The Beast Singularity As one crawls, walks, runs, and stumbles along the chronological collage of his life,

one encounters the singular exception to the otherwise absolutely unique life experiences we attain, by force or by custom, in exchanging pedomorphic a priori currency for avaricious a posteriori contraband in our premeditatedly macabre traversal of that life until it expectedly expires leaving scratches of varying intensity in the polished surface of history in its wake. Whether this synthesis is inherent in all interchanges from a priori to a posteriori and is too subtle to grasp, or occurs as a synthetic race condition in a single byproduct of an otherwise divinely unique set is worth debating, however. The implications of the very existence of this singular exception are far reaching regardless of its origin in several ways. Firstly, it appears as a robust mathematical counterexample to the divinely unique soul that is ultimately necessary for the identification and personal communication with The Father promised to Man by the Judeo-Christian ideology. Secondly, it would imply that there exists a singularity in the supposedly continuous space of Judeo-Christian morality where continuity is the guarantee of absolute morality. Thirdly, any inherent presence in the surrender of a priori to a posteriori shows a predetermination that would desecrate Man's free will again conflicting with the promises of the JudeoChristian ideology, and while many further instances of clash or conflict with that ideology can be illustrated simply from the existence of that inherent singularity as a once-occurring race condition, it must be noted that indeed, there exists such a beast inside all transmogrifications from knowledge to experience commonly too subtle for Man, yet always proportional to the relevance of whichever a priori notion and a posteriori experience Man has indulged in the trade. If God gave Man free will and Man discovered the inherent desecration, he would no longer have free will or God, in a circular contradiction. So if God supersedes Man throughout a priori space, and if Man negates God in a posteriori space, then one must be good and the other evil, respectively. Nietzsche made a clear definition of good in The Anti-Christ, specifically: What is good?-- Whatever augments the feeling of power, the will to power, power itself, in man. (Nietzsche 22) This view is held in distinct contradiction of the Judeo-Christian model, where good can only be derived from God. While Man is in a priori space, he presupposes a posteriori space as potentially evil, while Man and his known but not yet experienced God is not only good, but also the very origin of good. This is certainly within the Judeo-Christian ideology that exalts prior- knowledge (which is attributed to God) and denigrates worldly experience as sin against God. Of course, Nietzsche also defined evil: What is evil?-- Whatever springs from weakness. (Nietzsche 22) Weakness is clearly a relative conceptualization of the anti- thesis to power, and it can be identified in several ways. Primarily, it can be shown that there exists something more powerful, and in the ideology Nietzsche was confronting that more powerful entity was God; man was forever bound to inferiority under the powerful presence of God. Secondarily, weakness can be derived from the falsification of the underpinning concepts in a given paradigm, and this can be accomplished by attacking what is known only by assumption: truths which have not been experienced; faith is weakness, and thus evil. Without ignoring implications, Nietzsche connects weakness and Christianity: Christianity has taken the part of all the weak, the low, the botched; it has made an ideal out of antagonism to all the self-preservative instincts of sound life... (Nietzsche 23) Knowledge obtained through experience, however, is far more

difficult to falsify, and therefore carries with it the potential for power. The persistent singularity inherent in the paradigm shift from the temporal to the parochial: that beast is barely a silhouette, but has already spawned the dichotomies derived from that paradigm shift into the exchange of Good vs. Bad for Good vs. Evil. At least that is how it appears in the omniscient, birds-eye view of this juxtaposition, while from the view of God, a long with Man, in a priori the dichotomy is certainly Good vs. Evil: Man and God Good, Man alone in a posteriori Evil. From Man's a posteriori view, God and his pedomorphic Man, are bad primarily by affirming the slave morality, and secondarily by fixating on thought and prior knowledge, best epitomized by the affirmation Cogito Ergo Sum . Despite the devotion to thought, however, Nietzsche maintains that Christianity does not actually allow purely free thought, by representing the highest intellectual values as sinful, as misleading, as full of temptation (Nietzsche 23). In that context, and in that order, their juxtaposition clearly delineates the journey from the Oral Stage into the Phallic Stage, as evil is replaced with bad, slave morality is lost to the affirmation of life and the often misunderstood death of God, and the superego merges into the ego in the transition from knowledge to experience, where Man leaves a priori space for a posteriori, with a stop in between. Man's paradigmatic journey from prior knowledge to experience is not an instantaneous metamorphosis, however. Outside the realm of both knowledge and experience, away from both the bad and the good breast of the mother, as well as from the slave morality, Man's experience to experience rather than just imagine is based around pain and pleasure: it is the home of the Id. Away from a priori space, Cogito Ergo Sum no longer defines existence accurately. The affirmation must be changed to reflect the new setting, as Man begins to manipulate his bowels in the Anal Stage: Defaeco Ergo Sum (I shit therefore I am). The very roots of the Anal Stage as well as the Id, pleasure and pain, are so intrinsically connected that they cannot be understood on their own: yet another dichotomy permanently fused and inseparable. This one has the exceptionally unique quality of becoming a posteriori for all humans without extraordinarily different brain chemistry. The purely animal and unabashed instincts of the Id inevitably infuse with the righteous Superego to create the first recognizable personality traits, leading directly into the Phallic stage, passing on the Id, Ego, and Superego. Despite the grotesquely unique choices between a priori and a posteriori, Man would do best to avoid two diverse choices in particular: a priori love and reproduction would be a rather nugatory endeavor, just as a posteriori death would be quite vacuous. On the other hand, a priori death is harmless, and a posteriori reproduction would line up perfectly as we move directly into the Phallic stage. The traversal and subsequent metamorphosis of an a priori into an a posteriori, the process that results in the synthesis of that unperceived beast proved doubly efficacious. Primarily, the maturing from an a priori to an a posteriori yields at minimum additional insight, understanding, and the potential for appreciation, which would serve as a powerful catalyst to increase the general creativity and thus the potential for creation. With the existential replacing the divine, inspiration must be gleamed from the temporal realm, thus creating an abstract homogeneous athenaeum. Secondarily, even a purely chimerical existence for this mysterious beast allows a powerful symbolism, a true synthesis of abstraction and conceptualization, creating a purely textual mascot quite fitting when applied to this existentialist theme, despite any questionable

press. From an a priori perspective, the iconoclastic singularity is the nihilistic beast, born of the Id to undermine existing knowledge and the existence based on divine thought, to leave the universe as nothing, because it would be nothing without faith and God. From an a posteriori perspective, the beast poses no threat. If Ubermensch means Superman, and Ubermensch means Trans-Human, then the ultimate abstraction as a synthesis of the trichotomy of sexuality (Id, Ego, Superego) and the dichotomy of master/slave morality slightly cropped with Descartes (a priori, a posteriori) must be a superhero capable of launching the Trans-human process within other people. Easier postulated than done, however: such a superhero would have to apply his power through the master morality, not the slave, and thus it must be a posteriori to remain valid. The intrinsic difficulty in such a task is to create experience during comprehension, and of course this superhero has to be, on some abstract or metaphysical level, internalized within the people themselves. The Beast Singularity is such a superhero, and he exists within all Men as the synthesis of the exchange of a priori for a posteriori, that famous metamorphosis that allows Man to go through the narrowly constricted confines of prior-thought (and only thought), and emerge on the other side knowing anything he'll learn hands-on; the Slave becomes the Master. But what is the Beast Singularity, and why is he the synthesis of that metamorphosis? The Beast Singularity is simply a paradigm shift inherently possible in all of us to become Nietzsche's Ubermensch by the acceptance of the possibility of choice between a priori and a posteriori, the simplest but most effective of which kills God The Father within the Phallic stage and embraces Nature The Mother nature, or natural experience and to Oedipus we return. Works Cited Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm; translated by H.L. Mencken. The Antichrist. Tucson, AZ: See Sharp Press, 1999.