Friday, November 13, 2015
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.