After reading the thoughts of Jack
Kerwick (Modern Age, Spring 2013) comparing forms of conservatism
here are my thoughts on the subject.
I tend to agree with neo-conservative
Leo Strauss that natural law (natural right) has a rational purpose
but I take the essential purpose to be material life evolving to
super-material life and Godhood in the cosmos, and Strauss does not
go there. I also tend to agree with classical conservative Edmund
Burke who suggests we need to live according to the tradition and
order of the time and place we live in, which does not have a
universal rational purpose other than living. However, Burke does
seem to see a universal purpose which only God knows.
I remain grounded in universal
evolution and the universal purpose of our eventual evolution to Godhood, where the
“particular” group, time and place is affirmed in its unique path
to the “universal” Godhood of material-supermaterial evolution.
“Rights” seem to get complicated or obfuscated and move away from
simpler definitions such as, “Natural law derives from the nature
of man and the world, just as physical law derives from the nature of
space, time, and matter. “ (James A. Donald) But then,
philosophical naturalism will not go beyond empirical proof to see
the teleological and sacred goal to evolution, but I do with theological materialism, hoping science will find proof for this in the future.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment