3.62
We’re prone to the illusion that the stranger god is one figure — that there’s a single truth about the colour of the god’s hat (§3.50). Therefore, if the stranger god is noticed at all, we tend to take the polytheism (the array of colours) as encapsulated by the monotheism of the one stranger god (§3.51). (This case would add to our typology in §3.56: we could call it a polytheistic monotheism.)
However, my writing doesn’t lead to monotheism. Instead, it’s as though there’s polytheism within monotheism (the above), punctured through and through by another polytheism (holes gesturing beyond). However, ultimately, the first polytheism isn’t actually within a monotheism (§3.50).
— Here and throughout, I’m implying that our old onto-theological principle—the One—has been punctured by things themselves and is losing its sway.
One way to read this layer is as a way out from the One, where the One is re-contextualized within a larger picture where monotheism doesn’t hold the day: for the prismatic god is only one god; the One is also only one.