Human nature, social doctrine, and religion

Human nature defines human loyalties in this order: self, kin, ethnic group, locality, state, region, nation and world. This order harmonizes with real human nature, as recently reaffirmed by sociobiology, and when social doctrine does not harmonize with human nature, it does not last for long or work well---and societies always snap back, as if on a leash, to the order of loyalties just mentioned.

It turns out that this order of loyalties more or less defines paleoconservatism, affirming monogamy, respect for family and kin, localism, regionalism, with many small states, and with nations competitive but in need of some cooperation. Each small state develops its own variations on ethics based on it own conditions for maintaining itself.

Some form of middle course between the extremes of total isolation with deadly competition, and one-world uniformity, can protect variety and competition, which is so vital for improvement and evolution. As Cattell pointed out, it is quality rather than quantity that counts in natural selection. This means there needs to be some restrictions on competition and force in the world.  If the human species is destroyed then no group survives.

The Theoevolutionary Church sees the need for a common world religious bond, in evaluating the progress of evolution, with the sacred goal of evolving to Godhood, the God first seen in the Revealed Religions (see the Twofold Path.)  That is, a religious bond which favors---for all groups---the evolutionary advancement of humans, and beyond, which is the deepest meaning behind life and the cosmos.