Successful societies deflect selfish impulsive goals

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.  

What Nietzsche and Cattell pointed toward

I affirm much of Nietzsche and much of Cattell in this blog. Nietzsche was not the libertarian individualist and Cattell not the racist that political correctness or cultural Marxism distort them as. Frankly, I believe Cattell improved on Nietzsche and I believe that the evolutionary religion I espouse improves on Cattell.

We need to evolve and improve both our given genetic nature and our acquired cultural nature, which Nietzsche called our “second nature.” Culture should not be a perversion of our genetic nature. Our actual human nature, where the individual is instinctively tied to ethics naturally created by his specific group-selection, would then tend to lead to many naturally occurring small states or ethnostates, protected by a light federalism, each evolving with variety, and having cooperative competition as the international goal.

But that is not enough. We require a transcendent ideal, beyond the individual, beyond the group, beyond the state, an evolutionary conservative ideal that includes but transforms the old order, and which has as its sacred and transcendent goal our evolution to Godhood in the cosmos. I think this is what Nietzsche and Cattell pointed toward.

Cattell's concern about the entropy of human beings

Raymond Cattell's decades long studies in the psychology of measurement and mathematical modes taught him that IQ differences are not merely culturally connected but are genetically connected. This led to his understanding that IQ differences, as well as emotional control from ego strength, lead to such things as the incapacity to concentrate, which is a poor fit indeed for our complex culture, and this in turn leads to psychological and social problems. However, Cattell recognized that even the criminal element may be with us for the reason that certain traits of criminals, such as self-sufficiency, dominance and fearlessness are also valuable in trail-breaking scientists, inventors and creators. This is bold thinking, backed by science.

Cattell recognized the great value of competition and worried about the “entropy” of human beings in the rush of modern liberalism to end all competition, which would be the worst thing for ongoing evolution. Freedom from all wants and concerns? That “surrenders the ego to the id.” Freedom from fear ? (eg. Roosevelt) That ends the use of the frontal lobes and mankind's progress, since “foresight is substantially fearsight.”

This is courageous thinking in today's world of entropic hedonism. What we need is cooperative competition, ethically directed individualism, ethically directed societies, with more impulse control, and not a state-sponsored forced end to competition. This means we have to deal with nature and genetics, at least as much as we do nurture or culture, and for this we very much need the aid of sociobiological studies from more men like Cattell and E.O. Wilson.

Transcendent evolution as the cultural pivot

We may center on evolving great individuals but Nietzsche didn't emphasize enough the idea that individuals live within groups which are even more vital to our transcendent ideals. Nietzsche's program was therefore more revolutionary than the evolutionary conservatism of this blog.

We need to have our eye on our own age, and we shouldn't live in the past or the future, but we require the broader mission in accord with a transcendent ideal. Evolution is the cultural pivot. But this is not the basis of our artificial culture today, we have no culture in this sense, but it needs to begin, even if the first generations are ridiculed by the philistines and pedants. Such is reality.

Culture can either enhance natural human nature or warp or block it, but first we need to define human nature. Sociobiology stands on the shoulders of past great biologists and social psychologists and it defines human nature more accurately than it has ever been defined before. We are here to survive and reproduce successfully and are cultures rise from this motive---but this is not the only motive.

Evolving to Godhood in the cosmos is the transcendent religious goal which needs to be attached to the science of sociobiology. One might ask, if nature is capable of evolving higher men then why is education or culture needed? Nietzsche pointed out (“The Republic of Genius,” Quentin Taylor) that nature has its purpose but nature can be wasteful, nature does not always proceed wisely, man needs to help nature work toward his own perfection---we have become conscious of our unconscious evolution. I see this in terms of the Spirit-Will-To-Godhood which activates material life from within to Godhood, but then life is also shaped by a far less direct outside evolution.

Nietzsche thought that human existence stands in need of “justification,” with Christianity fading. and with secular creeds inadequate to the task. Our evolution to Godhood is the sacred justification, and with the Twofold Path it can work in conjunction with traditional Christianity.

Intelligence alone is not enough

Intelligence alone is not enough, and beauty, truth or goodness, alone, are not enough. Together they are complete, especially when we evolve to the zenith of these qualities, which is Godhood. This also helps define why intelligence or beauty alone are not enough in defining an elite.

Evolutionary religion finds the ends, science and politics the means

An occasional scientist-politician wouldn't hurt rather than so many lawyers, but politicians can mainly use scientists and scientific institutions for research into sociobiology and social psychology, which have substantial knowledge that has been overlooked or buried by politicians, mainly due to political correctness or cultural Marxism. In democracies the people vote on ends which scientists and politicians can find the best means to attain. This also adds meritocracy and slows demagoguery in democracies.

Sociobiological research can help save the population from decline or even disaster. For example, IQ studies have found the law of regression to the mean of the group. A parent with an IQ of 110 will tend to have a child with the IQ of 105 if they are living in a group with a mean of 100. This sort of thing needs to be taken into account with the immigration of large groups of people with lower IQ's than the inhabitants of a country, which eventually has a big effect on the culture and leadership. As the people change the culture changes.  Examine the facts and motives of those who deny this.

However, alone, the science of sociobiology is not enough, it can find the means to the ends that evolutionary religion and politics decide upon. Evolving to Godhood in the cosmos is the primary end goal of life which religion and culture can affirm, as we move, hopefully, to the next level of civilization.

Harmonizing Religion and Science

The highest goal of politics and culture is more than survival and reproductive success, important as these are, and more than the classical goal of peace and justice. What is missing from science and sociobiology are the more holistic trans-political and religious goals. Science doesn't give a whole enough account of life, but then religion also needs the insights of science.

The science of sociobiology says to me that science can define values, it is not really blocked by the “fact-value distinction,” sociobiology has brilliantly told us about ourselves and why we do what we do, but also sociobiology attaches value to the survival and reproductive success which primarily drives our biologically and culturally behavior.

Modern science is the technical version of old classical reason, even if traditional theology doesn't agree, and science helps us understand the natural laws which can give us universally valid ends. When faith, intellectual intuition and practical thought are allowed into the dynamic of science and natural law, then we can affirm nature evolving materially and supermaterially to Godhood in the cosmos. The “font” of natural law can be seen as the Spirit-Will-To-Godhood which activates life to evolve to Godhood, shaped by outside evolution.

Without revelation, intellectual intuition and faith, science can in fact lead to such things as communism and fascism with life reduced to earthly survival of the fittest, selfish imperialism, or one-race nationalism, because whether it uses science well or not it sees nothing more than the truths that it uses science to discover. Liberal humanism also uses science as its foundation but with with less rationalizing of brutality.

When sciences such as sociobiology are attached to evolutionary religion then the goals of life are transformed from mere survival and reproductive success to long term evolution in the cosmos. This is how evolutionary religion can harness the tension between religion and science, revelation and reason. It can be seen that our evolution requires more than one-race nationalism or egalitarian imperialism. The reality of our populated planet says if we are to survive and evolve out into the cosmos we all need to evolve in our own distinctive ways with cooperative competition between a variety of states and groups. Our goal is Godhood, which ultimately means we are evolving far beyond even the human species or the present races of man.

Man and Godhood in Nature

How dangerous it has been to human history, and human evolution, to give such power and right to a non-material, non-object, beyond-nature, misinterpretation of God, which often led to hating nature and material life.

Both Godhood and man bend to the laws of nature. Godhood is not seen as beyond nature, which could imply beyond good and evil. The imperatives of nature, the right, power and might of nature should not be seen as evil if even Godhood is subject to its laws. Nature does not overthrow morality, nature created morality.  A higher level of Godhood might monumentally manipulate nature but that is not creating nature.

This perspective gives more weight to investigating nature, and the laws of nature.  Rationality, science and philosophical naturalism can enter religion. Theological materialism says that we evolve to Godhood materially and supermaterially, and the mystery of defining Godhood is gradually resolved as we evolve higher and higher intelligence, truth, beauty and goodness.  This is honorable to life, truth, and evolution. It is respectful of Godhood itself not to make of God an airy nothing.

Living in accord with nature and the future

Living in accord with nature also means human nature as was developed in the Hunter-Gatherer age, a nature which we certainly still possess. This harmoniously tracks, more or less, with traditional conservative values. To our inborn nature, or what we inherit, is added the second nature, our upbringing, our education (ie. nature/nurture), and the second acquired nature must not be a perversion of our inborn nature, as it has largely been in modern culture. More deeply and religiously this means living within an ordered conservative evolution activated by the Spirit-Will which internally activates material life to evolve toward Godhood, shaped by outside evolution. This is fully living in accord with nature.

As to the future, as Nietzsche suggested, the development of great people and not merely cultured people, is the supreme goal of education and culture, this is the political, artistic, and religious goal.  In today's language this means the development of great people sociobiologically. And not just one people but many people, grouped in small states and regions of distinct variety, and within the groups great individuals, the Republic of Genius, as Schopenhauer called them, calling to one another across time. If we can survive the present, this is our future, this is fully living in accord with nature and the future...Given who we are, is there a better way?

Admit our modern perversity and the past isn't so shocking

Looking backward in history things which appear shocking to our modern political correctness seem almost necessary when we admit our modern perversity. Modern culture, especially pop culture, seems unable to recognize anti-social talent from socially-redeeming talent. Ex-drug pushers, nihilists, anarchists, less obvious cultural Marxists, rapacious self-seeking businessman, and so on, are heavily promoted by modern culture financially and culturally.

What are some of the results of this anti-social promotion? Economic nationalism doesn't seem so shocking now that globalism has destroyed the manufacturing base and jobs in America, and greatly widened the gap between rich and poor. And “minding our own business” doesn't seem so shockingly “isolationist” now that our meddling in the world has cost us so much and brought nothing but trouble to most Americans. Preferences for ones own kind, recognized in the past, does not seem so shocking now after the great trouble caused, without success, in trying to make us all the same. And certainly without condoning the huge number of rapes in the military, perhaps keeping women largely out of the military in the past now seems not so shocking.

All the traits of human nature as defined by classical conservatism (not neoconservative) and by the science of sociobiology do not seem so shocking when we admit the modern perversity which has all but buried real human nature and healthy culture. Who are the promoters and why have they so maliciously promoted this perversity? Is it ignorance? It seems to have simply been the will to power of the promoters, who sought power by way of weakening traditional culture.

This has predictably led to much lower morale in the population, more alcoholism and drug addiction, more law breaking, more prisons, more egoistic consumption of luxuries, which has weakened the nation and denied money and effort needed for self-defense, research, health, and so on.

And thus a nation and a people decline... It needs to be turned around, perhaps beginning with the promoters of our decline.

Toward evolutionary conservatism

Nietzsche thought the aim of education was not merely to “know” the past but to produce and cultivate individual greatness in the present culture, which is what the ancient Greeks did so well. But now we need also to be concerned with developing great individuals sociobiologically, not merely culturally. This sounds shocking to modern minds because we don't admit the modern perversities. For example, such things as demanding absolute equality of conditions for all people is now politically correct, a perverse twisting of the idea of the equality of opportunity. This is perverse when compared with real human nature in human history. The frustrating thing is, these modern perversities were often pursued not with real moral concern but as methods to power for those seeking to rise in more fixed cultures.

But history has a way of snapping back to what human nature actually is, as sociobiology and a few courageous historians have taught us. We need a revitalized conservatism, we need evolutionary conservatism, and we will probably get it, if we can survive that long. A nation and even a world of thousands of mostly independent small states or ethnostates protected by a light regional federalism is what humans form into, if natural human nature is allowed to come forward. And this time with the important addition of cooperative rather than uncooperative competition, which humans are capable of if we try. This will also better permit our continuing sociobiological and sacred evolution.

I agree and disagree with both Burke and Strauss

After reading the thoughts of Jack Kerwick (Modern Age, Spring 2013) comparing forms of conservatism here are my thoughts on the subject.

I tend to agree with neo-conservative Leo Strauss that natural law (natural right) has a rational purpose but I take the essential purpose to be material life evolving to super-material life and Godhood in the cosmos, and Strauss does not go there. I also tend to agree with classical conservative Edmund Burke who suggests we need to live according to the tradition and order of the time and place we live in, which does not have a universal rational purpose other than living. However, Burke does seem to see a universal purpose which only God knows.

I remain grounded in universal evolution and the universal purpose of our eventual evolution to Godhood, where the “particular” group, time and place is affirmed in its unique path to the “universal” Godhood of material-supermaterial evolution. “Rights” seem to get complicated or obfuscated and move away from simpler definitions such as, “Natural law derives from the nature of man and the world, just as physical law derives from the nature of space, time, and matter. “ (James A. Donald)  But then, philosophical naturalism will not go beyond empirical proof to see the teleological and sacred goal to evolution, but I do with theological materialism, hoping science will find proof for this in the future. 

Considering future first principles of government

In its essential social aspects human nature seeks survival and reproductive success in the world. This behavior of human nature is derived from the laws of nature and the task of government is to protect this natural behavior as much as possible.

When there are large groups of people, and with not all of them culturally and genetically similar, with all  seeking to fulfill the natural imperatives of human nature, a civilized way has to be found to reduce the chances of conflict, since war, especially modern wars, often damage success in survival and reproduction for both winners and losers.

Regions and states for this reason need to be protected in their differences and allowed as much independence and freedom as possible so that the people may fulfill the essential imperatives of human nature. Government as a whole is the recognition of this natural behavior, or natural law, and the need to protect and allow it. It seems to me that the original Constitution of the United States could more or less affirm this light federalism.

In the ancient past different groups, or races, were formed mainly from geographical isolation, and ethnics such as altruism were formed in isolated groups to help the groups bond for success in competition with other groups. But in the very populated world of today, present within-group ethics need to adapt to a between-group ethics which affirms our differences. Differences need to be acknowledged with courage and truth; the almost diabolical practice of promoting strong ethnocentrism for ones own group while disparaging and ruling out ethnocentrism in all other groups needs to cease.

In the future, in accord with nature and human nature, I believe we will be more consciously involved in our evolution, in shaping patterns of the distribution of cultural and genetic traits related to our needs and goals, and for this we will need the protection of differences. Religion helps bond people in the deepest way and sets sacred goals with values, morals and rituals. I think governments and religions of the future will apply evolutionary philosophy and sociobiology, with the sacred goal of evolving all the way to Godhood in the cosmos.

Non finito evolution

It seems to me that Socratic and post-pagan philosophy and religion developed too much in cities, too much away from nature, and they had a too abstract, almost anti-nature ethos (art too). The re-purposed or revitalized religious philosophy and cosmogony I write about in this blog is the evolution of life to Godhood, a recurring cosmos, beginning in primal matter, activated from within by the Spirit-Will, shaped by natural evolution, falling back, then beginning again with big bang creations, endlessly, no final mover, a recurring endless evolution, no beginning, no end, non finito. We humans are part of this evolution, and our values and morals, and our cultural structures need to proceed in harmony with this endless evolutionary song, not with one song but with a harmony of songs, all evolving, all moving toward the zenith of intelligence, beauty, and noble character, or Godhood.

Can we outlaw war without curtailing evolution?

Raymond Cattell thought we may have reached the level of civilization where we can outlaw war without curtailing evolution.

True there have been many inventions brought about by war, rocketry etc.. which eventually landed us on the moon. Cattell thought that we might think of war as the lower level of testing the power of a group and that groups might assert their power at a higher level of competition, with technology etc.

Sociobiological research institutes could be set up to examine the problems of nations and states, regarding the various stages that societies go through, like the age-categories of individuals, to help us not only outlaw dysgenic wars but insure the future evolution of culture and genes.

Cattell's important hope was that we can outlaw war without curtailing evolution. Can we really civilize the beast to this degree? Perhaps if we are to survive and evolve out into the cosmos we must.

Educational philosophy and future evolution

“We want to serve history only to the extent that history serves life.” (Nietzsche)

Pro-social and anti-social genius needs to be distinguished in relation to advancing evolution. I affirm some of the early Greek philosophers, perhaps Goethe, Schopenhauer and later Nietzsche and Cattell in seeing a graded reality from lower matter all the way to Godhood, a dynamic natural world with all forms striving upward, all levels of nature directed toward compounding consciousness, all evolving toward the zenith of intelligence, beauty and noble character, which is Godhood. Natural evolution may be beyond good and evil but not beyond good and bad---it is not value free.

Finding and assisting genius needs the help of our institutions. Working in isolation happens in any case, but genius and the works of genius lead human culture, culture follows genius and lags behind both culturally and genetically, and it is the task of culture to manage the under-emphasized cultural frustrations which are caused from the lag. This can anchor educational philosophy which has all but abandoned these ideals in regressively centering on the less talented rather than the most talented. Culture needs to promote the greatest number of exceptional people whose inventions can help the less exceptional. The great culture of the Renaissance was developed by only about one hundred men!.

The idea is that we don't study for the sake of studying as “idlers in the garden of knowledge” (Nietzsche), we study as the attendant of the great current of evolving life. Life precedes knowledge. We study past greatness to help ourselves become great.

Philosopher Frederick Nietzsche and psychologist Raymond Cattell more or less agreed with this assessment of future education, two outstanding masters, although neither essentially acknowledged evolving to Godhood in evolution, and certainly not in terms of transforming the God first seen inwardly by the great religions to Godhood evolved to outwardly. What is vital is faith in evolution, in its continual possibilities. 

The outward evolutionary religious age

The modern world asked the question, should we try to revitalize the collective, or try to heal far fewer individuals? It was predicted that an inward spiritual age was coming requiring near-total libertarian freedom for the individual.

Modern psychologists and philosophers, in line with Eastern religions, largely dismissed the collective modern world as hopeless and they centered on the individual, especially following the second world war. This was mainly the Involutionary Inward Path to the God Within which says there is danger in applying myth-religion politically. But there may be more danger in not doing so.

Sociobiology, a universal science, has overcome the fragmentation and individualism of postmodernism in defining the group as the main unit of selection. Even individual genius, which has been so vital to human progress, must harmonize with the group to have any affect. The evolutionary metanarrative has a universal theme of evolving to Godhood, with particular cultures and people as the central units of selection.

Science examines the world while religion unifies the world.  Science for a time buried myth-religion but it can now be an aid to religion in the myth-religion of our evolution to Godhood.

Theological materialism harmonizes religion and science and can make religion accessible to the modern secular mind. Humans are capable of universal evolution toward Godhood, along with the parallel evolution of a wide variety of individual small states or ethnostates, protected by a light federalism, and with cooperative competition affirmed.

I see an outward, not inward, evolutionary religious age coming. Religion, influenced by the East, has gone inward for most of its long history, mainly denying the material world. In the future we may see the material world as evolving outwardly to supermaterial Godhood, the Godhood first glimpsed inwardly. This is creative myth-religion as cosmic salvation, which can heal both the individual and the collective.

Nietzsche and Godhood

The supreme goal of education and culture for Nietzsche, especially early Nietzsche, was the genius, and the works of genius, including noble character. The more individualistic superman later was the culmination of this philosophy.

The supreme goal of the Twofold Path and the EC is primarily the evolution of life to Godhood, and it follows from this that the evolution of genius, the works and noble character of genius, and the genes of the genius, can help us along in our evolution.

Nietzsche might not have approved of the goal of Godhood as understood through intellectual intuition and proportion, which he might have called an illusion, however necessary, but Nietzsche might have acknowledged the grounding of Godhood in in material-supermaterial evolution, and philosophical naturalism.

Sociobiology (E. O. Wilson) has affirmed group-selection as the primary unit of selection, with the individual relating primarily to group selection. The academic world now needs to have a more transformable cultural role for sociobiology, which could then influence high and low culture.

Cooperative competition in evolution in a world of variety and evolving small states, while affirming ones own particular people and state, might not have been highly valued by Hellenic-loving Nietzsche, but the world was smaller then.

Long term evolution will need the help of international institutions working with national institutions. We can surpass the Ancient Greeks, which might have made Nietzsche happier. But we will need cooperative competition and not imperialism to do it.

Can we have proportion and beauty in the political as in art?

If it is possible to have proportion and beauty in political order as it was conceived in classical architecture then political order is not only an empirical thing, it is also art, and seems to also call for the eye of the artist, at least the kind of artist who sees beauty in proportion and proportion in beauty.

Proportion and beauty are the blending of opposites and the ordering of different things, not merely by empirical mathematics but by artistic proportion. Although proportion has its own numbers, classical architect's adjusted proportion to fit the eye, not to fit the abstract facts in building the structure.

Thinking of a nation or world containing small states, or ethnostates, protected by a light but defensive federalism, with a variety of different groups and environments, and with the universal goal of materially evolving toward ascending levels of Godhood in their own particular ways---this seems like beautiful proportion to me, even before you track it down empirically, which you can also do with the science of sociobiology, which defines real human nature as primarily kin and ethnic centered.

Beauty and proportion are related to aesthetics whereas you track the good in the moral and philosophical fields, but if you think of Godhood the the zenith of beauty, truth and goodness, which we evolve to in the cosmos, then Godhood is where truth, beauty and goodness attain their connected proportion, blending together in absolute beauty. We head toward that in art and in politics.

The artist's eye

By seeking beauty in art affirms Godhood. Also evolving increasingly beautiful, intelligent and noble beings is closer to Godhood, which is the evolved zenith of these things. We materially evolve to Godhood in the material/supermaterial world.

Frederic Turner wrote, “ ...the artist must sail into the unknown, cutting blazes as he or she goes along, blazes that consist of a combination of some symbols already known and some open to question, a grotesque paradox, that opens up the new territory of perception...”

Turner also quotes Shakespeare from “A Midsummer Night's Dream”:

“The poet's eye, in fine frenzy rolling,

  Doth glance from heaven to earth, from earth to heaven.

  And as imagination bodies forth

  The Forms of things unknown, the poet's pen

  Turns them to shapes and gives to airy nothing

  A local habitation and a name.”

The Religious Sociobiology of the Twofold Path

It might appear oxymoronic but it seems to me that a religious sociobiology fits the balancing requirements of unifying the individual and the collective in modern times.

20^th century psychologists and philosophers centered on the individual, understandably being scared away from collective myths by the selfish and deadly collective myths of World War Two. But this abandoning of the collective has led to the disruptive divisions and alienations of modern times.

There has always been a tension between the individual and the group and the same tension seems to exist between science and religion. The evolutionary science of sociobiology has affirmed, or reaffirmed, the primary unit of selection as the group (see E. O. Wilson) and it seems to me that this can revive or affirm  unifying collective myth-religion to help heal the divisions and alienation of hypertrophied modern individualism.

I affirm the evolutionary religion of the Twofold Path of theTheoevolutionary Church where the unifying myth-religion is the evolution of life to Godhood in the cosmos, and where individuals are not ignored and can be meritocratically selected to help lead us in our collective evolution to Godhood. A realistic path can be found toward the cooperative competition of groups, with a unifying myth-religion to affirm it.

The God seen inwardly and individually is included and transformed in the universal outward evolution of all groups toward Godhood in their own particular ways. The unifying evolutionary myth-religion of the Twofold Path can work within regions and small states which affirm cooperative competition, protected by a light federalism. Sociobiology supplies universal scientific knowledge by which particular cultures can be interpreted universally, and the evolutionary religion of the Twofold Path is added to complete a more organic unification.

The Spirit-Will to Godhood and Human Culture

The Will to Godhood, or the Spirit-Will to Godhood, is the most basic activation of life, it is physiologically and psychologically active throughout the living cells, but it remains to be more fully explained by scientific philosophical naturalism. In human beings the Spirit-Will activates the other elements, such as the Ego or Superego, and even reason, resembling more a Super-Id, but with the highest evolutionary purpose of  inwardly activating life to evolve all the way to Godhood, as life is being shaped outwardly by evolution.

The Spirit-Will is neither the master morality or slave morality of Nietzsche, and it is not the purely creative version of Nietzsche's will to power that is politically correct. The Spirit-Will is not dominant for the sake of being dominant or creative for the sake of being creative, it seeks Godhood in evolution by way of activating life to evolve to Godhood.

Authentically developing the Will to Godhood means self-consciously always moving upward in evolution selecting a balance of intelligence, beauty and noble character, until attaining the zenith of these things in evolution, which defines Godhood, the goal of religion, culture and evolution.

The Spirit-Will is the zenith of the Soul just as the Soul is the zenith of the mind. The Soul is the experience or mirror of God or the Father Within seen in the mind after applying the traditional ascetic disciplines of the great religions in blocking material desires. This is the Inward Path. On the other hand the Spirit-Will seeks real Godhood through material-supermaterial evolution in the Outward Path, that is, the Godhood first seen as the God Within. This defines the Twofold Path.

Group life has been the natural method evolved and applied in human beings to help them survive and reproduce successfully. The Spirit-Will to Godhood has worked in harmony with group life in a variety of evolving groups, regions and states. Humans are capable of cooperative competition but civilized advances have realistically needed to be martially protected against less civilized values. It is important to see that we can suppress war without suppressing evolution.

We would best have religious and sociobiological research institutes, nationally and internationally, to objectively, and voluntarily, help guide our evolution to Godhood in the cosmos.

Future myth, religion and politics

If we think the future will be one where individuals seek the Spirit-Within, the bliss within, which seems to be the future most thinkers affirm, then a libertarian frame fits, one more concerned with individuals than the group, with social values oriented toward the individual. But if we think the future will be one where the organic society, the group, the religious based evolves materially and supermaterial to Godhood in the outside cosmos, then this fits a Burkean ordered evolution more than an ordered individualism.

I obviously lean toward the second, a group-oriented evolution based in human nature as it developed at least since paleolithic times. But with the Twofold Path there is room for seeking the God Within individually. This perspective, this new religious philosophy, sees the Inward Path as a symbol, a mirror of the Outward Path of evolution to Godhood. This brings the individual back to the group yet values the advanced individual as helping to move the group forward.

As to anarchism, postmodernism, or neoconservatism, they lean toward the libertarian, or they are selfishly tribal, or they have imperial agendas, or they have little myth or deep religion, which doesn't seem to be bring them into the future. 

Can we have competitive evolution without primitive war?

On this Memorial Day I was thinking of how Raymond Cattell, with his fearless eye, called war a degenerate form of competition, yet he questioned mankind trying to rule out all competition in a hedonistic pact.

Whether we like to admit it or not war has been a test of the power of group survival, but it would be far better to see a higher level of testing between groups through cooperative competition. Yet realism says that cooperative competition in the world would still need to be backed by force, since we are an imperfectly evolved species. Power vacuums won't control invading power.

If we care about advancing in evolution we need to somehow rationally allow for expansion and contraction, that is, the evolution of groups. We can't block evolution, we will have explosions if we do. It will greatly help when we all can see the full importance of distinct groups having their own regions, virtually their own ethnostates, no matter how small. Competition within the same species is always greater than competition between different species, each species tends to find its own niche. Separation is vital for peace. Each group can then get on with the challenges of evolution within nature itself. The United States of America, my country, made a start in its original Constitution, with its separation of powers and states.
 

The idea is to have all groups, all nations, jointly exploring and advancing in evolution without primitive wars, and, yes, we can suppress war without suppressing evolution.

The deeper sacredness of nature

James Cooper quotes 19^th century landscape painter Asher Durand as saying, “Nature in its purity was fraught with high and holy meaning, only surpassed by the light of Revelation.”

But revelation is part of nature, which makes nature even holier than Durand suggests. Nature has evolved life and human beings, and nature continues material evolution all the way to supermaterial Godhood. This is the deeper sacredness of nature.

Religion should not block this sacredness of nature by downgrading evolving material life. Religion should affirm and champion evolving material life as the sacred path to real supermaterial Godhood in the cosmos.

Revitalized conservatism, ordered evolution, and the evolutionary realist

When faced with two opposing positions, say, the new or the old, or just opposing positions, you avoid both by finding a compromise, but a compromise that always leans or moves in the direction of evolution, human evolution. That is, you don't compromise just to compromise with no directional preference.

This way we can gradually evolve with revitalized conservatism and ordered evolution toward Godhood in the cosmos, trying to avoid radical revolution as we evolve. This is more the position of a conservative evolutionary realist with evolutionary religious ideals, than a political pragmatic realist.

Backward and forward culture

Martha Graham once said, according to Jesse Dorris, that no artist is ahead of his time, the others are behind the times. This has also been true of the science of sociobiology which is now at least 40 years old. Sociobiology dismantled the legitimate frame work for much of modern intellectual culture but the world has not caught up, not even our colleges and universities.

Sociobiology dismantled the ground of postmodernism which saw truth, gender and so on as only a social construct, as well as cultural Marxism (political correctness), and even religion as something beyond biology, but few people seem to have realized this.

People tend to deny difficult truths, and also even merely uncomfortable truths. But I don't want to be flippant about illusions, which have activated much of human cultural history, as sociobiology pointed out (and Nietzsche earlier), illusions were important to successful survival and reproduction. But can we now move beyond even a few of these sloppy intellectual constructions? People like to hold on to the personal power they created out of these shaky constructions.

Yet we also should keep in mind that even specialists in sociobiology can be limited with what Nietzsche called only a “patina” of culture. The supreme goal of culture, all ethnic cultures, is the ongoing evolution of genius, with a noble character (that is, not just brilliant monsters), and with the continual goal of evolving all the way to Godhood in the cosmos. We all need to reach beyond ourselves in developing that sacred goal.

Deeper modern myth-religion is required

Old and new myths grew out of human nature and the needs of survival and reproduction in often harsh environments. If we connect mythology to sociobiology we can have a basis for comparison.

For example, Joseph Campbell complained about how the patriarchal myths of the Hebrews and Aryans subjugated the old Goddess myths, but it seems to me that human nature as defined by sociobiology was represented in both mythologies. In the Goddess myths differences in gender remained, men tended to be hunters and warriors, women were gatherers and nurturers, men were men, women were women, and so on, with few exceptions, not unlike the patriarchal mythologies. Particular environments and ethnic peculiarities determined the emphasis, balance, and differences in myth.

It is modern myths that conflict with both ancient mythology and sociobiology. In modern mythology who rules? The politically correct or culturally Marxist media rules. Who are the rebel heroes? Those who object to cultural Marxism. What represents the divine? The Big Bang? Technology? Who are the great goddesses and patriarchs? Billionaires and movie stars. Hedonism rules. Technology rules. Individualism rules. This will not do. Deeper modern myth-religion is required.

I say what will rise is evolutionary religion, which is philosophically and scientifically based in theological materialism. We are all evolving to Godhood in the cosmos, the God first seen inwardly by the great religions. This will do, and it need not have much conflict with the old mythologies, old religions or sociobiology.

Religions are united in the Inward Path and transformed through the Outward Path

I have to agree with Rene Guenon---although I don't affirm the religious philosophy of the Traditionalist School---that the way to reconcile the conflicting demands of the various religious forms is to see the shared esoteric core between them. A single tradition is concealed under the outer forms which degenerated over time.

Where Guenon splits the esoteric and exoteric, while seeing them as two faces of the same doctrine, I separate the Inward from the Outward Paths in the Twofold Path, seeing the Inward Path as that ecumenical core of all the great religions, and seeing the Outward Path and theological materialism as the next religious-philosophical development. This at last brings the material world and evolution to religion, including past excluded science as a tool.

The Inward Path, or more formally the Involutionary Inward Path, led to seeing the God or Father Within for all the great religions, which is their ecumenical unity. The Evolutionary Outward Path includes the Inward Path but sees it as an early mirror of real Godhood reached outwardly through material and supermaterial evolution.

The great religions can join together as one, which they are at their core, and they can retain but transform the Inward Path into the Evolutionary Outward Path to real Godhood. Since I live in the West I apply Christianity to this sacred evolution through the Evolutionary Christian Church.

When the counter-media rises conscious evolution can advance

Nietzsche suggested in “On the Future of Our Educational Institutions” that the “deciding factor” for those selected is not merely the “degree of talent” but the degree of moral sublimity, the instinct towards heroism, toward sacrifice, with a positive need for culture, and a personal obedience to the discipline of genius. Talent alone without this need can even hinder not promote the procreation of genius.

How long will it take for these improvements to no longer be considered politically incorrect? Those who advocate these things continue to be shunned in their careers and in their lives. The cultural Marxism that is political correctness, which has largely taken over our colleges, universities and the media in general, will have to be countered. This is a big mission but there is no better mission for the future. New media, new institutions may have to be created to replace the schools and media if they can't be adapted. It may require the work of several generations.

The evolutionary religion of theological materialism can lead the way followed by the tools of sociobiology. This can be accomplished in democratic republics if a counter-media rises. Revolutions are to be avoided. Classical conservatives were right about constant change within an ordered evolution, and this can be advanced all the way to Godhood.

Fear of the Machine

Individualism is important, even vital, I certainly have benefited from it creatively, but it seems to me that too often individualism is hypertrophied by selfish and fearful men, who are afraid of the machine, afraid of the logic of evolution, afraid of monumental religion and science, afraid of divine cosmic order, afraid that this larger order may rearrange their selfish and even nefarious schemes. We do not always have a principled defense of the individual.

This seems to at least partially come from seeking the truth from only one way of thinking; why can't a thinker use reason, empiricism, irrationalism and intuition, all of them, in seeking the truth? I never agreed to the philosophical battles between these systems with one cutting off the other. We should not be one-eyed, we should be four-eyed in seeking the truth.

We don't need to have empires to believe in the machine, evolution, monumental religion and science, or the cosmic order, we don't need to give up individualism, we don't need to end up with Hitler or Stalin or imperial global corporations, we don't even need to give up the inner individual voice, when we believe in these things. Fearful men scare us away from cosmic order, clinging to their selfish and sometimes nefarious schemes for power, fearful of losing themselves in something bigger than themselves.

We are evolving to Godhood in the cosmos, this is the logic of evolution, this is cosmic order, this is the monumental view, and we don't need imperial dictatorships to direct us. Many groups, many small states, protected by a light federalism, guided by evolutionary religion and science---this is the way to fearlessly face the future, grounded in the sacred.

The way to channel Eros into conservative morality

Christianity has been based in the conservative values of human nature, which were later defined and affirmed by the science of sociobiology. Religion could apply this knowledge if it did not mainly reject science as a way to help justify its values and morals. Since at least hunter-gatherer times basic human nature has been conservative in rejecting radical individualism and unrestrained sexuality, and human nature has approved of such things as group-bonding altruism, marriage between a man and a woman, and other conservative values. Why? Because conservative values over the long run helped us survive and reproduce more successfully than non-conservative values. Human nature is still the same, which means that society and culture may snap back to reflecting real human nature, because going against human nature gradually corrupts and destroys culture, as history has shown time and again.

Which came first, the media-promoted sexual revolution, culminating in gay marriage, or the fall of Christian morals? Christian morals have been declining since at least the Enlightenment when science asked questions that were not satisfactory answered by religion. And as the West lost Christianity it lost its moral foundation, replaced by radical individualism and unrestrained sexuality, largely promoted by a non-Christian media.

Alas, sciences such as sociobiology, when pure, can tell us how things work but not how to behave. This is where the religion of the Theoevolutionary Church and theological materialism come in, which define Godhood as reached through material and supermaterial evolution, while using sociobiology as a tool of evolution and not as a religion.  The Inward God of tradition is retained but transformed into the Outward Godhood of evolution. This is the sacred way to channel Eros and conservative morality toward evolving to Godhood and away from radical individualism and unrestrained sexuality, which have all but destroyed Christianity and the West.

Blocking the particular in the universal

Universal values calling for the sameness of all people tend to be weaker than the particular values of group and individual survival. Religions have usually identified universal values and devalued the particular, even though they make little offerings to the particular, at least for laymen.

The difficulty comes from placing too much value on the Inward Path to the God Within (or the Father Within) which is universal, and not enough value, or even blocking entirely, the Outward Path of evolution to Godhood. The Outward Path affirms material evolution, group selection and cooperative natural competition, the Inward Path blocks them.

Cattell and other psychologists have suggested that frustrated genetic urges which were unsatisfied led to beliefs to fit the frustrations. To me this suggests that the frustrations of natural life and selection led to religiously trying to block these drives and dwelling in the desire-free state of the God Within.

The healthier path would be to successfully fulfill the natural genetic urges, or at least develop cooperative competition to allow more than one group to fulfill their genetic imperatives.

The Twofold Path remedies this historical and imperialist religious mistake of trying to make the particular universal.  The Inward Path to the God Within is transformed, not blocked, because we are evolving to the God first seen inwardly as a mirror of outward Godhood. This is the next religious philosophy attached to the old, this is the new, psychologically healthier, stage in religious development.

A side point to this is that political philosophy has often made this same mistake trying to block the particular with the universal. There are no  large “perfect” societies full of universal saints or world altruists mainly because natural evolving life will not be blocked.

The ultimate cultivation

Early Nietzsche was concerned with education for high culture, which was more socially oriented than later Nietzsche who thought more in terms of individuals, not groups, surpassing present humans. Nietzsche wanted aristocratic cultivation to be free of the mundane sciences and free of more practical money-concerns which he thought had nothing to do with aristocratic cultivation (a long way from the libertarianism some have claimed for Nietzsche). Present knowledge from sociobiology suggest that in the future the cultivation of great men we will need more than aristocratic education, biology will need to be included, the genes are necessarily involved.

Sociobiologists have called for future humanities institutions to be attached to sociobiology institutions, although they don't have evolution to Godhood in mind. We need to find people who can create great works to replace our lost or declined works, which can provide the basis for our evolution to Godhood, but a true high culture is not founded on cultivating minds alone but also on concern for biology. The evolutionary goal is not “merely” culturally developed people who create works of genius, important as that is, the people themselves need to be bio-culturally considered, and even these steps will be steps to even greater people in the future.

To adapt another phrase from Nietzsche, it seems that this future evolutionary religion was born posthumously. It will require more than a few generations. But some generation has to begin the mission.  The goal is to evolve beyond the human species to Godhood, this is the ultimate cultivation.

Thoughts on classic functions of new myth/religion/philosophy

The “universal” is supplied by theological materialism and the life-activating material Spirit-Will, or Tirips. The “specific” is elaborated by the cultural-ethnic-environment in which the universal proceeds.

Cultures take on specific shapes related to their environments and the ethnic/racial traits of the citizens which forms a “style” of consciousness as well as the forms of art, architecture etc. But all cultures are activated by the universal, that is, theological materialism and Tirips, with the same goal of evolving to Godhood in the cosmos.

The political or practical ramifications of this myth-religion/philosophy suggests small states or ethnostates to accommodate kin and ethnic centered  human nature and nature itself, protected internally by the citizens and externally by a defensive federalism, and guided by science, religion and the universal goals of theological materialism in the evolution of life to Godhood in the cosmos. The artistic ramifications lead to the affirmation of the sacred myth-religion/philosophy through popular and high art.

This supplies the classic functions of myth/religion/philosophy as defined by the mythologists (eg. Jung, Eliade, Campbell), that is, a sacred religion of evolution to Godhood in the cosmos, sacred new/old images in relation to our time and place, the creation and bonding of values and morals, and helping us to live our daily lives.

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

Human evolution proceeds ultimately by natural selection among groups, which determines the natural selection among the 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 due to adjusting to the new cultural inventions (mutations), and the subsequent genetic lags, 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.

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."

Sounds more humane to me than constant violent revolutions.

Speculating on future educational philosophy

Considering educational philosophy from the Ancient Greeks with their education of an elite, to Christian education in the middle ages, to the economic utilitarian education of the present bourgeoisie, what is next, what is best?

I think of bringing philosophical sociobiology into the humanities along with theological materialism. This could deflate present culturally Marxist elitism, but it could also counter the pervasive utilitarian education-for-economic-profit, while keeping the practical technical schools for the great majority. The idea is to continue the classical idea of creating higher men and women, but open to all, this time centering on sociobiology, culture fair intelligence tests, and psychometric techniques available to help us better understand human abilities and evolution. Genes do relate to culture and it is outrageous that this fact is largely blocked in modern culture.

Cultural leadership can synthesize philosophical sociobiology and religion. The sacred goal is the evolution of life to the highest intelligence, beauty and character, which defines evolving to Godhood in the cosmos...perhaps this will be the next religion, which includes the traditional Inward God of Christianity and other religions transformed to the Outward Godhood of evolution.

Change as the most powerful law of nature, and the means of its conservatism

I have taken the conservatism of Burke and Kirk seriously, I understand what Hilaire Belloc meant when he said Europe is the faith and when the faith dies the culture dies. But I also think we need to go even deeper than this in understanding the rise and fall of cultures.

The Twofold Path of the Evolutionary Christian Church, which I write about in this blog, seeks to retain the Inward Path faith of the God Within of Christianity, but it also includes the Outward Path of evolution to Godhood in the cosmos, which is grounded in a sociobiological understanding of the rise and fall of cultures.

The cultures of Europe, China, Russia, Africa were created by the people, with the ethnic traits of these lands, who then adapted Christianity or any other religion to their particular people, their worlds. When the ethnic group dies or changes the culture changes, often including the religion.

We can affirm a variety of regions and states with different people, different ethnic cultures, knowing that it is the people and the traits of the people who create the cultures, before the faith. This is absolutely natural and harmonious with human nature. We can hold the different cultures and regions and small states together protected internally and externally by a light federalism, but also bonded by a universal faith, a religion which understands the importance of our differences as we all evolve in our own fashion and in our own states toward the outward Godhood first seen as the inward God by the traditional faiths.

Burke wrote, change is the most powerful law of nature, and the means of its conservatism.

How my worldview deals with the complications of human nature and modern culture

It seems to me that most of the complexities in political and cultural discourse today come from not being able to accept the stark reality that we are higher animals driven by biological needs that help create the cultures we create, adapting our selves and our cultures to our various environments. There is too much cultural baggage devoted to such things as universal sameness and equality. To see past these things, or to see biological man, for many modern intellectuals is too much for them. The propaganda for the modern liberal view has been powerful throughout our educational systems and the whole media.

So its seems to be realism versus idealism, with idealism always fading as the world and human nature always do what they really do, that is, separate according to differences, different states, different ethnic groups, different cultures based on the needs of different environments, and then they tend not to cooperate. So what can be done about this when intellectuals don't even accept the biological part of this worldview and they continue to think we have to find a way to all get along equally within the same democracy? This is mainly where the complications come from, because it really can't be done successfully.

My work tries to deal with real human nature and real human behavior, to find a way for order to be achieved rather than chaotic disorder over time. Sociobiology has to be strongly included in this search because it has dealt with the reality of real human behavior. Nietzsche's conflicts regarding the individual and society it seems to me split into before the break with Wagner and an after the break. Before the break he thought of heroes working within the cultural order, and after the break from Wagner it was individualism, individual heroes all the way. The latter libertarian side of Nietzsche is becoming more and more popular among intellectuals on the left and the right.

What does sociobiology say about this (Wilson's version) ? It says that the group is vital, that the group actually created our values and ethics, with such things as altruism, which is the basis of most religions. So libertarianism takes a back seat in this view of human nature and the creation and maintenance of culture. Sociobiolgy for me suggests small states, even ethnostates, and a light federalism to protect them from internal and external threats. But then something is needed to help then cooperate beyond federalism.

My work moves on to worry about society without religion, which we virtually have now, accept for surging Islam. My religion takes sociobiology into account, but unlike Cattell's courageous Beyondism (which I admire), I keep God in the equation, or Godhood, with my philosophy of the Twofold Path, theological materialism, etc. Conservatism influenced me more than it did Cattell, which made him too radical in relating to human nature in my opinion. But this is thinking beyond where modern intellectuals want to go. I think who we really are as humans will eventually take us to evolutionary religion, if we manage to survive until then.

So that is how my worldview deals with the complications of human nature and modern culture.

The super-materialization of the sacred

The Outward Path evolution of material and supermaterial life to Godhood in the cosmos is made more real, more concrete, as a theology of love, than the traditional religious Inward Path transformations, seen as human to divine, eros to agape, kama to prema, which are also affirmed in the Twofold Path of the the Theoevolutionary Church (TC). Theological materialism is not so much a “secularization of the sacred” (Joseph Campbell's term) as it is a super-materialization of the sacred.

With evolution, love for the particular in real survival and reproduction, for example, love for a beautiful woman, literally becomes love for the supermaterial divine, both are living objects, not abstractions, not inner Godhood, not merely symbols, but the real thing which we can evolve to.

This is bringing new mythology, new-old religion to a myth-starved, God-starved modern world.

Music and cultural transformation

Nietzsche gave great attention to music as the basis for cultural transformation. He saw Wagner's music-dramas as creating such a cultural transformation, which they did. We can see the power of rock music in the 1960's which had much to do with transforming a conservative culture into a modern liberal culture. And rap music now has again transformed popular culture toward a more African-American ethos. Did the money behind this music know this would happen?

The impulse to culture, as Nietzsche called it, can be more deeply seen in the creation and maintenance of religion, which sociobiology has confirmed as the impulse to bonding for success in survival and reproduction---groups bonded in religious altruism have done far better than non-altruistic groups.

Music will be needed to help bring theological materialism and the Theoevolutionary Church foreword. But great art is not merely for our education, great art also affirms the sacred in intuitive and emotional ways, more like music than words.

Finding the Sacred

Eliade said we need to find where the sacred is hiding in tradition, the sacred is always under various camouflages. He thought that various future religious experiences will be quite different from those we are familiar with. The sacred always takes new shapes, and it may not be the scholar or strict man of science who unearths it.

This is what the Twofold Path and theological materialism offer, a pattern which includes the God of the Involutionary Inward Path of past tradition, but requiring the Evolutionary Outward Path of material-supermaterial evolution to make it present, to reach Godhood. What the mythology-revivalists dreamed of may be accomplished by protecting the various groups and small states as they evolve toward Godhood in their various ways. This may not be accomplished by one-myth or one-race imperialism which the world turns against, but there needs to be an overall goal of evolution.

Independence and separation of distinctly different groups who, contrary to political correctness or cultural Marxism, simply cannot get along well together, protected with a light federalism, and affirming cooperative competition, is not only natural and practical, it creates the only real peace we can achieve. But most importantly, it is also the best way to evolve in variety toward Godhood. 

Why Theological Materialism?

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 the 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.

What philosophy could this define? I call it theological materialism, a religious philosophy, a philosophical sociobiology, which includes old religion in new science as in the Twofold Path.

What to do about the media?

The selection of what is news, the editing has fallen to politically correct or culturally Marxist editors and publishers, and this has biased the news considerably. Our “culture” in the West is largely now created by the Media. The march to control the media from within has been wildly successful at corrupting the West, more than an overt military conquest.

Can this corrupt media culture be changed by changing the values of our colleges and universities, who mainly educated the editors? Or is it more practical to build our own media alongside the corrupt ones? Both ways are very difficult but building our own media may be the slightly better plan.

Primarily our media and our schools need to spread sociobiological education as the basis for our political and religious culture. This was Cattell and Wilson's hope and it is mine too. What De Toqueville said of material progress needs to be applied to biological progress, “What the few have today, the many will want tomorrow.” Our shared overall value is the goal of evolution out into the cosmos to Godhood.

Connecting Religion, Politics and Science

Political philosophers and social scientists have overlooked (or banned) the work of Raymond Cattell and to a lesser extent E.O. Wilson, which means the trend of the social sciences toward the positivist hard sciences is incomplete and even biased. We need sociobiology and psychometric testing in the social sciences and in the humanities and in normal life. The claim that these fields overlook normal human life and are too narrowly trimmed down so that they may fit into empirical analysis or quantification is just plain incorrect.

I have included sociobiology in the religious philosophy of theological materialism and the Evolutionary Christian Church, while using anything else that seems relevant, intellectual intuition, science, ideology, political philosophy, art, etc. This philosophy looks to future evolution and science in seeking the material-supermaterial evolution of life all the way to Godhood, the God first seen and mirrored in the Inward Paths of the great religions.

I have passed over much of progressive liberalism, which often seems to reject both religion and the Enlightenment in pursuit of an anarchic or libertarian hedonism that does not relate to actual human nature or the group-selection which mainly created human civilization. I have affirmed much of paleoconservatism and classical liberalism, which includes limited government and free enterprise, but I have opposed the essentially Vedic Traditionalist School with its dream of a reactionary Arcadia or golden age before science and evolution came into the picture.

What is the internal coherence and necessity of a great culture?

The form of culture is shaped by the content of culture, but both form and content are instinctively   shaped by the traits of the people or ethnic group who live in the culture. What great cultures have is what Nietzsche called an “exalted and overall transfiguring goal,” a “mastery of the drives.” At this time the Media has taken the place of real culture, leaving us with virtually no culture, a degenerating motley circus.

What is the internal coherence and necessity of culture? Successful survival and reproduction, but more than that, a continuing evolution toward the zenith of beauty, truth and goodness in the people and in the culture, seeking the ultimate goal of materially evolving to Godhood in the cosmos.

This is not myth-religion as illusion and deception, contrary to the interpretations of Nietzsche and Freud, this is real material life and evolution with a sacred goal. We need more than the mere explanations of science and history, we need actual philosophically religious direction as a sound basis for the turn to evolutionary religion.

Early Nietzsche thought the Ancient Greeks (Hellenes) saved their culture not by cutting the Gordian Knot but by tying it back together again into a stylistic unity in their diversity. We need to do that with an ethnopluralism of ethnostates.

Light federalism can unify and protect divergent states with divergent ethnic groups, then we can---all of us, or only some of us, the choice is free---consciously pursue our evolution toward ascending levels Godhood, toward beauty, truth and goodness, with the help of religion and science.