Pretentiousness, sublimation, and higher civilization (from the archive)

I have never liked sliding away from the truth in mannerisms, speech and gestures, pretentiousness, phoniness, it always seems somehow weaker... And yet, and yet, I understand that we must sublimate aggression and even the sex drive if we want higher civilization--- those people who cannot sublimate, often remain primitive, violent, and live short lives. We need to evolve far beyond the beast and this often seems to require more than the straight talk and the real behavior that we prefer.

It seems to me that unpretentious people are stronger than pretentious people, just in face to face connections, but it also seems to be true that often unpretentious people are less successful than pretentious people. Pretentious people perhaps have a larger variety of behaviors, roles that they can play, in a complicated society, they sublimate the aggressive instincts. Some just may be inauthentic or bad actors, and pretentiousness seems to be stronger with the striving middle class and less so in the more aristocratic classes. But the skilled worker on weekends with his dogs and his gun acts not unlike the lord of the estate with his dogs and his gun. Also there is no doubt that genetic connections are involved in the ability to sublimate the instincts (see Raymond Cattell's "Beyondism".)

If we let mammalian drives, instincts (ergs), go as they go without sublimation we may end up not moving beyond the primitive level of communication, which may be okay for some roles but not for most roles in higher civilization. We don't want to create opposition between the instincts and intelligence, nevertheless some instincts need to be checked and sublimated, not blocked---sex and aggression are certainly sublimated in the higher religious and aesthetic pursuits...This all adds up to the natural often conflicted behavior of human beings.

That being said, we don't want to move too far away from basic real human nature, and we may not even be able to do so successfully, which includes such good things as kin selection, marriage-making, religious-making, among other things, with group-selection, even ethnocentrism, as the primary unit of selection. I consider the material spirit or will, which activates within material life like a Super-Id, as the zenith of all these instincts, it is leading us to evolve in the material world toward Godhood, shaped by the outside forces of evolution and selection. That is one instinct that is already sublime in its unpretentious primitive state.

We don't need Heideggerian and Traditionalist School gloom

 Heidegger concluded after years study that the West has lost its spiritual strength, lost its Gods, destroyed the earth, reduced humans to a mass, and created only the mediocre, and the Traditionalist School agreed with that assessment.

Rather than killing religion and God, or going backward to a Traditionalist School which repudiates all the great Western achievements of modernity, they might have gone back to the point of the metastasis and rejected the split between the material and the spiritual. There is no non-material spiritual God but we can reach ascending levels of supermaterial Godhood by way of material and supermaterial evolution. Real Godhood is reached by material evolution, which is not the symbolic experience of bliss reached in ascetic practices.  

^{Why didn't the Heideggerians and Traditionalist School followers study more Western geniuses, like Edward Wilson and the great Neo-Darwinist field of sociobiology, or men like the brilliant British/American psychologist Raymond Cattell, or the courageous historian Wilmot Robertson? Why did they not find science (a jewel of the West) nearly as important as Eastern spiritualism (a jewel of the East)?}

I see Heidegger's idea of Being as Time in line with that tendency of intellectuals to overlook the fact that the “names” of things are an abstraction which only point toward the reality of the thing named---the abstract name is not the thing-in-itself. All philosophy and theology is full of this metaphysical error, with God, Being, and Truth as only names and abstractions, often with no connection to real objects. Godhood, religion,Truth, need not be lost when we bring our thinking back to real, evolving, material objects.

The big problem with the Traditionalist view is that there is no non-material spiritual world, there is only ascetic interpretations derived from spiritual language and strict ascetic disciplines designed to overcome or block all material desires, which bring feelings of great bliss to the ascetic that is exaggeratedly described as a spiritual union with God.

If they needed a God and religion why not the ascending levels of material/supermaterial real Godhood reached through material, not spiritual evolution, by employing the Western evolutionary sciences, rather than hearkening back to asceticism, which seeks an inward god by way of blocking all material drives and desires to experience the bliss of "god" (satori, moksha, illumination, etc.), which is really a peak material experience brought on by blocking all material desires.

Edward Wilson's sociobiology makes it impossible for honest people to sidestep the biological origin of our social behavior---which includes religion and philosophy. These men of the West deeply respected the culture-creating West and the Western gene pool; they certainly inspired my work on theological materialism and ethnostatism.

A better way to look at the cultural life of man than through the artistic dualities of rational Apollo and wild Dionysus

In early Nietzsche's “The Birth of Tragedy: Out of the Spirit of Music” the Apollonian gives form to the formless Dionysian and both were needed to create a whole man in a whole culture. Later Nietzsche more or less rejected the rational Apollonian in favor of the wild Dionysian, which was a mistake. But the duality was unclear to begin with.

Sociobiologist Edward O. Wilson told us that "the genes hold culture on a leash. The leash is very long, but inevitably values will be constrained in accordance with their effects on the human gene pool...” Human nature is biologically kin-centered and ethnic-centered, even xenophobic, as well as being genetically gender defined, age-graded, heterosexual, marriage-making, hierarchical, and religious-making, with group-selection and ethnic selection as the primary unit of successful selection, followed by individual selection.

Professor Raymond Cattell found that new cultural creations tend to be the work of genetically/culturally superior intelligences and are developed in two main ways: cultural creations as outlets for frustrations, such as poetry, music, drama (p-culture), and cultural creations that are more adaptive to fit us to the environment, engineering, medicine, science (r-culture), not “merely” an “outlet.” These cultural inventions from superior intelligences tend to require more complex adjustments for the general population than the general population tend to be genetically suited for---Cattell calls this “genetic lag.”

Cattell suggests that we deal with these frustrating discrepancies by improving the genetic composition of a population to help reduce the frustrations, which can spill over into many social problems, including revolutions. It's like having foresight that can lesson the morbidity rate of the group rather than as we see today where people and cultures just painfully die.

I think that is a better way to look at the cultural life of man than through the artistic dualities of rational Apollo and wild Dionysus. Then we can add religion featuring the material evolution of life to ascending levels of Godhood as the sacred goal of all life and create cultures even superior to the ancient Greeks.

The real definition of altruism (from the archive)

 Altruism is, and should be, naturally directed toward those who are genetically similar. The “natural processes have been distorted by ideologies which encourage altruism toward members of competing gene pools...There are six main entities to which an individual's ethical values can be functionally oriented: fellow group members, the group government, other group governments, members of other groups, individuals committed to a Beyondist Ethic, and, above all, the Evolutionary Purpose. Each of these objects calls for precise alignment of its loyalties, in a situational hierarchy among them. For example, a man's ethical loyalty to his own group exceeds that to members of "mankind" generally. However (a) the injunctions of the different "object" ethics are different, mostly, in kind, and (b) circumstances put emphasis on the primary survival of all groups, if the total existence of man is threatened...” (from "A Concise Beyondist Catechism” by Raymond Cattell)

This can work in harmony with the social structure of Subsidiarity. To love ones neighbor is not literally to love the whole world, which would be contrary to real human nature, to love ones neighbor is to love one's kin and ethnic group. Evolution takes place best in diverse, separate groups, we can love the world in the sense that we affirm the right of every group to love its own neighbor, its own group. Then all groups may love Godhood by materially evolving to ascending levels of Godhood. Real altruism and evolution can best take place for all us in protected ethnostates and with an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.

Paying attention to IQ scores is vital to the rise and fall of human civilizations

Courageous and unbiased studies by Prof Richard Lynn and others of the IQ's of various human groups: East Asians (Chinese, Koreans, Japanese) – average IQ 105 : Europeans – average IQ 100 : American Indians, Mestizos, American Blacks, Arabs, Turks, Iranians, Indians, South East Asians – average IQ 85 : African Negroes – average IQ 70 : Australian Aborigines – average IQ 62 : Bushmen and Pygmies – average IQ 54 ---: Ashkenazi Jews have an average IQ of 110-117 : High-caste Indians IQs in the 115-120 range : If 120 is a reasonable estimate for white South African engineering students, the average IQ of the overall population should be 97.

Professor Raymond Cattell courageously found that new cultural creations tend to be the work of genetically/culturally superior intelligences and are developed in two main ways: cultural creations as outlets for frustrations, such as poetry, music, drama (p-culture), and cultural creations that are more adaptive to fit us to the environment, engineering, medicine, science (r-culture), not “merely” an “outlet.” These cultural inventions from superior intelligences tend to require more complex adjustments for the general population than the general population tend to be genetically suited for---Cattell calls this “genetic lag.”

Paying attention to IQ scores is therefore vital to the rise and fall of human civilizations. Cattell suggests that we deal with these frustrating discrepancies with eugenic measures ( improving the genetic composition of a population) to help reduce the frustrations, which can spill over into many social problems, including revolutions. It's like having foresight that can lesson the morbidity rate of the group...Sounds more humane to me than what we see today where people and cultures just painfully die.

Eugenics is already shaping where the next generation wants to go in education, and parents are already using testing and screening, genetic counseling, birth control, in vitro fertilization, and genetic engineering, and we can move on from there, as the deceitful paralyzing of eugenics begins to wind down.

The deeper more serious problem for me that comes from blocking eugenics is that it blocks the sacred mission of life evolving toward Godhood. We do not launch ourselves out on a goalless adventure of evolution, our goal is to materially evolve to ascending levels of  Godhood, which is the goal of theological materialism.

An ethnopluralism of ethnostates for all groups, black, white, brown, yellow, or red, could deal best with racial defamation and discrimination; ethnostates could allow the deep natural love of ones own group and culture to continue evolving and improving, protected by a defensive federalism. An ethnopluralism of ethnostates could be established legally in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states. 

Cattell suggested setting up international research centers of sociobiology for studying the causes of the decline or rise of nations, which could advise the ethnostates. The research centers would be only advisory, we are not talking about world power here. .. Then we can all get on with evolving toward Godhood.

How I interpret Raymond Cattell's eugenics---yes the dreaded word (from the archive)

Human evolution proceeds ultimately by natural selection among groups, which then determines the natural selection among individuals, genetically and culturally. The ethics of the group are fixed by aiming to survive in reaction to the environment. We have loyalties in a hierarchy of values from fellow group members to mankind in general.

New cultural creations tend to be the work of genetically/culturally superior intelligences and are developed in two main ways: cultural creations as outlets for frustrations, such as poetry, music, drama (p-culture), and cultural creations that are more adaptive to fit us to the environment, engineering, medicine, science (r-culture), not “merely” an “outlet.”

These cultural inventions from superior intelligences tend to require more complex adjustments for the general population than the general population tend to be genetically suited for---Cattell calls this “genetic lag.” It's like the old instinctual brain having to adjust to the newer cortex.

Cattell suggests that we deal with these frustrating discrepancies with eugenic measures ( improving the genetic composition of a population) to help reduce the frustrations, which can spill over into many social problems, including revolutions. It's like having foresight for groups akin to a medical watch on individuals, which can lesson the morbidity rate of the group...Sounds more humane to me than what we see today where cultures just painfully die.

Adventurous societies will always be looking for new helpful (not antisocial) inventions from superior people, which then need adjustment to the general population. The goal is to always be evolving, which Cattell believes is the prime process of the universe. He calls this scientific religious philosophy "Beyondism."

I adjust Cattell's prime process of the universe to the material evolution of life to ascending levels of supermaterial, not spiritual, Godhood.

Modifying the weakness of democracies

James Madison said qualifications such as those of wealth, of birth, of religious faith, or of civil profession do not define what he meant by a natural aristocracy. But this does not or should not mean that genetics are not involved in defining a merit based natural aristocracy for any political system. We cannot rule out genetics even as those who make the social effort to cultivate and perfect certain traits and capabilities are likewise involved in defining a natural aristocracy.

Raymond Cattell had an interesting way of modifying the weakness of democracies, which tend to end up with the legal robbery of haves by have nots. The idea is to modify the weakness of democracy with a healthy form of meritocracy. Cattell based the selection of merit on his psychometric research into intrapersonal psychological structure, with such things as his empirical studies of Culture Fair Intelligence Tests to minimize the bias of written language and cultural background in intelligence testing.

Cattell, a British and American psychologist known for his psychometric research put it this way: majorities in democracies can tell you what they want, then an elite selected by comprehensive testing of merit can help you actually get what you want, rather than having the ill-informed, greedy, power hungry, corrupt, selection process of most democracies, which define their elites.

Getting the reconciliation of the individual and the group right means, among other things, discerning the difference between creative social individuals and creative antisocial individuals, which modern psychometric testing can help with (was Hegel social and Nietzsche antisocial?) This assumes the sociobiological knowledge of the biological origin of most of our social behavior. Cattell's tests work quite well in telling us much about social and antisocial people (as long as there is room for outsiders to fall through the cracks, which, being outsiders, they often do.)

The bottom line for me in thinking about the group and the creative individual is to let individuals and outsiders freely create with no strings attached, that is, philosophers, artists, engineers, scientists, or whoever, but in the end the judgment has to come down to understanding and judging the difference between the social and anti-social works.

The related subject of ethnostates and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates also seeks to conservatively modify the weakness of democracy by advocating a way to deal with the growing variety of ethnic groups in America with very different genetic pools and different agendas, which could be done by adapting the Constitutional separation of powers and states to develop ethnostates, in harmony with real kin and ethnic-centered human nature, and then protecting them with a defensive federalism.

These ideas conservatively reform what we have now rather than having destructive radical revolution from the left or the right.

Denying the opportunity to phase out some of our undesirable genetic disorders

As Natalie Regoli wrote, it's a simple fact that choosing healthy mating partners and controlling the offspring can improve the quality of human life. But when that is not done engineering the genetic makeup of a child can eliminate hereditary conditions that lead to deformities, mental and physical problems. It then acts as a preemptive protection for the child so that he or she will no longer worry about inheriting genetic disorders from his or her ancestry.

Eugenics is already shaping where the next generation wants to go in education, and parents are already using testing and screening, genetic counseling, birth control, in vitro fertilization, and genetic engineering, and we can move on from there, as the deceitful paralyzing of eugenics begins to wind down.

One of the stupidest things humans have been doing at least since World War II is denying the opportunity to phase out some of our undesirable genetic disorders. This also relates to denying the biological origin of social behavior.

Positive eugenics is aimed at increasing desirable traits, while negative eugenics refers to decreasing undesirable traits, but we can't even advocate decreasing undesirable traits without some loudmouth calling us racist.

It is true, as Regoli points out, that engineering desirable offspring is now very expensive. Not many couples can afford hiring a team of geneticists to engineer their next baby. This further widens the gap between the rich and poor, with the rich producing the more dominant and more superior offspring. And down the line eliminating genetic disorders might also produce humans with similar genetic makeup and a shallow gene pool, with a lack of diversity.

But basic human nature is genetically kin and ethnic centered and if idiotic multiculturalism is not forced upon us we naturally separate into ethnostates and diversity naturally continues.

Some of the best thinking on eugenics over the past 30 years comes from Raymond Cattell's book, “Beyondism,” (1987), especially the tightly packed 16^th chapter. I would have future sociobiological research centers built on many of Cattell's ideas, which could then be applied to our religious evolution toward supermaterial Godhood.

For me the deeper more serious problem in blocking eugenics is that it blocks the sacred mission of life evolving to Godhood. We do not launch ourselves out on a goalless adventure of evolution, we need not remove God or Godhood from evolution, our goal is Godhood.

We can learn to prevent the decline and early death of a variety of people, ethnic groups, and societies by understanding the social and biological patterns that bring collapse, and by applying voluntary population control and genetics. We can help prevent negative ends, but we can also civilize the beast and seek positive ends, even as we recognize that competition, separation, and distinctiveness are a good thing on the evolutionary path to Godhood.

Thoughts on war and the need for a deeper realism

Raymond Cattell's best argument against war was that when regarding evolutionary ends it is the quality rather than the size of the group that should be the basis for natural selection.

This for me underlines the realist position on war (see Barry Posen) regarding the strategic position of the U.S. The U.S. is enormously powerful, geography favors the the U.S. due to ocean barriers and relativity weak neighbors, and we will best procure our security with a transition back to realism, and away from both the liberal and neoconservative idea of hegemony in the world, which tries to maintain a unipolar world dominance that does not seriously take into account ethnic/racial, national, religious, and identity politics, which are the most powerfully human instincts against a unipolar world.

The neoconservatives and liberals (and even some religious  conservatives ) have taken the Hellenized position of a universal elite who think ideas can transcend tribes, cultures and epics, but this never works well. Like Rome, America is, or used to be, too pragmatic for the idealism of Greek philosophy, we wanted to build roads more than philosophy. People create ideas, ideas then reflect the biological traits and needs of the people.

We need to build more than roads, philosophy needs to get back to philosophical naturalism. I believe traditional religion also needs to affirm theological materialism. We are realistically evolving to Godhood in the material and supermaterial world and we need long term realistic strategies to do so. Wars of hegemony in the world are to be avoided. We need to take into account ethnic, national, religious, and identity politics, which are the most powerfully instincts against a unipolar world. Ethnic or racial imperialism needs to eventually give way to ethnopluralism, with regions and states set aside for ethnic/racial cultures, protected from marauding imperialists, supremacists, and global money grubbers, by a light federalism.  This could legally be accomplished by adapting the U.S. constitutional separation of powers and states to an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.

Future evolution

Obviously the future evolution of life and specifically human life is a complicated synthesis of human nature, the environment, and the biological origin of social behavior, but first we have to survive, and surviving depends on correctly defining real human nature so we can know which social structures will work best with human nature, that is, which social structures will lead to survival and reproductive success for distinctly different ethnic groups and races now competing on earth.

Raymond Cattell remarked that we seem genetically unadapted to large altruistic societies, yet man has a natural tendency toward tenderness and protectiveness and altruism toward kith and kin. This is one of the biological pillars of the political argument for localism and small ethnostates over large multicultural states: localism and regionalism are the most natural way to hold civilization together with natural altruistic group behavior, and better keep us from the selfish anti-social behavior which happens in large groups.

The latest fashion of machine technology seems to proceed in direct proportion to the devaluation of human biological evolution. I am not against technology but the evolution of biological man needs to be valued higher than the evolution of machines. Technology is only an aid in the evolution of life, even if the restrictions of political correctness (cultural Marxism) make it difficult to say so. Life and evolution need defending. The Great Spiritual Blockade to real Godhood needs to be unblocked.

There is something fishy about “singularity” or machines evolving to be as intelligent as humans. It makes it look like humanity is too scared to advance intelligent humans and beyond, rather than (or as well as) advancing machines. It seems like a cunning bypass of the subject of future genetics because it is a politically incorrect subject and doesn't fit various agendas. We have to get over the abuse of genetics and eugenics of World War II, truly healthy people don't dwell on such negative things as a way of life.

We can use technology to help advance humans, but to become machines and possibly therefore lose future human evolution sounds a bit sick. We seem to be allowing deceitful nerds with media power to determine our future. Let's have a little courage and begin to at least talk about the great evolution of real life toward Godhood, only aided by intelligent machines. It's actually a religious mission.

The future superstructure of genetics and bio-engineering need to rest on the evolutionary base of biology, and not become a new artificial structure without a natural base, arrogantly overlooking the biological origin of social behavior. We can enhance our genetic and biological capabilities endlessly as we evolve toward Godhood, but if we upload ourselves into silicone chips we could end natural evolutionary life, which is a diabolical end.

There seems to be something almost paranoid about those who see racism behind any talk of the improvement of hereditary qualities, which is taken to the point of preferring artificial evolution to biological evolution. A very cynical reading could also see those who wish to stop the evolutionary biological improvement of hereditary qualities as an underhanded way to enhance their own genes, consciously or unconsciously, by stopping the advancement of others.

Ethics can be inferred from evolutionary history (what else?) otherwise we attempt to go beyond nature itself. As Cattell said, this does not mean we will not move beyond the human species---ethnocentrism, for example, is a conservative stopping off place to secure beneficial mutations before moving on to the next stage, the next pause, the next species.

Is there a direction to evolution? The evolutionary process has shown a direction toward higher, more complex, more intelligent, more conscious forms, in spite of occasional backward going and stagnation. Evolution gives us hints of direction so we may aid evolution in the direction it is going, applying the sciences of sociobiology and genetics.

Cattell's “Beyondism” seems to suggest that progress is blind, and he thought we can therefore only speak of “going beyond” what we are. I believe that life and evolution show a religious goal of attaining the supreme survival success of ascending levels of Godhood by way of evolving in the material and supermaterial world, activated from within, and shaped by by natural selection and evolution from without.

 

This means ascending levels of Godhood from man to superman to supermaterial Gods and not a transcendence from material life to non-material ''spiritual" life.

We can learn to prevent the decline and early death of a variety of people, ethnic groups, and societies by understanding the social and biological patterns that bring collapse, and by applying voluntary population control and genetics. We can help prevent negative ends, but we can also civilize the beast and seek positive ends, even as we recognize that competition, separation, and distinctiveness are a good thing on the evolutionary path to Godhood.

When we look at long-term evolution what is important in choosing wives and husbands?

Do women judge the status of men as more important than looks perhaps knowing that their children will have a better chance in life with a high status husband? This would happen a bit less now with more independent working women. And young women seem less class conscious and looks tend to be rated higher with them than status---but this changes as women get older. And high status people often choose beauty over status and low status people often choose status over beauty. When we look at long-term evolution what is important in choosing wives and husbands?

In the long term, group selection has been more successful than individual selection. As Raymond Cattell and Edward Wilson have said, evolution proceeds ultimately by natural selection among groups, which determines and is determined by natural selection among individuals, genetically and culturally. The only ultimate test of the fitness and progress of a group's culture-genetic make-up is whether it survives, historically.

As Wilson put it: "Within groups, selfish individuals beat altruistic individuals, but groups of altruists beat groups of selfish individuals." Cattell believed that the key to evaluating the individual and the group was for society to have a way to understand the difference between socially gifted work and anti-socially gifted work. Cattell sees survival to be as dependent on genetic as cultural bases, and one change of present values indicated is in a more enthusiastic pursuit of eugenics. This involves the acceptance of genetic individual differences, without envy or malicious obstruction, and of better education for the gifted.

Cattell sees two kinds of cultural developments : p-culture" which adapts as outlets for our frustrations, as in poetry, music, and drama, and "r-culture" which actually fits us to the environment, as in engineering, medicine, and science. P-culture may be training for r-culture, as well as for temporary emotional adjustment; but it is primarily by r-culture that we survive.

Ultimately our sexual choices will be or should be affected by these traits.

Why doesn't the Alt-right feature more Western geniuses?

Why doesn't the Alt-right feature more Western geniuses, men like the brilliant British/American psychologist Raymond Cattell, or the courageous historian Wilmot Robertson, or the great Neo-Darwinist field of sociobiology, rather than converting to the West-disparaging Russian imperialist Aleksandr Dugin and his Traditionalist School teachers, Guénon and Evola, who did not find science (a jewel of the West) nearly as important as Eastern spiritualism (a jewel of the East). Patriotism is unfairly lost in seeing the flaws of the West, which are redeemable. For example, an ethnopluralism of ethnostates or regions could be established legally in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states, protected by federalism.

If they needed a God and religion (civilizations rise with religions) why not the material/supermaterial real Godhood reached through material, not spiritual, evolution by employing the Western evolutionary sciences, rather than hearkening back to asceticism, which seeks an inward god by way of blocking all material drives and desires to experience the bliss of "god" (satori, moksha, illumination, etc.), which is really a peak material experience brought on by blocking all material desires. We can retain the traditional Inward Path to bliss but transformed in the Outward Path of material evolution to real Godhood.

Ethnostates were examined courageously in clear prose by Robertson back in 1993 without veering into Heideggerian metaphysics. A humane religion from science was valiantly mapped out by Cattell. And Edward Wilson's sociobiology makes it impossible for honest people to sidestep the biological origin of social behavior---which includes religion. These men deeply respected the culture-creating West and the Western gene pool; they certainly  inspired my work on theological materialism and ethnostatism.

The courageous work of social psychologist Raymond Cattell

The great social psychologist Raymond Cattell freely roamed all fields and brought highly intelligent insights to all of them, but he was also very courageous, which is a rare thing in academic thinkers.

Cattell worried about the fall of intelligence and the fall of cultural morale and he saw four major things influencing decline: the rise in luxuries (machines, goods), pluralistic ethics (few values in common, moral relativism), loss of the reality principle by the pleasure principle (the id assaults the hard reality of the ego), and negative eugenic survival of moral conduct (altruists die).

Cattell listed three, sometimes competing, ideas regarding cultural change: the materialist idea (economics, environment), diffusionist (copying, borrowing), individual leaders (inventions for the group).

Diffusionists have been given more weight, but invention is more rare than we have thought. Before 10,000 BC man was extraordinarily slow to invent and change; was it the migration of Cro Magnons (now called “European early modern humans”) with their cousins from the East that jumped started things?  Cattell thought both coercion and imitation, and both the materialist and leader schools needed to be included in explaining social mutations.

The great sociobiologist E.O.Wilson affirmed Cattell by confirming the biological origin of social behavior, even if Wilson underplayed the extra courage of Cattell's work on the rise and fall of intelligence in different ethnic groups, which was not “racist” but factual.

Wilson and other academics also maltreated Cattell's courageous work on a new religion from science called Beyondism, which was way ahead of its time, and brilliant---it influenced my work on theological materialism.

Cattell and his friend Robertson even thought about ethnostates to protect variety and differences, and suffered much heat for doing so.

Modifying the weakness of democracies

Raymond Cattell had an interesting way of modifying the weakness of democracies, which tend to end up with the legal robbery of haves by have nots.

Cattell, a British and American psychologist known for his psychometric research into intrapersonal psychological structure, put it this way: majorities in democracies can tell you what they want, then an elite selected by comprehensive testing of merit can help you actually get what you want, rather than the ill-informed, greedy, power hungry, corrupt, selection process of most democracies.

The idea is to modify the weakness of democracy with a healthy form of meritocracy. Cattell based the selection of merit on his psychometric research into intrapersonal psychological structure, with such things as his empirical studies of Culture Fair Intelligence Tests to minimize the bias of written language and cultural background in intelligence testing.

The related subject of an ethnopluralism of ethnostates also seeks to conservatively modify the weakness of democracy by advocating a reinvigoration of federalism to deal with the growing variety of ethnic groups in America with different genetic pools and different agendas, by adapting the Constitutional separation of powers and states to develop ethnostates, in harmony with real kin and ethnic-centered human nature.

These ideas, which sometimes seem pie in the sky, conservatively reform what we have now rather than having destructive radical revolution from the left or the right.

Comparing the political philosophy of Carl Schmitt and Raymond Cattell

Political philosophy is a balancing act in where you place the emphasis of your ideas. German philosopher Carl Schmitt had it almost right in thinking that political actions and motives can be reduced to friends and enemies. But research psychologist Raymond Cattell had it more right in emphasizing evolutionary development. Interestingly, both visionary thinkers were rejected by the establishment yet managed to get a lot of work done over long lives.

Just as feminism is exploited by groups who wish to advance themselves via the feminist call for equality, the friend/enemy dynamic of Schmitt is exploited and hypertrophied by supremacists and imperialists, and those political balancing acts then become more negative than positive. 

 

When the political philosophy is evolutionary, competition is valued but is more controlled and rational. The friend/enemy dynamic remains but means less than evolutionary development. For example, Cattell spent years developing ways to determine social genius from antisocial genius. 

 

After all, if we survive we will evolve beyond the human species to new species and the friend/enemy dynamic will be changing, replaced by evolution versus non-evolution as an ongoing friend/enemy dynamic.

In evolution versus non-evolution the friend/enemy dynamic is seen as often leading to supremacism and imperialism, which more readily makes wars happen, and wars are often more destructive than evolutionary---the refined chess table of controlled and rational evolution is overturned and stopped until order is restored.

When we develop ethnostates and an ethnopluralism of ethnostates in harmony with kin and ethnic-centered human nature, evolution can take place more easily with variety in more natural, less volatile, more harmonious, more homogeneous environments. Federalism can protect the ethnostates from marauding supremacism and imperialism. And sociobiological research centers can objectively aid in helping both friend and enemy to evolve toward Godhood out into the cosmos, which is where the best political philosophy places its emphasis.

 

An ethnopluralism of ethnostates or regions could even be established legally, conservatively, in the United States with our constitutional separation of powers and states.

Is the universe favorable or unfavorable to human beings?

"The universe is a machine for making gods." (Bergson)

Science says the universe is not favorable or unfavorable to human beings, it doesn't care either way. I disagree. Where the universe does seem indifferent is in natural selection.  The best in life is attained and eventually Godhood is attained by evolution, that is, the zenith of life, the highest beauty, truth, goodness, intelligence and power is attained by way of natural selection and evolution (but soon genetic selection) and the universe lets that happen---this does seem to indicate that the universe is favorable to it. The universe seems favorable to life in general because somehow it was/is set up for life to seek to evolve toward Godhood.

Human beings therefore can and should show more than indifference to the universe and its evolutionary patterns, we can aid in the evolution of life toward Godhood by voluntarily monitoring the sociobiological process of evolution and the genetic-cultural development of life with objective international research centers, which could lesson the suffering and decline of groups while fostering variety and healthy competition. (see Cattell's "Beyondism.")

Can we do this? Will we do it? We are capable of it. We may need to be capable of it if we are to survive into the future.

The universe is not evil. 

Understanding the difference between the social and anti-social creative outsider

Taking their clues from Nietzsche, postmodern philosophers were biased toward the individual over the group, at times reaching the level of worshiping the individual. I believe this came from missing or greatly undervaluing knowledge of the Neo-Darwinist science of sociobiology, which showed us that group-selection trumps individual selection: as E.O. Wilson put it: "Within groups, selfish individuals beat altruistic individuals, but groups of altruists beat groups of selfish individuals."

The great psychologist Raymond Cattell believed that the key to evaluating the individual and the group was for society to have a way to understand the difference between the social and anti-social outsider, because creative outsiders can be virtually criminals in rejecting laws. This harmonizes with the understanding that group-selection is the primary unit of selection and individual selection follows after.

The bottom line for me in thinking about the group and the creative individual is to let individuals and outsiders freely create with no strings attached, that is, philosophers, artists, engineers, scientists, or whoever, but in the end the judgment has to come down to understanding and judging the difference between the social and anti-social work of outsiders. Cattell's field was in comprehensive psychometric testing and the tests work quite well in telling us much about social and antisocial people (as long as there is room for outsiders to fall through the cracks, which being outsiders they often do.)

Conservatism in general upholds social change and not radical antisocial change, but this tends to get lost in a conformity that allows no antisocial or social change.

Goals and Means

I agree with many of the goals of Beyondism as suggested by Raymond Cattell: to increasingly have sociobiological education as the basis for social decisions, to promote group freedom for each group to diverge from others, to permit group growth but also group retraction with “cooperative competition,” to avoid the genocide of cultures and groups by pre-analysis, to avoid the hedonism of overindulgent humanism, to except the principle that evolution will proceed as fast as possible, and to set up powerful sociobiological and genetic research centers.

We need to have end-goals but we need to work with what we have---this is the essence of evolving conservatism. Radical revolutionaries tend to think of only the end-goal and give little thought to what they have to work with---and many moderns don't even have a goal. For example, the ethnopluralism discussed here can harmonize with the separation of powers and states of the U.S. Constitution.

Moving on from Cattell, if we get behind thought and feeling we find the instincts of the Spirit-Will, or the Spirit-Will-To-Godhood, or Tirips. We can perhaps define Tirips as the multifarious processes of the instincts which activate life to evolve toward the supreme survival success of Godhood. The Tirips exists within material life and is never separate from it, there is no duality here.

The activation of material life by Tirips toward evolving to Godhood is the unchanging constant, but values within this basic instinct change, as evolution makes new discoveries and presents new challenges. Many attempts have been made to evolve to Godhood in many cosmos, and many attempts were botched or bungled---this is how evolution works.

The big task is to find ways to tolerate and encourage diversity between groups and small states, which are all on the path toward Godhood. Equality is a forcible leveling. Ethnopluralism and ethnostatism are quite different from what is known as “racism.” Racism usually defines mono-racial supremacy and racial imperialism, but ethnopluralism affirms the sociobiologically-defined group-selection of real human nature, for all groups, as human beings continue to prefer kin and group, in spite of the prevailing powerful cultural forms of Marxism.