On defining reality, and the consilience of fields

Real life needs to represent a higher importance than the desirable or the ideal life. That is the conservative position, or at least the Burkean position. I think it should apply not only to politics but to religion and philosophy. People too often believe in things that do not exist, and build whole systems around them. Nietzsche talked about how the means of virtue can be turned into the idea that “everybody must be everyone else's nurse.” But I think Nietzsche was mistaken in not seeing altruism as being as “natural” as any warrior trait, both can advance healthy cultures.

The problem comes of course in defining reality. One big difference comes from those who admit biological and physiological values and those who do not in any meaningful way---the divide in philosophy and psychology often comes here. It seems often to be the difference between naturalism and non-naturalism.

I would place the foundation of reality within the world of philosophical naturalism, and this then leads to theological materialism, which is developed in this blog. When even sacred Godhood is based in evolutionary materialism leading to supermaterialism, we have a chance at the long continuum of life and culture, and the consilience of fields---that becomes a system that actually seems to exist.