Conservatism and Eugenics

Real conservatism affirms change by keeping the best of the past while steadily harmonizing the new in the old. But when it comes to “eugenics,” that is,  the science of improving human hereditary qualities through selective breeding, conservatives follow the modern liberal line of thinking of progress as destroying the old order with the new. But healthy eugenics, like natural evolution in general, is conservative, keeping the best of the past while synthesizing the new. For example, the human brain retained the reptile and mammal brain as the human brain evolved on top of these earlier versions.

The question is asked by both liberals and skeptical conservatives : who defines the beautiful, the true and the good as we evolve toward higher versions of these things? Why depart from the traditional conservative answers to these questions? Nature suggests that radical revolutionary change and destroying the old order to build the new is rarely successful. In nature consonance and dissonance are usually resolved in harmony, not in disorder. Even ecology is defined this way.

A “reasoned and temperate progress “ as the old conservatives used to say, is the wise way to evolve. The stability of conservatism in general helps maintain evolutionary new mutations which would perish without that stability. And indeed, how much evolution, the timing of evolution, depends on the circumstances of the nation, or the small states or ethnostates within the nation and the world. Humans couples have been increasingly using genetic studies and new gene technology in the selection of their offspring. Raymond Cattell's Beyondism began the scientific study of the religious regulation of the pace of evolution, which we extend.

The universe is orderly, even if we don't always understand the order. And we are evolving in the material universe toward supermaterial Godhood, which is defined as the zenith of truth, beauty and goodness, and exemplified as the highest consciousness and intelligence. The old experience of the Inward God or Father Within is conservatively retained but transformed in the Outward Path of evolution to real Godhood. Like great art, eugenics is the affirmation of this sacred perspective.

How material essence precedes existence in the reality of the self

The word “life” defines our essence well, as matter with the capacity of metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, reproduction, but includes one more deeper definition: in theological materialism the internal-essence or meta-essence of life is called the Spirit-Will-To-Godhood, and it is material, or supermaterial. Things defined as “spiritual” are usually just that, definitions, sacred words with no real life or essence of life in them, they are openly and proudly non-material.

I affirm the traditional statement “essence precedes existence” as long as essence does not mean non-materialism. Essence is existence. When you say “existence precedes essence,” which is beloved of existentialists and implied in post-modernism, that is not much different from the loose idealism of Marxism or even modern liberalism, leading to the idea that human behavior is infinitely malleable since their is no essence or human nature.

The reality behind the “self” does not discard the material world as being only a deception. That kind of thinking has for many centuries led to the Great Spiritual Blockade of material evolution to supermaterial Godhood. This view is the Platonic and Orthodox religious view which turns reality on its head and says only the non-material is real.

The essence of life, the activation of life, that is, the material Spirit-Will-To-Godhood, must in reality face the exigencies of evolution and natural election on its evolutionary path toward Godhood. But the Inward Path of traditional religion and philosophy is nevertheless conservatively retained as preliminary insight transformed in the Outward Path.

The impossible task liberals have demanded of the police

Most people know that schoolyard combatants need to be separated, but if they later continue to fight---even after the liberal teachers demand love and togetherness---then what? The reality is that people with distinct differences may never get along, even when totalitarian force is applied, and for whatever peace is possible, a permanent separation is needed.

The hard reality is that in every human culture ever studied, human nature has included kin-selection preferences, hierarchy, division of labor, gender differentiation, localism, and ethnocentrism---even to the point of xenophobia---and group-selection has been the main unit of selection. If a culture proposes to not include these things, the culture does not last long and always returns to these things. These things also happen to be at the core of conservatism and tradition, whereas many of these traits are missing in, say, communism, modern liberalism, and post-modernism.

When Teddy Kennedy needed to prove his liberal worth with the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 it vastly and purposefully increased the number of people from the “third world” who were distinctly different from Americans, and who when they arrived naturally preferred their own kind. Now 21 million illegal immigrants from Mexico, Haiti, Nicaragua, etc. are following the same behavior, they don't fully assimilate because human nature will not let them fully assimilate.

And today once again the black/white battles of the 1960's have returned, with the hated police in the middle. This has created the impossible task liberals have demanded of the police, to try deal with distinctly different combatants who will not really get along.

The hard reality which Americans and the West will have to face is that whatever peace is possible in the world requires the separation of distinct people and distinct cultures into regions and states, which defines ethnopluralism. The United States Constitution with its separation of powers and states could even accommodate this solution. It is hoped that modern liberals will one day see that this is the most humane way to deal with real human nature. I'll bet the beleaguered police already sense this is true.

If they can sell cultural rubbish than we can sell the sociobiological view of human nature

“ Democratic sentiment in America is little more than a reflex of market imperatives.” (Jack Trotter, Chronicles, Oct. 2015)....I agree with that quote, and I say that if they can sell cultural rubbish than we can sell the sociobiological view of human nature, which can logically lead to independent regions and states, or ethnostates, for ethnic cultures, and the return to conservative values in general, which are in harmony with real kin-selecting and group-selecting human nature.

The media in general, particularly the entertainment industry, have been the main sellers of the various brands of cultural rubbish, such as homosexuality, radical feminism, license for all sexual acts, wide open national borders, and so on, but big business, the academic world, and politicians have followed the money and pushed the same cultural rubbish. This is what democracy has become.

So who owns the media, who rules the academic world, who runs big businesses, who are the venal politicians? Can they be reformed without a radical revolution? I am optimistic that reform, not revolution, can happen. As I wrote here yesterday: “life,” that is, metabolism, growth, reproduction, implies strong direction toward an end, at least toward survival and reproductive success, or evolutionary success in the world, no-matter what obstacles are presented, and life has had many extremely difficult obstacles to overcome. Do we have a choice?

I believe that the best solution to future political catastrophe calls for ethnopluralism not nationalism, federalism not fascism, but with an economic nationalism that certainly protects the independence of the regions and states, which would be largely ethnostates. This could be conservatively (therefore not radically) adapted to the U. S. Constitution with its separation of powers and states.

But I also believe our recovery needs to be deeply grounded in the religious philosophy of theological materialism if it wants to be more than stale preaching or more than a market strategy. As I have also  written here often, history is material evolution moving toward not a spiritual but a supermaterial Godhood. This is optimistic, not pessimistic news. History can be seen as a process of emancipation, but not emancipation from the material world, which is devolution toward spiritual nothingness. Materialism evolves to supermaterial Godhood, which is the zenith of materialism, with starts, stops, and backward-going along the way, and our sacred mission is to help life and nature evolve toward Godhood.

Thoughts on freedom, determinism, and the sacred goal of life

The word “life,” that is, metabolism, growth, reproduction, implies direction toward an end, at least toward survival and reproductive success, or evolutionary success in the world. I think the essence of life can be defined only secondarily as the “will to-power,” but primordially as the material Spirit-Will-To-Godhood. The deepest drive of “life” is toward evolving in the material world to supermaterial Godhood, which is the zenith of success in life.

Yet even when life attains Godhood in evolution there is probably not the immortality which life desperately and naturally desires, because there seems to be no beginning and no end to the cosmos, there is only the starts and stops of ongoing life and evolution toward ever higher forms of life.

What does this say about “freedom?” It implies that although there may be different paths in life which give us free choice, they are choices within the determinism that defines the action of life itself. That is, the Spirit-Will-To-Godhood drives life from within, to which evolution adds its own outside natural selection.

It would seem that only death itself makes us “free” of the drives of life and the actions of evolution, but this is a freedom that healthy life does not prefer, even if ascetics have desired such a condition while still alive, which has been the Great Spiritual Blockade of material evolution toward real Godhood. The spiritual blockade brought only the Inward God seen or experienced by ascetics, after ridding the body of all the desires of life, which is an insight that can be retained but transformed in the Outward Path of evolution toward supermaterial Godhood.

Ethnopluralism and the limits of altruism

The assault against the West, internally by the controlled media, modern liberalism and neoconservatism, and externally by economic globalism and large numbers of migrants, leaves us with the choice, as Chilton Williamson pointed out, of not accepting huge numbers of migrants and virtually destroying them, or accepting them and destroying us.

This great dilemma brings forward all kinds of disagreeable political reactions and possibilities, from the revolt of the citizens leading to non-democratic action, to the real death of the West due to a suicidal misreading of the limits of altruism.

I think the best solution to future political catastrophes calls for ethnopluralism not nationalism, federalism not fascism, but with an economic nationalism that certainly protects the independence of the regions and states, which would be largely ethnostates. This could be conservatively adapted to the U. S. Constitution with its separation of powers and states.

Perhaps most importantly, unlike other political systems, ethnopluralism adheres to real human nature, which remains strongly kin-centered, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, among other traditional things, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection, and it discourages all forms of marauding imperialism.

We can never accept the death of the West.

Real history and religion are not emancipation from the material world

Modern thinkers only seem to be opposite Hegel in thinking that we are moving in a pessimistic direction. Hegel is not optimistic or realistic when in the end his philosophy turns back to Plato's world of rejecting materialism as a negation, and seeing his highest God as pure non-material “spirit.”  That describes devolution not evolution in theological materialism.

Reality seems to be the opposite of those who think that consciousness eventually loses it physical or material properties, which the old and new Gnostic's believe. Plato and the Eastern mystics were largely responsible for turning reality upside down, which influenced the Judaic-Christian world and Islam. Aristotle, the first Western scientist, seemed as if he would affirm materialism against his great world teacher, but in the end he too rejects materialism in defining his God, which influenced the philosophy of Aquinas.
 

Being “self-aware” does not have to divide us from ourselves, as the old and new Gnostic's believe. There is no “fall” from grace based on the idea that knowledge of our “true self” is non-material. We have to move beyond the Great Spiritual Blockade to real Godhood, which as conservatives we can retain but see as the first incomplete, inward, view of outward Godhood in the Twofold Path.

Some say that science is only a method of inquiry and not a worldview, but science does end up with a worldview consisting of the reality that science finds, or believes it finds, in the world. Human reason and science alone may not be able to grasp the complete nature of things, but they can be an important tool in affirming what intuition usually finds first.

History is material evolution moving toward not a spiritual but a supermaterial Godhood. This is optimistic, not pessimistic news. History can be seen as a process of emancipation, but not emancipation from the material world which is devolution toward spiritual nothingness. Materialism evolves to supermaterial Godhood, which is the zenith of materialism, with starts, stops, and backward-going along the way, and our sacred mission is to help life and nature evolve toward Godhood.

Is there a solution to the ongoing cultural, religious and ethnic destruction?

Essentially, it is not violent Islamic militants, black radicals, sadistic police, neo-fascists, the Jewish lobby, or the global one-percent who are the root cause of our ongoing cultural, religious and ethnic destruction, the root cause is the un-mixing, non-integrating, un-assimilating behavior of real human nature, which remains deeply kin-centered and group-centered.

Even though assimilation and one-worldism are preached daily as the only solution, these groups are simply too different from one another to get along well, or assimilate. The only long-term solution I have been able to see that would stand a chance of stopping the ongoing cultural, religious and ethnic destruction is the natural separations of ethnopluralism. That is, regions and states set aside for the various cultural, religious and ethnic groups, and then actually protecting their independence with some sort of federalism. I even think that the U.S. Constitution with its separation of powers and states could adapt to ethnopluralism.

When considering an even deeper solution to our destruction, I agree with the Carl Schmitt line that “all modern political teachings are secularized theological concepts.” I affirm the religious philosophy of theological materialism, which can religiously and philosophically help organize our future evolution on earth and out into the cosmos over the very long-term.

My view of deep-conservatism

I support limited government, private property, and private virtue as necessary to maintaining a healthy society. But I have a problem with economics being set free from real national interests and I believe in putting tariffs on foreign products to protect manufacturing in the United States, which has been all but destroyed by greedy global capitalists.

I also emphasize the separation of powers and states more than most conservatives, to the degree that I think regions and states eventually need to contain evolving, distinct, ethnic cultures and far more independence than they now have, although I think the states need to be protected in their independence by federalism, and I think we need a strong protecting military---“diplomacy without arms is like music without instruments.”

I agree with the philosophy of non-inference in the affairs of other nations, I reject imperialism, although I think we can do business with the world. I have been influenced by conservative thinkers like Russell Kirk and Pat Buchanan, but I reject neoconservative thinkers---biology is more a “universal” element and defines reality more than the Platonic abstractions of Leo Strauss. I have also been influenced by sociobiologist E.O.Wilson, and by social psychologist and futurist Raymond Cattell.

I don't agree with conservatives in their disbelief in the perfectibility of man, which derives from the incomplete traditional religious rejection of materialism, although “perfectibility” needs to be understood as evolving beyond man. I agree with conservatives that religion is at the foundation of any long-lasting civilization, although the theological materialism I affirm retains but transforms the inward, ascetic, non-material understanding of God to the outward material and supermaterial Godhood reached through material evolution.

This religious view of conservatism brings science and the material world back to religion, where they have only been partially accepted by conservatives. Nothing requires a more long-term conservative philosophy than the very long-term material evolution of life to supermaterial Godhood, where the best of the past is retained as we continue to evolve toward the highest truth, beauty and goodness in the cosmos.

Non-assimilation offers a solution in the Middle East and everywhere

Assimilation has deep cultural, biological, and psychological components. The real antidote to most of the world's problems is not globalism, centralization, counter-revolution, cultural imperialism, military intervention, or massive immigration, the real antidote is devolution, separation, and moving from the big to the small. Distinct characteristics set people apart, as the solid evolutionary sciences have been telling us for many years, and it is overdo time to acknowledge our unassimilable differences.

Not only in the Middle East but in Europe, Russia, even China, as well as the United States, we will eventually need to devolve and separate into small states, ethnic cultures, or ethnostates, with some sort of protecting federalism---for example, ethnopluralism applied to a three-state solution in warring Syria, or a long overdo two-state solution in Israel/Palestine.

Those who support massive immigration, cultural imperialism, and globalism, are recognizable enemies of world peace and order. This is not advocating isolationism, we can deal with one another, but not through the forced assimilation of people and cultures which cannot be assimilated. Devolution, separation, and ethnopluralism are the most sane, rational, and even emotionally satisfying long-term solution.

When means are mistaken for ends in religion and philosophy

Nietzsche was right in saying that life is only a means to something, although I think he got the sacred ends somewhat wrong. Life is not only the means to “power,” which was Nietzsche's claim, life is the means for material life to evolve toward the sacred end of supermaterial Godhood. “Happiness” is the other choice thinkers make as the most basic motivation, but happiness is a secondary reaction which only uses happiness as an incentive for deeper goals.

The conscious world is only a small slice of what lies beneath, which first Nietzsche and later Freud understood. Consciousness itself arose to enhance the deeper goals of evolutionary success, including the deepest motivation and goal of the evolution of life to Godhood, which is described in theological materialism.

The means have been misunderstood as the object itself, without looking for the end that explains the necessity of the means. Nietzsche understood this, but he didn't quite affirm the most basic activation of the evolution of life toward Godhood, that is, the Godhood first insufficiency glimpsed in the religions which Nietzsche dismissed.

Our values need to relate to the conditions that preserve and enhance our ongoing evolution toward Godhood, then the means are not mistaken for the end. Religion need not be rejected but transformed from the ascetic God-Within of the Inward Path, to the evolution of life to real Godhood in the Outward Path.

The Return Of Teleology

Theological materialism affirms teleology. The end-goal of material evolution is supermaterial Godhood, which was formerly seen as attaining the God or Father Within in the Inward Path. There is a material end-goal and purpose, beyond human limitations.

This is a spatial, temporal, material/supermaterial Godhood, and not as Eastern sages, Plato and Christian mystics believed, not an Idea, or sacred word, not a sacred vision alone, which can now be seen as preliminary to the Godhood-goal of material evolution.

The zenith of beauty, truth and goodness is not merely apprehended in a vision, they are the highest realm of value and morality in the evolution of material life. Conscious life needs to be guided toward these highest ends, even as unconscious life is guided toward these ends.

Religion, philosophy, art, science, politics, etc. can be oriented toward the highest realms of material evolution, reality and value. The best work in these fields will know the sacred goal of evolving life.

Awareness of the return of teleology comes about through the process of applying all the methods of gaining knowledge, from rationalism and empiricism to pragmatism and even the super-sensuous intuitive apprehensions of mysticism.

But the high, united, goal of beauty, truth and goodness, defined as material or supermaterial Godhood, is not the unchanging “permanence” defined in Tradition. Life is seen as endlessly evolving ever beyond into higher realms of value, reality and Godhood, with stops and new starts along the way.

How seeking Godhood unites religion, art, and material evolution

At this stage in our evolution, Godhood is almost a mystical goal, but this vision helps carry us forward in material evolution to supermaterial Godhood, which we can affirm in religion and art. This is not a spiritual goal, it is a material or supermaterial goal, it is a sacred goal grounded in the reality of the material world.

Beauty can be a leading guide in religion, art, and evolution by seeking ultimate beauty, truth and goodness, and thinking of these sacred things as united in Godhood, at the zenith of evolution. This is not merely the Idea of beauty, truth and goodness, as in Plato---and as in the traditional religious mystical vision---this defines the real living objects of evolved Godhood.

We can know Godhood with this scientific-intuitive-artistic way of seeing and knowing in religion, art, and in material/supermaterial evolution. This is the worldview of theological materialism.  This is how seeking Godhood unites religion, art, and material evolution.

Love and Immortality

I think Plato was almost right when in the “Symposium” Socrates suggests that love or Eros is more than the desire for the beloved and is actually the longing for the immortal “good.”  This, according to Plato (Socrates) accounts for the desire for generation and reproduction. Physical reproduction is inspired by the Beautiful, which is a sacred Idea in Plato. Then he goes on to say that any kind of creation follows this same desire for immortality.

I say Plato “almost” got it right because I believe that the non-material definition, or the sacred word or Idea of “good” is only secondary to the real living object defined as good. We evolve in the material world toward the ultimate or zenith of goodness, beauty, intelligence, truth, etc, which is defined as the supermaterial object, or objects, of Godhood.

It seems to me that both Nietzsche and Freud were limited in their definitions of love as the power-drive (Nietzsche), or the pleasure-drive (Freud). Love and reproduction, essentially, strive toward evolving in the material world to supermaterial Godhood, which is the zenith of beauty, truth and goodness, intelligence, higher consciousness, etc. This can help guide us in the direction evolution seems to want to go.... It could also suggest a new kind of evolutionary therapy, or psychotherapy, related to the essential drive of life (the material Spirit-Will) activating life from within to evolve toward supermaterial Godhood.

How reality and ethical and aesthetic values coincide in theological materialism

What is most real is most valuable. According to the classic Whitney Oates examination, Plato thought this way, which is a solid way of seeing, but I think Plato turned reality upside down and worshiped unreality or non-life, whereas theological materialism regards life over and above the Idea or definition of life.

Ideas such as courage or truth are important but they only define the real thing. Definition is secondary to the real thing. “Pure existence” is only two words of a non-material Idea in Plato, whereas in reality pure existence is more likely the highest evolved living object. The same criticism applies to the traditional religious definitions of God and spirit, they are ideas and definitions only and are not considered material objects.

This does not rule out or reject Plato or traditional religion, but it defines the sacred religious Ideas of God as only the first glimpse of real Godhood, which is, in reality, evolved to in the material and supermaterial world, as defined in the Twofold Path.

If we can only know that which does not change, as Plato and other religious founders define Ideas, then we cannot know anything since everything changes in evolution. We can know changing evolution by applying the various forms of knowing, from rationalism and empiricism to pragmatism and skepticism and finally even mysticism. But ideas only define this process and are not the objects of evolution. In projecting the direction of evolution we can utilize these ways of knowing, but finally also we can apply intuitive vision.  In seeking reality and truth virtually every method is permitted.

The Uncomfortable Reality of Ethnic-Determined Politics

The fragmentation within countries now increasing across the world is largely due to ethnic-determined politics. Ethnic-determined politics is the difficult reality of real politics, but it is less difficult than other political philosophies which are often not much more than intellectual fantasies about what determines politics, such as class-determined or nation-determined politics. Definitions of imperialism, one-nation, one-country, and ethnopluralism, are not the same. The word country is a geographical designation with internationally recognized borders. A nation is associated with a group of people sharing a culture, language, and history. I use the term ethnopluralism to describe the reality of ethnic-determined politics. Real human nature remains kin-centered and ethnic-centered, with group-selection as the main unit of selection.

Ethnic-determined politics does not rule out the affirmation of a protecting federalism, and ethnic-determined politics need not negate democratic republics, it could actually strengthen them. For example, the separation of powers and states in the U.S. Constitution could accommodate ethnic-determined states and regions. Ethnic character, tone and guiding belief already determines much of the cultural ethos. The charge of “racism” has largely been the deceptive, and sometimes naive, attempt of one ethnic group to dominate another. Even when force has been used by empires to block natural ethnopluralism, it is only for relatively short periods of time before they break back into various versions of ethnostates.

As E. O. Wilson has brilliantly and poignantly pointed out, humans are conflicted by their prehistory of multilevel selection between the individual and the group, these are the forces that created us, we are suspended in unstable and constantly changing positions between the two forces, and we must find a way to balance these forces. In the same way we need to find a balance between ethnic cultures and ethnopluralism. This is what we are, and ethnopluralism is the real base of conservative politics, although the religious base is even deeper.

Looking beyond reality to miss-define reality

When we look through the world of “appearance” we should not look beyond life and beyond reality to define reality, as too many philosophers and ascetics have done. Whitney Oates mentions the Greek Sophist Gorgias who went as far as to write a book called, “On Nature, or the Non-existent.” Even supreme wisdom has to be embodied, it does not stand alone outside the world.

This world is not the reflection or appearance of reality, this world is reality, including Godhood which we evolve to in this world. Defining this world as being less valuable than a “non-material” world has blocked our material evolution toward supermaterial Godhood.

Think of the amazing ethical and aesthetic experience that supreme wisdom would bring if wisdom was embodied in a supremely beautiful and supremely evolved body. Ideas, formulas, words are of course important, but they are not Gods and they should be considered secondary to the things they define. Ethical and aesthetic values need to relate to the real material world and not to the non-material world---this means that religion, philosophy and art need the reform of theological materialism.

How Beauty Could Guide Evolution

When I speculate on the values of our future evolution I am tempted to give intelligence or higher consciousness top value, but then I remember that intelligence without goodness, without good character, can create monsters. But where does Beauty belong in evaluating evolution?

It seems to me that Beauty includes all the values, a more whole or total vision of reality, which  would include the zenith of material/supermaterial evolution. Beauty might lead our definition of Godhood in helping to guide ongoing evolution toward Godhood.

I would probably accept Plato's position on Beauty that it has the most complete embodiment in things of sense (see Whitney Oates writings). The view of Godhood in theological materialism is that the material and supermaterial---not the non-material---define Godhood as the zenith of evolution, and this could relate to the complete embodiment of Beauty in things of the senses.

The whole inner being, the whole consciousness seems to be working in experiencing Beauty, which seems more total than when contemplating such things as justice, courage, or even wisdom.

Then there is the living reality that material life is advanced in evolution through reproduction and survival. In our sexual reproduction, Beauty has been a leading indicator of high value. Intelligence, power, goodness are highly prized, but the first choice, the choice of the whole being---if people are honest---does seem to be Beauty. The whole being seems to be involved in desiring and experiencing Beauty.

In speculating here about the place of Beauty, I see that Beauty is hard to define in words, but for me, this positively relates to my view that words, even sacred words and sacred Ideas, are only a reflection of the real object, which is contrary to Plato. The material object is more important than the idea of the object in the epistemology of theological materialism, and that includes Godhood.

Intellectuals and the Real

It seems to me that the will-to-power of intellectuals and priests has typically attempted to bury reality in ideas. Contrary to Plato and to traditional religions, the world of sights and sounds ranks higher than the world of ideas. The Gods of philosophers and ascetics tend to be Ideas, sacred Words, an inner experience of bliss, which they call the God or Father Within.

It is sights and sounds that are anchored in reality, and the realm of Ideas are only a reflection of reality. This is how we unblock the Great Spiritual Blockade which has blocked, or at least slowed, our evolution toward Godhood for thousands of years.

Godhood is material or supermaterial, and this puts Godhood in the world and of the world. We do not have to reject traditional religious Ideas, but we can see the Inward-Path-God of religion, and the Ideas of Plato, as only a first symbolic glimpse of real Godhood which can be reached through material/supermaterial evolution in the Outward Path.

In the same way it is not the Idea of Beauty that is most beautiful, it is object of the beautiful definition that is beautiful. The Idea only dimly reflects real material beauty, not the other way around. The same goes for the beautiful formulas of mathematics which only reflect the real object they define.

The Denial of Nature: Godhood Left Out of Religion, Conservatism, and Neo-Darwinism

The deepest problem of modern politics, religion and science is the failure to recognize natural laws and natural standards. There are distinctions in human nature that cannot be denied, but are denied, and they are denied not only by modern liberalism and postmodernism but are denied by conservatism and science---although not all natural distinctions are denied.

It is not just the historicism of liberal postmodernism thinking that all values are relative to the time and the place, which leads to nihilism, it is conservatism thinking that all values relate to a non-material God, and science rejecting God entirely. They miss knowledge of the sacred goal in natural evolution.

Platonic reason and the God of traditional religion swerve away from nature when the highest reason and the highest God are seen and defined as non-material. Many in science are now making the same mistake in calling quantum physics non-material or spiritual. This biases religion, politics, science, and culture in general.

The science of evolution has developed all along from Darwin to E. O. Wilson in learning that human nature remains kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection. This leads to values that relate to the separation of powers and states, and to an ethnopluralism protected by federalism. This political structure best enhances the variety that evolution benefits from. But Neo-Darwinism has a problem with religion and conservatism because it sees no ultimate cosmic goal to life other than random selection.

The Godhood left out of religion, conservatism, and Darwinism is the supermaterial Godhood which material life evolves toward in the natural world. The divine is a level of life we can evolve to become. Life endlessly evolves with no beginning and no end---who can really prove a beginning motionless mover?---along with the ups and downs of natural selection and evolution. Our mission is to aid in the evolution of life toward Godhood.

We can return full circle to nature and real human nature while retaining Godhood, conservatism, and enlightened science. Theological materialism affirms this acceptance.