Evola consolidates the understanding gained by the man at stage three with a discussion of the topic “privation”. In Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas, “privation” is the absence of a given form in something capable of possessing it. As it is a lack, it has no being in itself, yet it is part of experience. Evola will use the concept of privation, which denies a real being, to refute the philosophy of realism, which postulates the being,

The realist claims that there is a something behind the appearances or representations that somehow causes or accounts for them. Evola denies this and reasserts his claim that the appearances are from the “I”. But certainly there are things that are impervious to my will. Evola claims that they are not real things but rather a privation, something that reveals my own insufficiency. Along the way of explaining this, a new, and perhaps greater and more heroic, meaning is given to activity in the world.

In a note, Evola points out the limit at which philosophy as such must end; what is then required is self-realization, to which no study of philosophy can lead. Evola asserts that such a transformation is “not a myth but a real possibility”. This cannot be overemphasized — it is insufficient to study Evola, one must work to achieve such a realization by other means; otherwise, nothing will be understood.

The rejection of realism, the elevation of self-realization over rational thought, and the centrality of the will, freedom, and power have far reaching implications. This short work does not draw out all such implications, but it is an interesting exercise to ponder them. Evola writes:

Therefore, with the intention to develop the position assumed by the consciousness of the third stage, we will consider the only true objection encountered by absolute idealism. In absolute idealism there is a doctrine that seeks to transform the negative task of criticism and scepticism that defines the second stage into something positive; and that ceasing to understand the world as a phenomenon, as simply an appearance, (the only legitimate conclusion of critical investigation) in order to understand it instead as something posited, created by the I. Therefore when one no longer speaks of representing but rather of positing and creating, the concept of a free will comes into play, and thus this problem arises: I can well reduce the world to my representation, but at what point can I reduce it also to my will and my freedom?

Since Evola’s presentation is quite terse, it may be helpful to try to give some examples of the concept of “Privation”. If we start with the assumption that the world is my representation and my will, then it is impossible to deny that the world does not seem to be subject to my will — this is what Evola is referring to as “privation”. Recall here what Guenon wrote about Man’s role as Mediator between Heaven and Earth. Heaven is the Idea. Man’s role as Mediator is to manifest that idea in Nature. But nature is subject to its own law of Destiny, so it resists my will. That leaves us with two alternatives:

1. My inability to exercise my Will reveals in insufficiency in me … a privation. This is something I should possess, were I at the level of the True Man.
2. My inability to exercise my will reveals the existence of something to oppose it.

The natural temptation, then, is option (2), to ascribe some independent reality as the true source or cause of my sense of lack. In other words, what is properly the will of the “I”, gets projected onto something else.

Projections and Privation

We can look at three levels of projection:

1. The Persona projects itself onto the Shadow
2. The Mind projects onto the Body
3. The I projects onto the world.

The Shadow

The man whose self is not well integrated experiences certain motivations, feelings, desires, attractions, weaknesses and so on as alien to him. Hence, he denies them in himself, and hides them in his unconscious. Jung called that the Shadow archetype. Notice the similarity here to what Evola is getting at: the Shadow is not a real entity, rather it represents a lack or privation in consciousness, something the I denies, yet it is a product of its own will. So “I” may project those feelings and desires onto others, or attribute them to outside forces like God, or the devil, etc. Oddly enough, someone else can easily see through “my” projections and recognizes them as my will.

The Mind

At the next level, the I sees itself as the mind alone (subtle manifestation) and separate from the body (gross manifestation). It experiences the needs and desires of the body as something alien that impinges on its consciousness. The body becomes that master of the “I”.

The Self

Even if the “I” is integrated with the body, at a further level the body-mind organism separates from its environment. It then regards the world as an independent reality. The world seems dark and alien and is an obstacle to my purposes. Instead, I can understand the obstacle not as the “other”, but rather as the revelation of my own insufficiency in that regard. This gives my activity — that is, since my efforts to exert my will and bring such obstacles under control — an heroic character. This is represented in many myths such as the labours of Hercules, Jason, the medieval search for the Grail, and so on.