Weininger's Equation
Published 2020-04-06 natively.
The above is Weininger's equation for the Attraction (A), between two persons (X,Y) as a function of their balance of masculine (M) and feminine (W) qualities, and both taste (K) and exposure (K). The K function is intended to represent all other, here-undefined, known laws governing interpersonal taste, such as preference for a hair/eye color, age dynamics, the Westermarck effect, etc. The T function is a measure of the time in which the persons have been able to subject one-another to their attractive effect. Weininger's system takes it as implicit that the degree of masculine and feminine traits in any given person are complementary, and always form a totality, expressed here as an exclusive range between zero and one. Also worth noting is that while originally given as a linear function, the relation can also be applied to matrices for more nuanced results.
The primary significance of the equation is that the strength of attraction is stronger the greater the contrast is between the qualities of the two persons, approaching infinity as the persons resemble the absolute male and female, and approaching zero as the two resemble one-another. In the following chapter, Weininger states he has no explanation for the cases where a man of pronounced masculinity exerts an outsize influence on other masculine men, or cases of persons who are primarily attracted to androgyny (sexual undifferentiation).
Those who possess a majority quality in opposition to their biological sex, Weininger terms 'sexual inverts', as cases of highly-masculine women and effeminate men were well-known then as now. According to Weininger's law, the predilections of these persons for typical members of their own sex is reliably explained, where attention to biological sex alone must resort to external apparatus. In the same vein, he argues against the legal persecution of homosexuals, espousing instead the therapeutic program of matching inverts of each sex to one-another, thus able to form organically-strong if-unconventional relationships and fulfill their social responsibilities. In modern terms, this is akin to pairing the tomboy with the twink.
For my purposes, I will call the Attraction defined by his law 'complementary', as describing the natural attraction of unlikes, applying equally well to 'normal' persons as to inverts.
In section IX, Weininger defines "the most important limitation to the assertions in the first part of this work". That is, building upon intermediary sections and specifically in psychic (psychological) respects, masculinity is synonymous with 'ego', 'soul', and other coordinate terms for moral and cognitive development, and each man essentially develops after the standard of the genius; "he in whom the widest understanding has made universal comprehension possible". Ergo, and specific to section IX, a man in his approach to totality may understand and fashion after any creature, including women. To quote: "the man of genius possesses, like everything else, the complete female in himself; but woman herself is only a part of the Universe, and the part can never be the whole; femaleness can never include genius". More directly, he states that while he has seen many men of extreme femaleness, he has never encountered any woman who was not "fundamentally female", that even the most physically-masculine woman remained psychically female. An intractable distinction of *being* separates men and women, and regardless of what qualities they possess, a person can only *be* male or female. The nature of this existential separation is illuminated in length in the rest of the work.
The primary significance of this limitation is that a man can possess and therefore embody the female, but she can not do the same in return. A necessary implication is that there are certain qualities of men, the less physical ones, which are functions of his *being* and from which women are necessarily excluded.
Weininger does not make the subsequent conclusions in his work, but they follow easily from his statements. A man can, by his interest, occupy the female frame, fully reproduce her mentality and inhabit it upon a whim, which easily explains why the best descriptors of the internal sensations of women have always been given by men; a puzzle presented by Weininger earlier in his work. The questions of the motives and implications of that choice, while Weininger can offer significant insight into them, are not to be discussed here. What is solid is that man can do so, and in this manner find the womanly attraction to masculinity without inhibition by his own physical traits. This includes aspects such as spiritual or moral development, those psychical properties of men that not even the most masculine female can hold, though any female may perceive it enough to be attracted to it.
It is through man's higher development, his approach to genius and thus universal comprehension, that he in utterly sober terms may transcend the specificity of his birth, his instantiated form, and achieve the selfless admiration of another, outside the natural attraction defined by Weininger's law of complements. While making no claim of modern observed cases, it is evident upon reason and introspection that a certain form of homosexuality coheres between the most developed men, and follows a platonic description. Alexander is one of numerous historical examples of this form amongst the most masculine men in respects both of body and spirit. Likewise, the problem of pederasty (unsolved by Weininger) is easily understood with attention to its practice by higher men and exclusively with boys, never girls; the unique masculine quality of *being* may be appreciated in youths and old men alike.
For my purposes, I will call this attraction 'sympathetic', as describing the rare attraction of similars. This applies to persons in conditions outside the 'complementary' attraction, that is, those who have developed over it, in the times and places where they may exercise the faculty of genius, universal mentality. These two laws of attraction are contradictory, and cannot exist in the same moment.
Considering the larger thesis of Weininger's work, which is an exaltation of man's qualities, his exclusive claim to the higher forms of existence, the godhead itself, with all of its attendant agonies and possibilities, one statement cannot be rejected. It is a thesis of profound and utter love for man, his unique *being*, and hope for his prosperity. If directed towards any one figure, it would be the greatest praise voiced in a philosophical work. To resort to abstraction, without the necessary implication of what actualizing such a philosophical perspective would entail, is cowardice. His hatred and mercy for women are compelling, and while any while he acknowledges as well as any man of social conscience their necessary role, no thinking man can love them in any profound sense. His quote: "men either despise women or they have never thought seriously about them". Those who hate women have begun to think seriously about what they are, and that is the same concomitant as genius, of beginning to love men, to love life, to love himself, love the positive force in him and love existence.
HH.
[Index]