Wednesday, November 30, 2016
This should be the rallying cry of conservatism, freedom within evolution, or ordered evolution, rather than freedom within order, or ordered freedom.
The order in real evolution comes from the long-term need of conservative stability, which provides the time for positive rather than negative cultural and genetic traits to rise to the surface. Radicalism turns over the game table before the game is completed.
That is the way to move the evolution of life forward conservatively, while evolving toward higher beauty, truth and goodness. Human beings can assist in this process by the choices they make, with the goal of evolving to Godhood as the zenith of religious and cultural goals.
Directly related to freedom within evolution, or ordered evolution, is the idea that group-selection needs to be accommodated first, with individual selection following after, because group-selection remains the primary means of successful survival and reproduction, and given human nature, it remains at the origin of real social altruism. Group-selection, or ethnocentrism, is often hidden behind the lies of various "isms," especially beneath libertarianism which worships the individual.
We have been gradually learning what human nature actually is over human history, along with its connection to biological evolution and human culture. Ethnopluralism, the next version of conservatism, is the most harmonious way to proceed toward ordered freedom within evolution.
Tuesday, November 29, 2016
Evidence is being compiled by sociobiology but it seems likely that successful societies deflect ergic (instinctive) goal satisfaction from selfish impulsive goals, and this seems to happen both genetically and culturally. When this doesn't happen societies tend to destroy themselves by a dysgenic process. Could this genetic/cultural process be made more conscious in our social philosophies?
We can see that it is selfish to talk about individual civil rights without including the rights of the group, and the the state, because individual rights are determined by the survival of the group and the state and the circumstances of the time. Raymond Cattell thought this process was related to vanity and the failure to escape selfish instinctive impulsive demands, which are not appropriate to advanced cultures. Libertarians take note.
Jung thought that our preferred paths toward a given goal are instinctive, he also thought that the more intrafamilial archetypes were innate. It would seem that the sublimating deflection of selfish ergic goals after centuries would lead to humans who innately find the adjustment less difficult. Expanding this forward into future evolution and one sees how evolution slowly progresses toward civilizing of the beast. We can perhaps see an example of these civilizing genetic/cultural changes happening in the way that the glands governing fear and pugnacity are larger in wild than domesticated animals.
I am not irrationally afraid of instinctive drives overcoming the civilizing ego because I coined the idea of a Super-Id, in the form of the activating material Spirit-Will within material life that is shaped by outside evolution, which can be mediated or harmonized by the mind and the ego. But this process of civilizing ergic drives does seem opposite the barbarian instincts of war, which is the usual accusation hurled against the subject of appling sociobiology in our social philosophies.
If we ever want to actually do something about the suffering people in this world, rather than just blaming the downtrodden on the evil rich, we will need to look at these genetic/cultural dynamics.
People complain on the left and the right about the politicization of the arts and humanities but then they totally religionize or Marxize the arts and humanities. All fields are not the handmaidens of ideology, but all fields are tied together sociobiologically. Just because totalitarian dictatorships were wrong does not mean that all totalities are wrong. I'm not talking about invading specialties and biasing them, I am taking about the deepest elements within life that connect all life and connect all fields, specifically, the material will to evolve toward Godhood which activates life as life then moves through the outside world of evolution and selection. This is a totality that can be synthesized by the arts and humanities and also by religion and science.
I'm talking about not just a total art work (Gesamtkunstwerk) but a coming together of religion, science, the arts, and politics, realistically connected by sociobiology, and understood by theological materialism in a sort of Overart, which respects human ethnic differences by way of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, without trying to jam everyone and everything together in one massive imperial territorial totality. The international ethos can then be observed by objective international research centers which help distinctly different people successfully survive, reproduce and evolve materially toward Godhood. This is not merely an ideological or Utopian dream, this defines the deepest conservatism... I believe humans need to do something like this if we are going to survive on earth, yet alone move out into the cosmos.
Monday, November 28, 2016
The way I see it the main dilemma of the Alt Right was how to deal with the ethnocentrism of real human nature while also dealing with religion, science, conservatism, nationalism, and radical racialism.
Religion versus science presented itself, with the science-minded Alt Right moving toward a scientific racialism and rejecting religion. A lesser number moved toward transhumanism preferring intelligent machines to humans. A larger group moved toward the Traditionalist School of Guenon and Evola and are now mainly followers of Aleksandr Dugin, who hates the West---this school downplays science in favor of spiritualism over materialism, but keeps an element of racialism-as-tradition. Another wing moved toward paganism, such as Odinism. Perhaps the largest group on the far right never quite fit in with the Alt Right, they are the racial supremacists, sometimes in the Hitler mode. Others on the far right moved toward a racialist version of Christianity arguing that Christ was not Jewish, etc. Few if any moved toward conservatism or paleoconservatism.
I faced many of the same dilemmas of the Alt Right and the paleoconservatives, and I developed theological materialism, having been impressed and influenced by Raymond Cattell's religion from science called Beyondism, Edward Wilson's deep sociobiology, Russell Kirk and Pat Buchanan's paleoconservatism, the ethnostatism of Wilmot Robertson, and the esoteric religious thinking of people like Guenon, and others. I believe I successfully included or synthesized these thinkers in developing theological materialism, which sees the material world evolving to supermaterial Godhood, the God first symbolically but incompletely glimpsed from within by traditional religion. I also dealt with the courageous Friedrich Nietzsche, and later, Heidegger.
I eventually found a way to be a conservative patriotic American, grounded in religion, philosophy, and science, while affirming the constitutional separation of powers and states in the United States, slightly amended to save itself, by becoming an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, where different groups within ethnostates can be what they actually are and what human nature actually is, rejecting the various forms of ethnic supremacy as unworkable and immoral. The sacred goal of life is to materially evolve toward supermaterial Godhood in the cosmos.
It seems to me that the real "fall of man" happened when lies became a conscious technique in political and social strategy---gaining "knowledge" was more about the rise than the fall of man.
Some people are both liars and stupid, some are both liars and smart. Modern political strategists are full of lies, the Big Media lies consciously, the business world and the academic world have the same mix of liars. But even religions purposely lie.
A Muslim is permitted to to lie if in so doing he protects or furthers the interests of Islam, as long as he remains faithful to Islam, it's called taqiyya. The Babylonian Talmud encourages Jews to cheat and deceive Gentiles whenever necessary. Do the ethnic groups which affirm these religions take on these qualities, or do these religious qualities derive first from the ethnic groups? People create cultures, cultures do not first create people.
I suppose real Christian's lie a bit less because it is believed that craving material power and possessions is what causes Christians to lie, which real Christians are supposed to give up. This puts Christians at a disadvantage socially and politically in the face of smart liars, even though there are few Christians who carry their Christianity that far. And there is also that ethnic element in Western civilization becoming Christian.
The big question is how can we develop a healthy culture given this mix of liars and truth tellers? My position is that religions and ethnic groups need to have their own regions and states which can then be protected with federalism. That sounds difficult but there are far more difficulties in trying to have a great multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, multi-religious mix attempting to live in the same territory---even totalitarian dictatorships can't make that work.
This would be easier to see if we weren't lied to so much.
Sunday, November 27, 2016
Conservative tradition relates closer to real human nature than progressivism, but both have little or no sociobiology, and therefore both can do damage to humanity. Passions and instincts are not essentially evil, what is evil is trying to force human nature and biology to go against real human nature, whether the unnatural forcing comes from religion or political totalitarianism.
Our so-called freedom is circumscribed by biology, the natural world, and the cultures we are born into, and our freedom is limited by real nature, and real human nature. Our cultures and civilizations need to accommodate what we really are as humans. Modern culture has been moving in the exact opposite direction to this and deforming and corrupting what we really are.
Even the smallest change in human nature and our DNA structure, for example, in our immune system, took hundreds of thousands of years (now we have genetic engineering which is more rapid), but we all remain kin-centered, gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection. Rational and instinctive channeling of human nature and human drives, or education in general, needs to move in this direction.
I believe an ethnopluralism of states and regions can be established legally in the United States due to our constitutional separation of powers and states. It may require a few constitutional amendments to legally give more power to the states. This will not be easy, but it is far preferable to radically destructive civil disruptions, or even civil war, which naturally are now increasing due to competition between ethnic groups within multi-ethnic societies, even as we preach conservatism or progressivism.
Saturday, November 26, 2016
This is the new "biographical story" of the beginning reign of Queen Elizabeth II of Great Britain, and it is no Downton Abbey. Rather than being saccharine as Abbey was this one has a sinister tone. In one scene the dying king, father of Elizabeth, sings a sacred Christmas song among "the people" while wearing a big clownish paper crown made by a child, skewing both Christmas and royalty. In another scene the constantly smirking Prince Philip is hunting ducks with the king in a deep fog on the water, with shotguns breaking the eerie silence like an assassination attempt. I guess hunting is as evil as royalty...We see what to expect from this production.
But this sort of Media attack on Europeans and European tradition, which has been increasing since the 1960's, seems to have caused the Donald Trumps, Marine Le Pens, and even the Nigel Farage's of merry old England to rise up against them, so maybe a more even-handed entertainment is coming.
Politically incorrect as it is to say, I think some individuals are more capable of handling freedom and responsibility than others, and I think this may also apply to ethnic groups---but in saying that I must quickly add that I am not talking about superiority or inferiority, I am simply talking about differences between people.
This necessarily relates to demographics and immigration policies which have a great deal to do with the tone of the culture: as the people change the culture changes. It has been a lie to say, as the cultural Marxism of political correctness says, that all individuals and groups are the same with only slight unimportant differences in skin color.
I don't think the "civil rights" movement had as much to do with seeking equality as it did with seeking superiority---it is seeking supremacy far more than ethnocentrism which causes the defamation and discrimination that modern liberals constantly go on about.
But conservatives don't seem to fully realize that it is not enough to tell distinctly different individuals and groups to better handle freedom and responsibility by affirming conservatism and tradition.
This is why I advocate an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, which can be conservatively accommodated by the constitutional separation of powers and states, where different ethnic groups and individuals can develop the cultures that best suit them, with federalism protecting the whole. That is the deeper kind of conservatism.
Friday, November 25, 2016
Trollope's advice is in stark contrast to postmodern thought, but I think Trollope's thoughts on moral fiction are a good antidote to the hedonistic relativity of today's novels and today's art in general. Here is a free audio version, which you can perhaps listen to as you drive.
The "maker's mark inscribed upon the soul" (Mark Amorose) is not really inscribed upon the soul because the soul, which is probably the deepest part of the material mind, is itself activated by the even deeper evolutionary will-to-Godhood (or to tie this in with the past, the "spirit"), and it is this that is the sacred activating dynamic of life, as described in theological materialism: this is the material/supermaterial drive which is, to quote another well known poet, "the force that through the green fuse drives the flower."
Yes, money brings power, and money can be used for various purposes, but is is about the lowest force on the hierarchy of activating forces. The hierarchy of drives or forces, from the shallow to the deep, go from the will to money, to the will to power, to the will to survival and reproductive success, to the evolutionary will to Godhood, all of them material or supermaterial drives.
So the philosophy of economic nationalism, which is, supposedly, president elect Trump's philosophy, is morally, biologically, and philosophically more true, sound, and balanced than the libertarianism of the Wall Street geniuses, who therefore make fundamental religious, philosophical, biological, and cultural errors, which they base their lives---and our lives---upon.
But I'm not holier than thou because I just returned from shopping.
Wednesday, November 23, 2016
It is not necessary to invent a non-material transcendent God or first cause of the universe out of nothing to believe in real Godhood. Believing in Godhood does not depend on the idea that reality issues forth from a non-material primal source. If this kind of creator is accessible to reason only, as St. Thomas Aquinas said, then reason is suspect.
A God, a Being of immateriality is a creation only in the minds of men. There is not a creator who is not a thing, not an object, not a living object, and there is not a creator who is a form, definition, an idea-only, or a blissful experience. Yet these define the God of most religions and most philosophies.
What there is is endless evolution, with many beginnings and many endings, with no first beginning, no first cause, and no final ending. Evolution does evolve life to Godhood, real Godhood, in the material and supermaterial world---but there is no final Godhood, only endless evolution of Godhoods.
There is a material or supermaterial primal source, and a material or supermaterial activation of the primal source from within the primal source, at the beginning of every universe. And this same primal source and activation from within is present in all life, including human life.
Tuesday, November 22, 2016
"Everything is what it is, and not another thing." (Bishop Butler, 1726)
Contrary to Plato, mathematical things, triangles, as well as such things as justice, beauty and love, are human definitions pertaining to actual objects, they do not exists as entities in themselves.
Nonexistent spiritual definitions have been given far too much attention and power in religion and philosophy, which has led to misdefining and degrading the real world. Ascetics even put up a Great Spiritual Blockade against the material world, which actually blocks the real path to Godhood of material evolution. When people like Paul Tillich or Heidegger say such things as, “God is being-itself, not being,” they perpetuate the same belief in nothing but a mode of thinking.
Spiritual definitions need to drop back to their support role or defining role and they need to cease to be Gods themselves. The natural world has to be unblocked if we are to reach real Godhood by way of evolution. The confusing name-games for God will stop when Godhood is seen as existing in the same sense that everything else exists. The exoteric needs to rise again over the esoteric in religious theology, and does so with theological materialism where Godhood is seen as a supermaterial object evolved to in the material world.
The Twofold Path makes room for the traditional, non-object, idea-only definitions of the God-Within, or Father-Within, of the Inward Path of the great religions---this is included but transformed in the Outward Path of the Theoevolutionary Church. This brings the real world into religion and religion into the real world, and most importantly, it unblocks the long-blocked natural path to evolving to real Godhood, the real purpose of existence, which is only reflected in the God-Within. This is a transvaluation of Plato's and i dare say Heidegger's world.
An unmanifest God, which can be seen in Hinduism, and in the Christian Meister Eckart, is a definition, or principle, or denotation, or an intuitive experience of God, but this is not Godhood. Plato too saw an unmanifest God, as did his followers. God or Being has been seen as unmanifest all the way to Heidegger, whose Being remains a hidden Being, or is a process of the human mind where Being needs thought to manifest itself.
Heidegger's chilly Being seems not to be exactly the same as the loving God of Aquinas, but both thinkers see Being as not an object in time but a process happening through human thought or special experience. Aquinas at least does say that even if we can not know God completely, God is there knowing himself, God is a mystery but not to himself. Although the God of Aquinas does manifest the world, his God remains a nonmaterial, unmanifest God, and not a manifest-supermaterial-evolved-Supreme Object-in time-Godhood, as Godhood is seen in the Theoevolutionary Church.
This God or Father-Within of Aquinas (and the Eastern religions) is found in the Involutionary Inward Path, it is the “unmanifest” God contained in the virtual tabula rasa Soul. This Father Within is attained or experienced by first ridding the body of all material desires and surrendering to the Soul. Nevertheless, it is only through the Evolutionary Outward Path that one can attain Real Godhood in the cosmos. This requires not ridding the body of material desires but fulfilling the goal and promise of material desires in evolving to Godhood, the supermaterial zenith of the material world .
Philosophers and theologians have compressed too many things in God, for example, God as Creator, Sustainer and Destroyer, when these things derive from different things, even if they are related. Primal Matter and the Spirit-Will within Primal Matter seem to be the creator, and natural evolution is, at times, the destroyer, and Godhood is the manifested Zenith of natural and supernatural evolution.
I do allow the ideal to go beyond man's mind alone and beyond man's existence. The ideal meaning can appear within the Spirit-Will which exists within man and within life. But this is a Spirit defined as remaining in the material-supermaterial world as part of the natural world. I think when early phenomenology tried to avoid metaphysical constructions it cut its head off, which is what science did...
This also means that man is not as “free” as Heidegger suggested. We are not “hurled” into the world with no idealistic-natural goal. The goal of the Spirit-Will is to activate our material being at any given stage of evolution to evolve to the Zenith of Beings, which is Godhood. We are determined from within by the Spirit but shaped from without by “freer” evolution.
Heidegger seems to think that language not merely expresses the world, including Being, language gives the world shape, the shape of Being is always and only linguistic. ( see “Heidegger and Aquinas,” Caputo).
This is considered a problem in modern philosophy, but it is not a problem in reality. Language should not and does not create the actual world, or create Being, when it does it is giving itself far too much importance.
I think language remains what it was for Aristotle and St. Thomas, an exterior sign of interior mind. Language does not give birth to Being, when it does it is in error.
The error of relativistic Structuralism seems to be in this Heideggerian reading of language, to them Being always depends on the language used to define Being, so there are different Beings for different languages, since Being only exists in languages.
We invent being with language when we don't know what Being is, but this invention does not mean that Being is only an invention of language, it illustrates that we are inventing Being with language and not that Being is only language.
Being is an Object, a Thing, and man can try to put a word to Being, but the word does not create Being. The exact, Absolute, Real Word or Words for Godhood can only be known by Godhood, or perhaps by a penultimate God.
As we become higher evolved we will better define Being, but language will never be Being Itself, not even with Godhood. Even with Godhood, language will still be the exterior expression of interior mind--- in Godhood's case, it will be Absolute Exterior Expression of Absolute Interior Mind.
No wonder that solipsism rears it's selfish head in philosophy, which seems to me to be a false entrapment of the ego in itself. I find the world real, the Spirit-Will real, and Godhood real, as actual existing objects. Being and being-to-Be have material and supermaterial substance as objects.
I think I also reject Heidegger's definition of Being more or less as time. Profound as this philosopher was, this seems to be a rejection of the actual object in favor of a definition of certain moving aspects of the behavior of objects. Time the definition is not Being the object.
Likewise Plato's Forms are not Being, forms secondarily define Being. In the old paradox, does unity define being or is unity beyond being? I say the form or the thought of unity is only that, a thought in the mind-brain of being or Being, and unity is not a real object. Unity is only part of being as the mind-brain is only part of the body. Total unity, or Absolute Unity would happen with Godhood attained at the zenith of material evolution (with supermaterialism). That is, Godhood's mind knows, but only knows within the united Body of Godhood.
Now if philosophy wants to try to define this real world just described in epistemological detail it is welcome to do so. But I think Being has to be rescued from such things as Heidegger's definition of Being as the history only of Being. Being and being are more than any kind of definition of Being.
Is this “faith” I am applying in defining reality, the leap of faith? Theological materialism is a religion after all, a religion with a kind of idealistic materialism, but an idealism grounded in the projected goal of an evolving living object with immanent and transcendent real substance.
I am beholden to no one for this “heresy” which allows me more freedom than most---some would say perhaps too much freedom. Is my perspective really “poetry” or does it move outside of philosophy? Like a pre-philosopher I see no difference between existence and Being and I see no separation between essence an existence. Essence would be the Spirit-Will within the existing real object being.
Time follows Being, time defines the existence of Being, time is not Being, as Heidegger seems to suggest in “Being and Time.” Time is not an object, but Being is an object.
Thinking of time as Being is like thinking of God as beyond the object, beyond materialism, even beyond supermaterialism. This is making an idol of denotation and definition.
“Being” doesn't mean unchanging “permanence,” Godhood Itself seems to transform into a new cosmic Godhood, the old cosmos continues to be activated by the evolutionary Will To Godhood, or Spirit-Will, until it has reached its final goal of Godhood, then it seems to begin again, or continue on to even higher Godhood.
Being does not “stand outside” of existence, even speech and thought are part of Being, as the mind is part of the body.
I think that in standard ontology, Being (big B) is the definition or denotation only of being (small b) as in this the brain defines the body. Even in Godhood Being is the mind of God (being). Being depends on being and being depends on Being.
This suggest to me that the being of ontology deserves the large B of Being because the overall total being is superior in its totality to the Mind or Being. Being is never separate from being. Being never “emerges” away from being on its own. Being or Godhood simply exists as a supermaterial object who knows itself fully as it exists.
This relates to what I see as the false separation between “essence” and “existence.” The essence, or idea, is never separate from the existence of the object in the same way that Being is not separate from being.
Aquinas, the central philosopher of Catholicism, sees Being as act, to be is to act, and this I can agree with. But Being also exists as a living being that has evolved to Godhood, which is the potential of all other objects in the cosmos. Being then transforms, or continues evolving as other lesser objects transform, into the next cosmos or the next being.
There is no It or Being left behind when being emerges from being, or Godhood. Only the Spirit-Will remains within matter activating the next cosmos.
It should be understood (it may be obvious) that my thinking on Being and being, like Aquinas, is ultimately mystical, “ratio” knows its place. I conceptualize a mystical view of Godhood (intellectual intuition) but I consider conceptualization a lesser instrument than knowing or being the total Object Itself.
In the tradition of trying to understanding Being historically comes the next stage of understanding Being in an evolutionary way, this is the “metaphysics” of theological materialism.
But traditional metaphysics sees Being as eternal, always existing outside of history, so it is really ahistorical, not unlike much of modern philosophy, in seeing Being as withdrawn from the world.
There is a separation between what I call the idolatry of denotation and Real Godhood. The denotation and defining becomes the idol, the God, is given eternal life outside of material and even supermaterial life.
Being does not “withdraw" from the historical or evolutionary “sending” (Heidegger's term) of life, time and history are only denotations, definitions of actual living and transforming Being and beings, which do all the sending and begetting---nothing outside of living objects does the sending or transforming.
There is no “oblivion of Being” (again Heidegger's term), there is only the transformation of Being or the evolution of beings.
I do not think we should feature the “principle” of substance, called “form” by Aristotle, who thought form was the highest principle of substance. This is how religion and philosophy veer off beyond reality, beyond the object, beyond the truth of the object. Truth is an object first, a principle second.
Godhood or Being should not be envisioned as form or principle or abstraction but as a Supreme Object, a Supermaterial Object of substance, or super-substance.
The Spirit-Will is the acting animator of material-supermaterial being, all the way to Godhood, whereupon Godhood is transformed into a new cosmic Godhood containing the animating Spirit-Will within each material being.
For St. Thomas, Being is act, not substance, which would be like saying God is Spirit-Will (although the Spirit-Will is an acting substance). The Spirit-Will, which is material, is not Being or Godhood, the action of the Spirit-Will is part of evolution, Being is a Supreme Acting Living Object.
To Heidegger, Being is also not causality or actuality but the radiance of what shows itself to us (Caputo, “Heidegger and St. Thomas"). But Being is the Zenith of Causality and Action, more than “mere” radiance which is “only” a property of the Object Supreme Being.
Truth is found in objects, in things, which are then seen and described by minds. Minds require bodies, just as the Soul and Spirit-Will require bodies. A Divine Mind exits in the Divine Body of Being.
Transcendence is another word for evolution, the transcendence of being to Godhood is evolutionary, and the transcendence or transformation of Godhood into a new cosmic Godhood is evolutionary.
As to proof, describing this ontology and metaphysics corresponds to Heidegger's preference for the poet's way of naming Being, as poets and thinkers who have been touched by It (in older words, faith and intellectual intuition). I am waiting for more concrete “scientific” proof, for example, proof of the Supreme Substance of Being and proof of the evolution of beings to Being or Godhood, which will come in the future, I believe.
I see it as a device, an abandonment, to say, as Heidegger said, that Being is time, or more precisely, that Being gives Itself to man in the form of time, because our senses operate within the horizon of time. This way one doesn't define the ground of Being.
The way to ground Being is to secure Being in materialism-supermaterialism, to define the Spirit-Will as Essence, which is also supermaterial. One then can define Existence as a material-supermaterial Body, activated by the Spirit-Will, and shaped from without by evolution.
Godhood is this way grounded in Its own Essence and Existence, as all other causal life is, only Godhood or Being has evolved to the Zenith of the material-supermaterial world.
The problem seems to stem from the old duality of material/spiritual and the inability to see God as material-supermaterial, along with the insistence on a wholly spiritual God with no “confinement” in anything material or supermaterial.
Creation is “mutatio,” nothing can be created out of nothing. This is causal thinking, this is theological materialism. It is time to end the battle between spirit and matter, religion and science. At this time, reason and science can take us to the gate, and intellectual intuition and religion can pass us through the gate, until reason catches up.
Heidegger thought that Scholastic metaphysics constitute an oblivion of Being (“Heidegger and Aquinas,” Caputo), but I think religion and philosophy in general have created an oblivion of Being.
How much simpler, elegant, to suggest that all is materiality and supermateriality, which can even explain Angels and Godhood, as well as human life. The lower material evolves to the higher supermaterial. Hairsplitting arguments about “form” and “substance,” “Potentiality,” “purity” and “spiritual versus material” no longer apply.
Angels would be Penultimate Gods, made of nearly the same supermaterial substance as Godhood, which are not non-material pure spirit or pure act. Angels and Godhood are the highest evolved Beings in the cosmos, yet made of the same material and supermateriality as the rest of the cosmos.
As above, so below.
If only “beings” are, what does “Being” mean, asks John Caputo (“Heidegger and Aquinas”). I think Being in this sense is meaning only, and far secondary to so-called lesser “being.”
If you need to give being a capital letter then Being is at the Zenith of Evolution and being (small b) is all evolving life leading to Godhood.
In this way both Being and being are actual physical objects with material and supermaterial substance, in the world, of time, and belonging to causal laws. To “define” these things is far secondary to their actual existence.
Definition is not worthy of the terms being or Being, these are not abstract concepts. Essence is in existence and existence is in essence. This suggest a rejection of any real distinction between essence and existence---this is not Thomist. I uphold the Involutionary Inward Path to the God Within, and I uphold upward evolution in the Evolutionary Outward Path to Godhood without, which is the Twofold Path of the Evolutionary Church. Heidegger's teacher, Braig, seems to have been closer to our way of thinking about Being than Heidegger.
For me the subjective/objective-ideal/real arguments come down to how much of the actual object we can subjectively see. The higher evolved we are---that is, with higher consciousness and higher intelligence---the more we can see of the actual object. We see differently from a dog or honeybee but we also see more of the actual objective object. Heidegger and Husserl seem to deny the whole idea of seeing an objective being-in-itself, and so they deny realism. (“Heidegger and Aquinas,” Caputo)
Seeing more of an actual objective object has apparently enhanced our success in survival and reproduction. Evolving to much higher consciousness and higher intelligence will allow us to see more and more of what is real and actual, and eventually our evolving to the highest consciousness, or Godhood, will allow us to see all of reality and truth, which is the goal of our evolution, activated by the Spirit-Will within life. I do not think it is enough to center on advancing machines rather than genes, as the Singulitarians do in their political correctness, which avoids biological evolution.
I can at least agree with Aquinas in defining Being as the very act of existing, Being as Being, rather than merely defining Being as Being. But I do not think that only in God are essence and existence identical, as Aquinas seems to have thought. Essence and existence are never separate in any life form, the difference is that in Godhood essence and existence have evolved---together never separate---to their highest form. Essence (Spirit-Will) activates existence (material/supermaterial body) all the way from the simple to the Supreme-Being-Actual-Object-Godhood.
Heidegger sees Being as rising up out of concealment (Caputo), but this looks to me like the old metaphysics, making Being pure Spirit separated from the rest of the world. I might interpret this “rising out of concealment” as a description of the creation of the world, but I see no real concealment, I see only different levels of evolution where only a God could be evolved high enough to understand the formerly unconcealed God, who is necessarily concealed from the lower evolved by levels of intelligence and complexity. I doubt that Heidegger meant “unconcealed” in this way.
It seems to me that Heidegger does not make his case for changing the old idea of language as primarily communication, words as an exterior sign of the interior mind, or language communicating meanings already constituted in the mind.
Heidegger wants to reject this “dualist” language theory, but in the process I see only complicated obfuscation---to say that “language is not representative but manifestative” is to me obfuscation.
It is true that we can develop names for things that do not exist outside of our minds, but this is still language representing our interior mind, our interior minds simply can be ignorant of the exterior world and not describe reality. The hope is that intelligence and consciousness will evolve to find the correct or real knowledge of the exterior world, and then use the interior mind to describe that exterior reality.
When both beings and Being are known and seen as material and supermaterial existing objects, and not as immaterial word-creations or definitions, then the language describing these objects can eliminate Idealism and most metaphysics. Language will continue to be an exterior sign of interior mind, but with high enough evolution---perhaps only with the Supreme Object Godhood attained--- Godhood's Mind existing in Godhood's Body will describe Absolute Reality with Absolute Language.
The “unconcealed” which seems to define truth in Heidegger's ontology (and in Ancient Greek philosophy), is defined in theological materialism as an Object. “Unconcealedness” is attained when life evolves to its highest truth and beauty, which is not a definition or denotation but is a supreme supermaterial object called Godhood. Theology and philosophy always end up perpetuating the same belief in nothing but a mode of thinking, definitions and denotations of God. Definitions wrongly become Gods themselves.
A key idea is to define some “truths” as “unconcealedness,” as the Greeks supposedly did, and as Heidegger did after them, but then go on from there and define unconcealedness as a living object, not an idea or math symbol.
If Heidegger was right that the Greek word for “truth” means “unconcealment,” then I would define truth as a material or supermaterial object released from the concealment of nonmaterial, traditional metaphysics, and mathematics.
I could agree with Heidegger's idea that the history of metaphysics is the history of the “oblivion of Being,” but I would put it another way: the history of religion and philosophy is the history of the oblivion of the real object. Given the oblivion of the real object it is no wonder that materialism rejected religion and much of philosophy. In rejecting religion, materialism and philosophy ended up with empty materialism.
In the theological materialism of the Theoevolutionary Church, the real object of materialism is seen as hypertrophied or evolved into the Supermaterial Supreme Object, or Godhood, attained through evolution. This retrieves religion and philosophy and even science from the empty oblivion of Being.
The real object has been lost in almost diabolical abstractions, which means that Real Being is lost in abstractions. Yes, we must use mathematics to technically run the world, but mathematics does not replace real objects and does not replace the Supreme Object of Real Godhood.
We know that living objects exist in the world from the simple to the complex, and it seems possible to think, without abstraction, that a hierarchy of living objects exist in the cosmos, and this evolution could evolve up to the Supremely Complex, with a highest level of evolution, where Godhood would dwell.
A child knows that what he sees is real, without abstractions, even if he does not know that he will see more of the object as his senses and consciousness and intelligence advance. This is basically all that needs to be said regarding how we regard the real world. The emperor of abstract definition has no clothes.
It seems that St. Thomas shifted from Aristotle to Plato in describing abstract God which I don't go along with. This becomes a God of definition.
The abstract idea of “pure perfection” always blockades the real material world, as if the world is evil. But when the material is seen to evolve to the supermaterial then this Great Spiritual Blockade of the material-supermaterial evolution to Godhood will be opened, and true Godhood can be reached.
“...If metaphysics is the summit of philosophy, it is necessary to look for the root outside of metaphysics.” (Gilson)
Generally, both religion and philosophy have been a philosophy of Being without existence, or Being is considered beyond at least material existence. This has been a great error. This has defined God as a non-object, or even as “Nothing” in relation to material life, which is often the way mystics define God. Philosophers and theologians have seemed to “animate concepts,” as John Caputo put it, with “absolute idealism.”
Godhood is a supreme object with essence, existence and being, and not Being without existence as we know it. Godhood is not beyond the material, Godhood is supermaterial, which is not the same as nonmaterial spirit. Godhood is in the world as we are in the world, but Godhood is at the zenith of evolution in the world. The Being of Godhood has existence in the cosmos, as all other objects do.
If metaphysics kills the material world then science should be the science of Being, seeking to discover the substance of the supermaterial. Until then, until science knows it has to be thus, by deepening its search to religious subjects, I have to define idealistic materialism, which seems contradictory but is not.
Heidegger said Being “rises up into unconcealment,” but being is never concealed, although at this stage in our evolution it may be concealed from us. In all life, all the way to Godhood, being is not merely the definition of the object, being is the existing object, from the material to the supermaterial.
Labels: Contrasting Heidegger and the Philosophy of Theological Materialism, Ending The Great Mystic War, Philosophical sociobiology
Ideas have unbalanced or blocked the reality of material or supermaterial Godhood, which is evolved to in the material world.
Ideas have nearly destroyed life. Religion did this before philosophy did this. Before "Being" or the "Absolute" there was the non-material spiritual idea of God.
But it's never too late, we need to come back to life on earth, which has the sacred duty as well as the ability to evolve beyond the earth all the way to Godhood.
We have to begin soon. Arthur Koestler said in Darkness at Noon, "Every wrong idea we follow is a crime committed against future generations." But it is the worship of ideas themselves alone that is the crime.
Next comes the worship of technology, artificial intelligence, etc, but that's another subject.
Those of us who criticize and despise the Big Media had a moment of bitter redemption, but is that all we're going to get is a "dressing down" by Trump of the Big Media? Trump also needs to initiate a breakup of the Big Media monopolies. Will we see that?
Monday, November 21, 2016
Ethnic or racial groups who are anti-Semitic, anti-Black, anti-Hispanic, or anti-White have not understood the message of ethnopluralism.
These groups are almost always racial supremacists and it is that supremacy which is the main cause of racial defamation and discrimination.
Modern liberals and egalitarians also have not understood that an ethnopluralism of ethnostates is the just way, and the most realistic way, to deal with racial defamation and discrimination. It seems too ironic to be obvious.
"Multiculturalism," that is, jamming different groups together in one space and then demanding that they all get along has led to far more problems than solutions. And it is supremacist groups and monopolies who benefit from this most.
An ethnopluralism of ethnostates has the potential to make everyone relatively happy. Those who object to ethnopluralism are usually Global Big Business, the Big Media, Supremacist Racial Groups, and misguided Modern Liberals who actually seek national or international supremacy.
This is why I believe an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, protected by some sort of federalism, needs to be the next big political movement, it deals best with racial defamation and discrimination, but also more importantly allows the deeply natural love of ones own group and culture to shine forward.
Even conservatives can rest easy because the constitutional separation of powers and states could accommodate an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.
Posted by Kenneth Lloyd Anderson at Monday, November 21, 2016
Labels: Political Future, The Ethnopluralism Hypothesis, Why and how an ethnopluralism of ethnostates deals best with racial defamation and discrimination
Friday, November 18, 2016
Both Nietzsche and Freud had big things to say about good and evil, with Nietzsche finding the will-to-power at the root of claims of good and evil and Freud finding sex. But both power and sex are grounded in human biological drives, and those drives have been grounded in the group-selection of ethnocentrism, which has been successful for humans in survival and reproduction, and is a basic part of real human nature.
For example, we have had German and Jewish ethnocentrism charging anti-Semitism and anti-Germanism toward each other, while advancing their own ethnocentrism. The Jews have played this dangerous game for centuries underground leading to periodic pograms, and the Germans tried it more openly leading to World War Two and their defeat.
It must be almost time to bring good and evil, power an sex, and ethnocentrism in from the cold. But not by using the tactic of claiming the Other as evil as a tactic to advance ones own group. The world has become too populated with dangerously competing groups to hide the real motives and real forces behind human behavior.
Theological materialism finds an even deeper drive than short term biological success or ethnocentrism. The root and reason behind these ancient forces is the drive of life to evolve in the material world toward supermaterial Godhood. This religious philosophy does not exploit good and evil by playing the same game of calling materialism evil while advancing one "good" religion against other "evil" religions.
What is finally needed is the open advancement of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, with each protected by some sort of federalism. Then the forces behind the evolution of life toward Godhood can ground human behavior even deeper than power, sex or biological drives, and good and evil can be less exploited and transvalued back to reality. "Internationalism" might then be seen in international research centers for helping the various ethnic groups and ethnic states evolve in the best way, together, toward Godhood.
And humans do need to be thought of as capable of saving themselves.
Thursday, November 17, 2016
How both conservatism and progress are affirmed
With populism the preference for localism and regionalism and the desire for conservative stability turn out to be the best environment for steady evolutionary progress, because good and bad genetic or cultural mutations can, in more stable societies, show themselves and be more quickly yet permanently incorporated. Biology is the current on which we are all carried.
One of the biggest errors in conservative philosophy has been the attack on the idea of "progress." It need not have been so. Both stable populism and evolving progressivism can be affirmed together when ethnocentrism, or group selection, is understood as a central trait of real human nature and evolution, more influential in survival and reproductive success than individual selection.
Conservatives being against "progress" derived essentially from a misunderstanding of the ancient practise of ascetics (Hindus, Buddhists, Christians) who were against all material desires because this was required in their efforts to see or experience the God or Father Within, and it had little or nothing to do with policing material progress. The "fall of man" was directly related to turning away from the desire-free ascetic inward path, and had virtually nothing to do with life itself being "evil."
In theological materialism the limits and restraints on moral behavior come from the requirements of the Outward Path of material evolution to real Godhood, that is, the Godhood only first glimpsed by the ascetics in the Inward Path. Both traditional religion and progress are not rejected, they are transformed in theological materialism.
And politically, radical revolution is also not necessary, at least in America, where an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, in line with real human nature, could be accommodated by the constitutional separation of powers and states.
Wednesday, November 16, 2016
It seems to me that phenomenologists, like Husserl and Heidegger, are a modern extension of Aquinas, but they bring in far more doubt about a priori reasoning and new doubt about empiricism as being unable to find the whole truth. They also tend toward individualism in thinking that the real, at least what we can see of the real, is reduced to what the individual-self can see, which seems too reduced from the sociobiological perspective which I try to apply in seeing what is real.
I don't think that historicism is the answer either, that is, the study of history as the prime tool for defining humanity, I think sociobiology is a better tool. But I would agree with those who think that our questions still exceed the powers of the human mind. Yet I do think these questions may be answered with the further evolution of our intelligence.
I believe in the Enlightenment, the miracle of science, and as I have indicated I especially treasure the new/old science of sociobiology, and such exponents of it as Raymond Cattell and E. O. Wilson. Even so, empiricism and reason do not do it all for me as they tend to do for Cattell and Wilson who do not seem to value intellectual intuition and faith enough to fit my experience of the world. Specialization in various fields has presented the single empirical tree in all its detail but not much of the phenomenal forest.
But I have faith in science and reason that they will one day explain the still mysterious activations of life, such as the inward activation of material life by the material Spirit-Will-To-Godhood, with the divine goal of evolving to Godhood, while being shaped by outside evolution.
Unlike Hegel's worship of the Idea, which places nature lower than the Idea of nature, evolution, in my view, brings nature back to religion and philosophy, and places the Idea as secondary to the Natural Living Object. Evolution is the engine of the philosophy of nature.
When the Idea is made God, as in Hegel (and Plato), and as in many religions, at least on the esoteric level, then Nature is wrongly seen as less than the Idea of nature, nature is seen as the “self-degradation of the Idea,” as Hegel sees it.
I see the Idea as the “degradation” of the Natural Living Object, since I see Godhood not as mere Logos or the Idea-In-Itself but as the Supreme Natural Object, or Objects, evolved to in the cosmos, of which the Idea can only be secondary.
This Great Spiritual Blockade of nature by religion and philosophy needs to be transformed and is in theological materialism.
Something has to be done about the power of the Big Media, which is once again deeply meddling and using lies and dirty tricks in the process of president elect Donald Trump choosing his cabinet.
Obviously we need to reinstate media ownership rules that curb the domination of the media by a few corporations, and we need to encourage a much wider range of ownership of media. But any move such as this is smeared as limiting freedom of the press, when it would really do the opposite.
Back in the 1980's 50 corporations controlled a majority of American media. By 2012 that number was six, mainly due to ending a rule preventing companies from owning a newspaper and radio and TV stations in the same city.
With what we see now going on in the Big Media in America and the West it is easy to see why the first thing dictators do is take control of the Media. Is that what we want? Is that the only way to curb the obscene power of the Big Media which is now dictating to America the culture it prefers? I hope not.
Could Trump take up this cause? It would be as important as reinstalling economic nationalism.
Tuesday, November 15, 2016
First of all, contrary to the paleoconservatives---who are the real conservatives---conservatism is an ideology, a system of ideas and ideals as visionary at theorizing economic or political theory as liberal and Marxist ideology have been. Conservatives attack liberals because liberals say they depend on science only to build their perfect society, but conservatives in reality also seek a perfect society---and they could use a little science in their ideology.
Biology is the missing link in conservative (and of course liberal) religious and political philosophy, which has created a detachment from reality and from real human nature. Both religion and political philosophy have drifted away from biology, or sociobiology, and never fully recognized the implications of the biology origin of most social behavior.
In politically philosophy we need to recognize fully that group-selection and ethnocentrism remain central to basic human nature. This logically and instinctively leads to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates. At least in America the constitutional separation of powers and states can remain and be slightly amended to accommodate ethnostates. These changes do not reject conservative politics they transform it.
In religion this leads to theological materialism: the God or Father within of the Inward Path can conservatively remain as the first glimpse of the real Godhood reached through the Outward Path of material evolution. The great correction of conservatism in religion does not require radical revolution but a transformation of conservatism into seeing real Godhood as supermaterial, not spiritual, and evolved to in material evolution. Science can be a big help in this correction, but not the sole source of knowledge.
Monday, November 14, 2016
Trump won not so much because the Big Media masters lost control of the libertarian Internet of gadgets, it was the greed of the Media for advertising dollars that caused them to follow the popular Trump incessantly and thereby expose "the people" to Trump's populists and nationalist ideas.
The old Big Media tactic of completely ignoring their enemies will now not work with the victorious Trump. But the New Media will soon be controlled by the same old greedy and liberal Big Media people, and they will find a way to either destroy or control Trump. They are like a deadly bacteria able always to transform themselves, no longer stopped by civilized antibiotics.
Sunday, November 13, 2016
Dave Chappelle said on Saturday Night Live last night that he was willing to give Donald Trump a chance if Trump would give the disenfranchised a chance. That's well and good, and better than many non-Trump supporters have been saying, but how many more chances do the Blacks and disenfranchised want?
As Pat Buchanan wrote (who was Trump before Trump) "Untold trillions have been spent since the ’60s on welfare, food stamps, rent supplements, Section 8 housing, Pell grants, student loans, legal services, Medicaid, Earned Income Tax Credits and poverty programs designed to bring the African-American community into the mainstream."
But the chances and the giving are probably now coming to an end since there is no money left to give. Does this mean more Black rebellion as we are now seeing in the streets against Trump, or even revolution? There are always those who want to ride these revolutions to power.
But the conservative transformation---not revolution---which I see coming, eventually, will bring about an ethnopluralism of ethnostates, where different ethnic groups can conduct themselves the way they want to in their own states within our Democratic Republic, perhaps with only a few amendments to the constitutional separation of powers and states. But we will need to retain federalism and balance the states together because we need the geopolitical heft of a large nation to defend ourselves in the world.
That is the best chance all of us will have. Interesting that Luis Farrakhan of the Black racialist Nation of Islam leans in this direction.
Saturday, November 12, 2016
When confronted with a problem Trump thrusts his chin out like Mussolini, but that kind of arrogant stance may be necessary for what president elect Trump is now facing.
Obama and Hillary have done nothing as yet to try to stem the "protesters" against Trump's election. The protesters are, as Justin Raimondo called them, "racial terrorists" enjoying a "criminal bacchanalia" looting and smashing windows and throwing projectiles at police, who are essentially not allowed to protect themselves.
Obama, Hillary, the Big Media, and all the ridiculous Hollywood actors have in fact been race-baiters blaming white police officers. That is some very serious agitation for our leaders to plant on the people.
Globalist big business has destroyed our economy and promoted open-border immigration to enhance themselves, helped along by greedy and probably traitorous politicians. We are attacked from without by Islamists and from within by race-baiters. Trump has said that this will not be tolerated in his administration. We will see.
Racial animosity will not end with Trump any more than it did with Obama, it may increase. Ethnic competition and ethnocentrism are a natural part of human nature, having been the way humans were successful in survival and reproduction for thousands of years, and the origin of group-bonding altruism. Accepting the reality of ethnocentrism is necessary, denying all differences has only made things worse, which would be obvious without the lies of the Big Media and the academic community.
But Trump is not the leader to advocate the ethnopluralism of ethnostates which will eventually be necessary for any kind of longer term peace and harmony on earth. That is the inevitable political action of the future. The U.S. can eventually do this by enhancing the constitutional separation of powers and states.
Friday, November 11, 2016
The British were capable of making democracy work, and their cousins in America, the Swedes also, but the Russians and Chinese not so much, and the Africans have always preferred dictators.
The police are capable of democracy in upholding the "rights" of protesters against president elect Donald Trump, even though the protesters are shutting down freeway systems and generally gumming up the gears of democracy. If the police were the fascists the protesters say they are the protesters would have disappeared from sight.
These big differences are one of the main reasons why an ethnopluralism of ethnostates is the natural political way to make the world work as harmoniously as is humanly possible. Even democratic republics can make it happen, if they have a constitutional separation of powers and states, as in the United States, with perhaps only a few amendments.
It is also possible we may have a non-democratic left or right Caesarism first, depending on who controls the chaos.
Thursday, November 10, 2016
Friedrich Nietzsche began his career by writing about the “German Spirit” and how to unblock and revive it, but as time went on Nietzsche thought that we all need to transcend the national perspective and affirm only individual great men, “good Europeans,” and supermen, downplaying or blocking nationalism.
Nietzsche's rejection of nationalism was at least to a certain extent related to Wagner's imperial brand of nationalism, or Wagner's pushy personality which took up all the oxygen in a room, and perhaps also do to Nietzsche's unfamiliarity or discomfort with male authority figures, having been raised by women only. Even great minds can brilliantly rationalize to accommodate their own weaknesses.
Correcting this error would have required an affirmation of the truths behind group-selection in the evolution of the human species and human culture. Supermen need the nation as much as the nation needs them. It seems to me that Nietzsche might have welcomed new knowledge from the evolutionary science of sociobiology had he had it.
What needs to be championed is the evolution and promotion of great men and women along with their nations, many small nations, ethnostates, with mutually agreed upon natural differences and natural separations, as we all evolve toward Godhood in the cosmos, sharing knowledge and information across a variety of nations. That is a version of "internationalism" we could live with. It seems to me that this is the better version of the new religious ethos which early Nietzsche did see as necessary to revive the fallen world. God is not dead, Godhood has been insufficiently understood. The Inward Path to the inward God of traditional religion leads to the Outward Path of evolution to Godhood, transformed in the Twofold Path.
Yesterday I mentioned how good it was, and somewhat surprising, to see that half the country, "the people" who voted for Trump, were not brainwashed and indoctrinated by the liberal Big Media. Today it is stunning to see the other half of the country weeping and gnashing their teeth over the election because they have been brainwashed and indoctrinated by the political correctness of cultural Marxism.
It is almost more stunning to realize that this outright foolish yet dangerous indoctrination in cultural Marxism is believed by the college educated, and not believed by the non-college educated. Talk about a trans-valuation of healthy values!
Let's hope President Trump can begin to undue the brainwashing and indoctrination. But it is---well again, stunning---to realize how difficult that is to do since it has been an indoctrination propagandized throughout our educational system from kindergarten to grad school.
Wednesday, November 09, 2016
As I absorbed the fact that Donald Trump won the presidency, three thoughts gradually rose to the surface, other than the thought we were right in saying that whoever wins this election it will be due to ethnocentric voting dynamics.
Trump's win showed that "the people" are not as brainwashed and indoctrinated by the Big Media as we think they are. That is important.
The second thought was that Trump's win reinforced those of us on the right who affirm legal conservative change within the democracy, against those on the far right who have given up on democracy and prefer radical revolution as the means to change.
The third thought, a bit more arcane, was the thought that the conservative rallying cry eventually needs to be "order within evolution," with order as the protector of evolution and freedom. Conservatism needs to be more than maintaining the status quo. Change means more than cultural change. Change is more deeply based in genetic changes, which require the time and stability of conservatism in order to advance positive rather than negative mutations.
Finally, an ethnopluralism of protected ethnostates is the real political destination of conservatism. Trump's America, Brexit England, Putin's Russia, Le Pen's France, we are all evolving in the material world toward Godhood, which is the deepest reason for change within conservatism.
Tuesday, November 08, 2016
The dirty tricks, the foolishness, the lies, the obscenely long American presidential election is over as voters vote today.
Democratic voters consist of women, the culturally Marxist college educated, minorities who think big government will help them, and those who generally lean toward a politics of female nurturing rather than male protection. The Republicans get the rest of declining America.
Hillary will speed up the decline, Trump will slow it down. Neither proposes the real solution to the changing demographics of America that is tearing this country apart: an ethnopluralism of ethnostates built upon the existing constitutional separation of powers and states, and rooted in real human nature, which remains kin-centered, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, with group-selection as the primary unit of successful selection.
Whoever wins this election it will ironically be due to ethnocentric voting dynamics, which Hillary and the Democrats claim to hate.
Monday, November 07, 2016
According to the excellent Quentin Taylor, early Nietzsche thought we needed a rebirth of myth-religion and he believed that science was incompatible with myth. Science had destroyed myth-religion, science would eventually prove itself unable to meet the full mythical-religious requirements of mankind, there were limits to reason and science, as Kant and others had shown.
Nietzsche thought as science collapsed as a guide to truth, an old/new “tragic insight” could be the remedy, and in his early work Nietzsche had Wagner's art-work in mind for this mission, at least to a certain extent. But as we know this didn't happen, or was made too imperialistic to happen, so man became myth-less man, man became abstract man, roving philosophically, culturally lawless, unchecked by myth-religion, consuming knowledge for knowledge sake, grubbing for roots. Life became a science, not a life. Postmodernism is mostly non-life and non-material conceptions.
The cure I reflect upon in this blog does not rest merely upon tragic art as Nietzsche advocated but with revitalized religion, religion which can master science, philosophy and art, where both science and religion can supervise our material and supermaterial evolution to Godhood, yet a religion tied to past myth-religion in that the Godhood sought through material-supermaterial evolution is the God or Father-Within mirrored or symbolized in the inward path of the great religions.
We are trapped in a web of definitions signifying nothing. It should be made clear that the great damage done by the concept of political equality was initiated by the concept of "metaphysical equality."
Egalitarianism is hucksterism, although some of the hucksters don't realize they are hucksters. Metaphysical equality is based only on a concept, a definition, an impression or a religious experience of God in the human intuitive mind, which was sought by virtually all the founders of religion.
Philosophy did the same in defining "Being" and the "Absolute" as entirely non-material. But there is no metaphysical equality in God any more than there is material equality in life. Does this lead to the rejection of Godhood? No, not when Godhood is understood as a material or supermaterial living object or objects evolved to in the material world.
We can see the good sense of affirming equal opportunity, but equal opportunity does not guarantee equal results. How can we save the real world from the great damage done to religious and political life by the false equality initiated by religion, philosophy, Marxism, and modern liberalism?
In the philosophy of theological materialism it is the material world that evolves to supermaterial Godhood. Why reject the very material means of attaining Godhood? This also has the added benefit of conservatively retaining past religion as we move toward the future, avoiding radical revolution which rarely improves anything.
Sunday, November 06, 2016
The decline of education requires more than going back to Western classical studies. It requires bringing sociobiology into the humanities. That is, "the scientific study of the biological aspects of social behavior in animals and humans,"(Oxford Dictionary). Math and languages are not the foundation of the sciences and humanities, sociobiology is.
We have developed intellectuals without wisdom, genius-impersonators, like white liberals trying to sing Black blues, or black blues singers impersonating white intellectuals. Colleges used to provide a blind selection process, now they select for equality in line with the prevailing cultural Marxism.
How does this end? Do we have to go back again to warriors and then work up from that stoic source? That happened with the ancient Greeks and Romans.
I know where I would like it to go:
First we ground the humanities in sociobiology.
This logically and instinctively leads to a real definition of human nature, which logically and instinctively leads to an ethnopluralism of evolving ethnostates.
Then we see that biology is evolving upward toward Godhood, with starts and stops along the way.
Then we help evolution along the way toward Godhood.
Then---if I may use a most political incorrect German word---we have Gesamtkunstwerk!
Not just a work of art that makes use of all art forms, but a religious/philosophical/scientific/artistic work combing all the fields.
Does that scare you or give you hope? It gives me hope. It's what I call a lasting foundation for education, for all groups.