continuing our notes of the [[4th we begin to write again]]. we can note that animus and anima discussed earlier can in it's mature expressions be understood as logos and pathos respectively, we thus have that expressing l o v e from our logos is the masculine side of ourselves and expressing l o v e from our pathos is the feminine side of ourselves. we can thus conclude that when elliott saxby discusses the masculine and the feminine he is actually discussing his own masculine logos and pathos.
similar then to when iain mcgillcrist discusses the right hemisphere and the left hemisphere of the brain, arguing thus that the feminine can see the limits of the masculine, but that the masculine cannot see the limits of the feminine. now, what's interesting about elliott saxby is that he argues that actually these two dimensions are animus and anima and that our task is not to be masculine or feminine but too show up as both depending upon the r e l a t i o n and thus the p o l a r i t y.
| | logos | pathos |
| ---------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| elliott saxby | wisdom, intellect, knowledge, cooperation, safety, boundaries, yes and no, discernment and the right application of the will. | everything we enjoy about life, beauty, music, dancing, food, language, everything we can see taste touch smell hear, diversity empathy and our intuition, yes for live without comparison, judgment or thought of good or bad. its the complete expression and acceptance of all life. |
| iain mcgillcrist | the left hemisphere | the right hemisphere |
| ken wilber | map | territory |
| hegel | becoming | essence |
of course, more advanced aspects of this discussed in process and event by bard & söderqvist. we have not only the logos which is the discretion and the determinate upholding of lines (what elliott saxby calls boundaries), no wonder then that metamodernity which says that the map is the territory, is an masculine perspective which argues that you need is models to act in the world in a goal directed way.
when pathos indeed is the reverse of all of this it is continuity and indeterminism, that is to say the territory is a place where all can happen that happens happen. as people usually say shit happens, and that means that things that is not part of our models that is to say our goals happens anyway. which is way for hegel becoming (animus) and essence (anima) are the two connected by the concept. this then is an invitation to study the masters hegel and nietzsche. to do that you can study with [cadell last](https://cadelllast.com/) at [philosophyportal](https://philosophyportal.online/phenomenology-of-spirit).
further reading
[Inner Marrage](https://www.audible.com/pd/The-Inner-Marriage-Audiobook/B0BNJHWVRD?source_code=ASSGB149080119000H&share_location=pdp)
[The Matter with Things](https://a.co/d/cJ3cfmw)
[Religion of Tomorrow](https://a.co/d/gJSaWsh)
[Process and Event](https://a.co/d/7ZXvMj8)