correlate because, from the perspective of the world, the self is corporeal. The body is at the same time the furthest from the self because the body as a peripheral unit has nothing to do with the self. It is a bunch of jumbled biological features whose organization is shaken even though it exists per se and is rarely deconstructed. Abstract contagion dulls the correlation of values ​​that should produce ecstatic moods. Emotional experience should overwhelm the states of consciousness that it itself causes. It should establish control over them even before it produces them, so that it will limit and direct them with its primordial high power of which they themselves are the fruit.

Experimentally modified pride fails. The idea that two independent concepts can be united by placing them in an associative relationship with anthropomorphic values ​​is precious. Περιθερεια was coming to meet επιθάνεια. But the rapprochement does not result in the necessary ecstasy. The subject tried to free pride from its own representations, even though the περιθερεια perspective was a kind of representation rooted in strong sensory experiences. Sensory experiences stifled the notion of περιθερεια perspective. They have turned the representation into a sensory experience. This prevents the subject from being vain, in the sense that he will not enjoy the progress of narcissistic-dominance processes. To satisfy the ματιοδoξiα he will have to find another way. This alternative itself pushes him away, it is itself a machine of archaic regression. It is a creepy paradise where the subject will die without remembering that he neglected his primary goals.

5.

The subject agrees with θάνεια that the body is an operational essence from which to start when thinking about the representation of dominance. The representation of dominance becomes independent and turns into a vacuum entity, floating without meaning, because the subject does not yet know how to determine its value position. The first step away from the body as a representation of dominance reflects negatively on the embryonic narcissistic-dominance subjectivity. The problem is not only that the subject will not be able to discover a model of action that will teach the subject to use the operational essence correctly and powerfully. Main problem is that thinking about the operational essence and empathizing with it as a sequential object of greatness will slow down the development of narcissistic-dominance subjectivity. One-dimensional sensory identification with one aspect of the expansive-operational power structures will encourage only one perspective of development in narcissistic-dominance subjectivity. The disproportionate ratio of this perspective to other perspectives will shake the primordial psychic structure of subjectivity. The operational essence is inherent in the feeling of dominance, and the bodily self-experiences are inherent in self-love. If the two pairs of perspectives do not develop synchronously, the subject will not be able to build the narcissistic-dominance unity, which is why operations exist as modes of dominance action in the first place. So, for the subject to act successfully in the world, he needs to harmoniously develop the two aspects of the soul (the dominance one and the narcissistic one). They balance the being of the subject and exalt his self-manifestations.

While empathizing with his body, the subject touches in a sensual way the very roots of his self. This unusual and powerful touch, which draws strength and energies from the body, forces the subject to fall endlessly in love with his own self. Every thought, or imagined image of dominance actions (whether operational or arbitrary), intensifies the feeling of dominance. The subject experiences himself as a master because he imagines a pattern. He does not have to focus on the material acts of the body to experience himself as a master. It is enough to introspect comprehensively his dynamic dominance position. Thus, the model of dominance will take root in his being and will encourage the subject to feel dominantly. Hence, the lack of empathy with the operational essence as a primary and unique object of greatness surfaces immediately. The model of dominance, even if the subject intuitively imagines it as an unpresentable object of interest, will elevate the feeling of domination at the expense of narcissism. If the subject tries to overcome the laws of his soul, and identifies the dominance model directly with himself and his self, he will face a psycho-energetic deficit. For the model of dominance to stimulate self-love, self-love must have already been brought to the highest possible state of sensitivity. The latter, of course, cannot be achieved without developing the aspects related to the narcissistic perspective. While the body was a representation of dominance per se, the dominance perspective and the narcissistic perspective permeated each other imperfectly and weakly, but synergistically. The element of representation represented the feeling of dominance and dominance possibilities, or generally speaking the operational essence. The body represented the self that the subject loves infinitely because it can experience it as a presence-on-himself; as a demarcation line between itself and the world. The operational essence rightly stood in the way of this embryonic and imperfect unity, cutting off the representation from the body, without giving priority to either of them. The subject has experience with his own body and the operational essence is realized through it. But the operational essence makes sense only if it represents and realizes a certain strategic-expansive potential. Unfortunately, the subject still does not have access to the secrets of the potential that should form the representation of dominance, that is, the model of dominance action. Therefore, the subject gets stuck again. Does he realize that the operational essence is illegally usurping the mental scene?

The subject is stubborn and will try to increase and intensify self-love with the help of the operative essence. He fixes himself on his body, empathizes with it as a decisive element of domination and experiences it as the center of the subjective dominance position. Instead of experiencing himself as a master whose power extends over the entire development of representation, the subject emphasizes the body that performs the master actions. This change in the angle of perception fixes his gaze even more on the operative essence. The subject pays attention to the dominance actions, not to what they reflect and exalt. He achieves a counter-effect. The feeling of mastery elevates him even further above self-love. The subject does not cease to love himself for a moment. But his narcissism is blunted. It is not the fact that he is the one who rules that excites him, but the sensational action whose continued dominance objectively exalts his soul. He does not affect himself with the idea of ​​the power of his own being. He focuses entirely and objectively-ecstatically on the function of master without considering the body as part of the self. He needs the body to represent to himself the dominance action vividly. He does not become sensitive to the body, although he fixes himself exclusively on it. His real preoccupation is the dominance pro festum. Not only does he distance the body from the self because he tastes the complementary acts of dominance, but he distances himself from the body after he has fixed himself on it in order to sacrifice it on the altar of exciting action. He becomes sensitive to acting through the body as the center of possibilities of dominance while excluding both the self and the body from the relationship. He is in narcissistic-dominance mood. But in his experiences the dominance perspective prevails over the narcissistic perspective. Thus, objective exaltation suppresses subjective exaltation, although the former should serve the latter. The subject must find a way to catalyze self-love through these objective experiences, whose objectivity springs from the nature of operational action and dominance representations. If he succeeds in this, he will form and develop a holistic experience, which, it is assumed, will help him be brave in the world.

To free himself from these constant complications of the process, the subject must raise his narcissism to the level of a feeling of dominance. Self-love is fragile. But this does not mean that the feeling of dominance is so high and clear that the subject knows exactly what to imagine and how to act. The feeling of dominance has an advantage over self-love. But neither the operational essence has a meaningful correlate, nor is the feeling of dominance an experience that overcomes the unusual force that smolders in the subject. While the subject feels dominantly, this force pierces him. More precisely, it strikes him after he anticipates and experiences certain states related to the expansive-operational structures. It thickens and exalts him. But he does not know what exactly should be reflected in these psychic processes. He only knows that the unusual force that is smoldering within him is gaining momentum. This is how far his knowledge extends. The immanent feeling of dominance prompts the soul to anticipate expansive-operational states. The feeling of dominance gains momentum as a consequence of the cooperation between anticipated structures and the primordial feeling of dominance. The subject needs to rediscover the value of the body in a roundabout way, without identifying the body with the representation of dominance. Before the body and its operational essence can be related to the ideas of dominance, the subject must have his own idea of ​​the operational essence of the body. If he does this, he will establish self-love. Thus, the conceived body will be identified with the self and will catalyze it. This will also balance the feeling of dominance and self-love.

The subject experienced the body as an object of greatness when he identified it with the representation of dominance, but did not transform it into an appercept. This is the best opportunity for the subject to correct the error, if at all the imperfect stages necessary for the further development of the processes are mistaken. By doing so, on the one hand, the subject will save the body from its subordinate position within the prevailing feeling of dominance. On the other hand, he will save it from the primitive superiority because of whom the subject experienced it as a self-referential absolute of dominance.

Ancient heroism set itself the goal of acquiring and perfecting the object of greatness. Such a universal object of greatness was κλέος. Κλέος, immortal glory, is the moral face of περιθάνεια. The better the hero achieves κλέος, the more naturally and spontaneously the peculiarities, impressions and lights in his being are arranged and harmonized. Κλέος, the feeling of having achieved a moral duty, and περιθάνεια, the aesthetic reward that results from moral accomplishment, illuminate the body, each in its own way. They help him to reach the ideal body shape that ancient artists elevated to the status of a deity. The ideal body shape symbolizes the articulated περιθάνεια. The word περιθάνεια has no negative connotation in this period. It is a state of mind that is reflected in the body and self-expression, after the hero has realized himself in the world and embodied the possibility of being. The hero does not behave like a primitive, he is not unnecessarily violent and he does not frighten the weaker ones out of fun. But he cannot completely hide his arrogance, that is, his arrogant and unconsciously condescending behavior. He behaves vaingloriously with a considerable tinges of pride. He seems innocent, but not naive, he performs every gesture in the spirit of inappropriate and eo ipso exaggerated paternal severity. Awareness of greatness is not so sophisticated as to smooth out his impulses. It is more realistic to say that the impulses are withdrawn under the pressure of instinctive influence of the necessity to be true to the task and the reputation imposed by the awareness of greatness. Greatness exalts him semi-subtly and relatively cultivates his being. Impulses encourage him to meet every random and announced challenge. Awareness of greatness does not allow them to be too rough and without a sense of a certain measure. Hegel saw this when he compared the life goal and action of the hero archetype with the relative independence of the individual from the ideal that is given to him objectively¹⁶. It seems that, indeed, the hero does not establish complete consonance with his ideal; more precisely, with the state of vainglory that should reflect the ideal as a subjective mental feeling and state. In fact, κλέος disrupts the ideal περιθάνεια. The narcissistic-dominance affects prevail over the ideal experiences in the hero’s life; they surpass and overshadow them. The thread of arrogance is thin, but still prevails over the other characteristics and their expressions. The average hero is usually tolerably, even adorably, proud¹⁷.

---

1. The aggressive-vengeful subject has no problem with courageous behavior. He cannot articulate it because he feels inferior. If he manages to overcome his inferiority, he will begin to articulate the courage that is inherent in him originally. ↩︎
2. An organ whose function is being blunted ↩︎
3. Legrand, D. (2007). Pre-reflective self-consciousness: on being bodily in the world. Janus head, 9(2), 493-519. ↩︎
4. He enjoys too much what he experiences and empathizes with. ↩︎
5. McGilChrist I., The things with matter,. ↩︎
6. All peculiarities that cooperate as a body and as subjectivity on and in the personality of the subject are existent regardless of whether they are disjunctive or conjunctive. They form equiexistent formations and change configurations at almost every moment of the subjective existence. ↩︎
7. About this in the introduction to the book Wild Enthusiasm. ↩︎
8. In the case of complementary pathogenic self-manifestation, the peculiarities build on each other and act synchronously in a disjunctive manner. ↩︎
9. This statement hints at the fact that in order to be powerful, we need to be deeply aware of the value of power. ↩︎
10. It is legitimate to reduce the representation to one’s own body only if it reflects the achieved successes of dominance. Then the subject will project his true value onto the body, in order to emphasize his own individuality even more. The presence-on-oneself is naturally most akin to successful actions in the world. If the body is conceived as a presence-on-oneself, to which it attributes its successes, it will “sanctify” the self. ↩︎
11. Schlögl, R. (2015). Heterogeneous catalysis. Angewandte Chemie International Edition, 54(11), 3465-3520. ↩︎
12. Such a technique will become apparent in the books that follow. ↩︎
13. The peculiarity differs from the trait in terms of permanence. A trait is a permanent peculiarity. A property of the subject that has turned into a daily habit. A peculiarity is an extraordinary expression that may or may not characterize the constitution of the subject. We call the body a peculiarity, not a trait, only because in certain psychopathological cases it loses its primordial value. ↩︎
14. Творенія Святыхъ Отцевъ, Томъ тридцатъ осъмой, Творенія Святаго Григорія Нисскаго, Частъ вторая, Москва, 1861, С. 207-208. ↩︎
15. The first two forms of vanity arise because the subject wants to stand out with something, but has nothing. The last two forms of vanity are a consequence of the subject’s fear of suffering the severe defeat that comes with failure at work. ↩︎
16. Hegel GVF., Estetika I, Kultura, Beograd 1970, s. 179-184. ↩︎
17. The Tabor light transforms the being of the man who succeeds in keeping God’s commandments. Because of this, his bodily form becomes ideal, even if it does not meet the criteria for beauty. But this luminous harmony of features, impressions, lights and powers is not called περιθάνεια, or a state of pride. Pride comes from a light that symbolizes the natural upward transformation, that is, the transformation that comes from achieving the significant opportunity to be in the world. The Tabor light, on the contrary, is achieved through overcoming the world within oneself and rising above the world, but not through its back. Therefore, when some say that God is an ideal instance towards which the hardworking and ambitious man strives, they are relativizing this essential and profound difference. ↩︎