Future Political Thoughts Against Bigness, and Pro Evolution

Rand Paul probably comes closest to understanding that bigness in government and business is bad, but he makes the grave philosophical and sociobiological mistake that libertarian's usually make of embracing an almost anarchic individualism over the needs of the group. Pat Buchanan's economic nationalism, which made America wealthy beyond compare, would not appeal to Rand, but we also realistically need to protect America jobs and American ingenuity from foreign and domestic abuse, as well as to protect free commerce between the states---a light federalism can do this.

Whatever this movement is called politically, small-is-beautiful, etc., it eventually needs to voluntarily move toward a realistic ethnopluralism, with independent states and regions free to evolve in their own fashion, which harmonizes with all we have learned in human history about human nature and natural law. Accepting cultural and ethnic variety and differentialism---not the motley multiculturalism which does not work and causes civil strife, and not one-race imperialism---may appeal to the left, ethnic independence should appeal to the right, and the Constitution could affirm it.

To sustain this political movement over time we also need religion, and here the aspiration is to have theological materialism (as seen in the Theovolutionary Church) voluntarily affirming internationally objective sociobiological research centers, aiding in our evolution toward Godhood in the cosmos, the Godhood first seen inwardly as the Father Within.

Politically I suppose Rand Paul may be the best we can do at this time. But it's not enough.

The pernicious transvaluation and transformation of “bigotry” by political correctness

“Bigotry” has been transformed and transvalued by political correctness (cultural Marxism) into being against natural law and against human nature. This means that human nature, affirmed throughout human history as being kin-centered, gender defined, age-grading, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, and religious-making, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection, is now being defined as “bigotry.” The laws set by nature itself  leading to defining natural law and human nature are being defined as bigotry.

Human nature has specified human loyalties in this order: self, kin, ethnic group, locality, state, region, nation and world. This is the order that harmonizes with real human nature, as recently reaffirmed by science of sociobiology. This means that ethnopluralism, with a light federal system insuring the independence of small states, regions and ethnic groups, needs to be seen as being in harmony with natural law and with human nature. For example, this means that those who now stand for heterosexual marriage and against gay marriage, and those who affirm their own familiar ethnic groups without hating other ethnic gropus, are not bigots. This also means we should be protecting ourselves economically with economic nationalism.

The pernicious transvaluation and transformation of the meaning of bigotry, human nature, and natural law---promoted by the media and the academic world---needs to be reversed. History has shown time and again that when cultures move away from natural law and human nature they are pulled back, sometimes rudely, to real human nature and natural law---and revolution often does more harm than good.

Hierarchy of values

The will-to-power and the will-to-happiness are secondary, contrary to Nietzsche and the Greeks. There is something more important, deeper, that drives these values, which is the activation to survival and reproductive success. In this Nietzsche underestimated Darwin and sociobiology.

However, there is something even deeper, more important, more vital than the drive to survival and reproductive success and that is the Spirit-will-to-Godhood, which activates the very essence of life, pushing life forward from the inside, as life is shaped by outside evolution, activating life toward evolving to Godhood, where the Absolutes, or near-Absolutes, can be attained, that is, the zenith of beauty, intelligence, character, happiness, and so on.

Human nature, culture, civilization, and religion need to harmonize with this hierarchy of values, this theological materialism, which means a materialization of the spiritual, retaining but transforming the symbolic-experience of the Inward God of religious tradition to the real religious Outward Godhood of evolution.

The film version of “On the Road”

I finally saw the film version of Jack Kerouac's “On the Road,” (2012,Walter Salles directed), which relied more on the original manuscript than the published book, which might have made the reception of the published book different since the level of thrill-seeking hedonism is much darker than the book. And this relates to the main thoughts I had from the film.

Thrill-seeking hedonism can be more easily justified if one agrees with Carl Jung's Spirits=Spiritual idea that seeking alcohol/drugs is a disguised desire for the Spiritual, many of the Beat Generation, and their Hippie followers, did eventually seek spirituality in Eastern religions, although Kerouac became trapped in alcoholism.

Hedonism and recklessness in literature and the arts often ties in with the natural rebellion of young people trying to make their way in a society they did not create. But seeking the bliss of the God Within or the Father Within can be seen as another concentrated form of hedonism, a spiritual substitute for alcohol/drugs. The way out of the dead end of  hedonism is not another form of hedonism, a way out comes from transforming the blissful God Within of the Inward Path to the Outward Path and the evolution of life to ascending levels of Godhood.

The Outward Path---which needs to be seen as the fulfillment of the Inward Path, and the real attainment of the God first seen inwardly---does not lack in thrill-seeking and adventure, since materially evolving to Godhood requires classical courage, heroism and intelligence, even beyond what is required wild poetic car trips across the country.

Freedom and determinism

If we define “heaven's command” as nature's command, as well as the command of human nature, we then are talking about the largely biological origin of social behavior, as defined by sociobiology. And if we define “earthly power” as the freedom we may have within our biologically determined nature, then we may see that we don't have as much freedom as most ideologies demand.

There is more an ignorance than a tension between what is free and what is determined, that is, ignorance of the natural and biological commands that keep us within determined parameters of nature and human nature. The idea is to try to set up our cultures so that they take into account the various few free paths we do have, leaving room for whatever creative freedom and variation we have, without trying to do what our determined nature can't do.

Religions don't need to impose order on nature, nature already imposes its order on us, which we need to know so that we may understand how much freedom we actually have to successfully aid in our own evolution in nature to Godhood. Both science and religion help in this mission.  We have to admit that the pagan religions seemed to understand this balance with nature better than the monotheistic religions, which too often viewed nature as evil, largely do to an exclusively transcendent view of God beyond nature.

How evolutionary religion outranks Dionysian art

Nietzsche thought that “spiritualizing” the senses made them artistic, not having much time for religion. But when spiritualizing is seen as a material evolutionary development then spiritualizing can be seen as a religious thing---we evolve from the simple to the complex, form lower to higher life in the Outward Path to Godhood. The spiritual in this way is really the material evolving to the supermaterial. Art still follows religion, as art performs the task of affirming the sacred.

To Nietzsche, nature is immoral in relation to traditional religions, but nature can be seen as moral in relation to evolution, nature can be virtuous again as we evolve materially toward Godhood. When Schopenhauer threw away real life in becoming a virtual Buddhist, Nietzsche tried to revive life again with the will-to-power, but with a will of no end goal, no teleology. Nietzsche's art was a Dionysian celebration of the tragedy of amoral existence. In this way Nietzsche seems to have corrupted the will almost as much as Schopenhauer. Religious, moral, and artistic health are defined in the evolution of life, in nature, to Godhood.

The language of art and literature

I think art and literature need to use a language most people can understand to allow the cultural communication to take place, otherwise art may communicate only to the few, as does much of modern art and literature where you have to first know the arcane language, the overall culture be dammed.

For me this means evolutionary realism, poetic realism, not unlike idealistic classical realism yet steeped in naturalism as studied by sociobiology, that is,  real nature, real human nature, but with the subjects infused with the upward climb of evolution toward Godhood, and with Godhood portrayed as the beautiful supermaterial zenith of material evolution, if that can be done. This way religious art remains ultimately the highest form of art, as an affirmation of the sacred.

Ethnopluralism contains both conservative and progressive elements

Who will have an easier time accepting  ethnopluralism, modern liberals with their multiculturalism, or the right with their imperialism and supremacism? Acceptance of ethnopluralism seems about equal for the left or right given the strengths and weaknesses of each political scheme. The natural right to differences will appeal to the left, ethnic independence and separation should appeal to the right.

Multiculturalism tried hard to make distinctly different people live happily within the same space, and it almost always ended in civil war or separation---even force can't make distinctly different ethnic groups get along well together, and religion has not accomplished this either.

Various political philosophies, but also various religions, need to stop proselytizing about being the only one, the only right, and accept cultural and ethnic differentialism. Federal systems can insure the independence of the varied states and regions without the central state becoming more powerful than the separation of powers.  The original U.S. Constitution seems uniquely harmonious with ethnopluralism.

The sameness of human beings can be seen in all ethnocentric life seeking to live and evolve to Godhood, but this needs to be understood as being best accomplished over time with ethnopluralism. International research centers proficient in sociobiology can objectively help all groups and states. Evolution can be realistically pursued in terms of cooperative competition.  Humans are capable of this.

Defining conservatism as ordered evolution

According to Nietzsche, Rousseau thought man perfects himself as he approaches nature, and Voltaire thought man perfects himself in proportion as he leaves nature. I think both Rousseau and Voltaire were right in this sense: evolution takes what man is and gradually changes man, perhaps eventually evolving beyond the human species. Idealists and utopians usually move away from what man is, away from human nature, in their projected cultural schemes, which is not only impossible to do but may be neurotic or even insane due to feelings of revengful powerlessness.

Nietzsche (and later sociobiology) thought traditions developed around what was needed for successful survival and reproduction in past times, but not for present times, which is where problems with the new arise with traditionalists. But real tradition, or real conservatism, values both what was necessary in the past and also includes a place for change, as Burke and others more or less pointed out. That is, conservatism doesn't throw out the basic traits necessary for survival, real conservatism imagines culture as a whole heritage attained by humanity up to our time, whereas the fanatic, the revengeful, the powerless, imagine a complete break from the past.

I think evolutionary religion can lead the way in affirming what the other cultural fields still lack: philosophical sociobiology. Ordered Evolution, not revolution, is the way to evolve, all the way to Godhood in the cosmos. Evolutionary change within order. That is how I define conservatism.

What kind of progress?

It is the kind of progress that we need to get right. Do we want to develop only artificial intelligence or do we want to develop more intelligent biological human beings, and beyond? Transhumanism tends to want to bypass the political incorrectness of biological developing increasingly intelligent human beings in favor of developing artificial machine intelligence. 

Nature is the source of reliable laws if we can discern them. Religion, philosophy and science don't impose order on nature, nature imposes whatever order there is on them. The concern is that we don't develop a machine utopianism which rejects human nature and biology and rejects the past in favor of only the future, which many utopias do. 

What we have is more a drive to seek to exist, which is a vital activating force of life. Devolution and barbarism are always a possibility, as conservatism warns us.  But not because evil dwells in hearts of men. Devolution and barbarism mainly happen because human biological evolution is not made conscious within the culture.  This is the base of a new bioconservatism. New beauty, intelligence and healthy character can come when evolution is seen as a natural development within the sacred forces of life. This is where theoretical science, philosophy and religion may dwell in the future, helping us to evolve to Godhood in the cosmos with biological enhancements from eugenics and genetic engineering. Artificial machine intelligence as a tool, not a goal.

The metamorphosis of the media

Light comedies in the evening can relax me, but over the years television comedies have become so raunchy and obscene, even during family prime time, that they only make me angry. It is the conscious destruction of the traditional values of normal citizens that drives me crazy.

Why do the popular media producers want to destroy traditional values? I think of Nietzsche's diagnosis of the metamorphosis of the will to power. First justice is demanded at the hands of those who hold power. Then freedom is demanded.  Next they demand equal rights largely to prevent competitors from growing power. And we now have the latter stages of this metamorphosis involving the total destruction of the values and the power of those who once held power.

This is what happens with multiculturalism.  A more practical way is to affirm an ethnopluralism of different states and regions, protected internally and externally by a light federalism.  The U.S. Constitution could  informally or formally accommodate this with it with its separation of powers and states.  The media won't like it, but who cares? 

Reason has to balance with stronger passions and feelings

“ Reason” has to balance with passions and feelings when defining healthy human nature. The fact is, passions and feelings are stronger than reason in human nature, mainly due to the makeup of the three human brains, with one added on to the other---conservatively not discarded---in each evolutionary epoch.

This to me means reason does not arrogantly dictate to the powerful lower brain, reason rides the lower brain like a great horse, or a great sports car, without trying to destroy the nature of the thing, which would topple the rider.

Since we generally know what “reason” is, how are the passions and feeling defined in human nature? Not merely as sentimental gush or animal rage. Throughout human history human passions and feelings have revolved around being kin-centered, gender defined, age-grading, marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, xenophobic, religious-making, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection.

An odd thing to have to admit here for a conservative but Rousseau was more or less right in thinking that man is healthy in proportion to how close he approaches real nature.  But Rousseau was wrong in thinking that natural man was a peaceful altruistic communist.  And Rousseau didn't say that man also needs to perfect himself by evolving in the material world to higher life.

The religious procession of evolution, devolution, good and bad

Conservative tradition can be thought of as a pause, a gathering of life to conserve the new improved discoveries of evolution before evolution proceeds again. Conservatism for its own sake is not enough, conservatism requires the activation of evolution or it stagnates. Rather than defining devolution as evil or bad, or defining evil as the absence of evolution, I would adapt Hegel's dialectical dynamic of thesis, antithesis, synthesis in an evolutionary way.

If Aquinas is seen as defining good in relation to the Involutionary Inward Path to the Father Within, or the God Within, one can then adapt the insight of Aquinas that evil is the absence of good in a dialectical way---the Inward Path of Christianity is seen as a pause for the symbolic-experience of what Godhood will be like, not merely a devolution, not evil, but a dialectical stage we can retain before proceeding on in the Evolutionary Outward Path to real Godhood.

Evolution for the sake of evolution is not enough, evolution can be seen as seeking Godhood, the sacred goal of life. This is where I expand on Cattell's scientific religion of Beyondism. This is where religion moves beyond present science which sees no purpose or design to evolution. This may change with future knowledge of the essence of life and evolution. Then perhaps modern knowledge can truthfully affirm religion again.

Being true to nature in art and religion

Being true to nature in art? How about also applying this realism to psychology, philosophy, politics? We need to unblock real human nature and stop the cultural monstrosities that have little connection to human nature. Examining nature, as the great field of sociobiolgy has examined human nature, applies to all fields. Science is connected to realism in art in this way. Religion also requires a more realistic view of nature and human nature.

I don't go on to add super-realism to realism but I do add “evolutionary” realism. We are evolving and not  standing still merely portraying or defining life in detail, which is why realism alone does not suffice. Evolutionary realism is included in religion with the evolution of life to Godhood, which was first seen in the symbolic-experience of the Father Within. Nature is sacred, it is through real nature that we evolve to Godhood, which describes supermaterialism.

Attuning Religions

Using the image of tuning a radio to a frequency that exits with many other frequencies we may then see that pagan and monotheistic religions are connected in the wider spectrum. The Traditionalist School isn't usually thought of as reviving pagan tradition but it does in many ways---in this case it leans heavily on the non-dual pagan Hindu religion of India, as do many monotheistic religions.

Religions gradually moved inward in human history, the earlier pagans had more interest in the outer world, seeing a spirit in all things, as native Americans did, and respecting all life for that reason. Gradually the material world began to be thought of as “evil” or at least far inferior to the God Within or the Father Within, which could be reached only by a Great Spiritual Blockade against material life and evolution and all the desires of the flesh.

The Twofold Path of the Evolutionary Christian Church seeks to correct this imbalance by unblocking the Great Spiritual Blockade and aiding or harmonizing life in the material and supermaterial evolution of life to real Godhood in the cosmos. This does not negate the Inward God, the Father Within, which is a symbolic-experience of Godhood, it revitalizes and transforms the God Within by attuning life toward evolving to real Godhood in the outside world. This affirms a linear view of history, seen in monotheism, without negating the cyclic view of history seen in paganism---life evolves and devolves, but life always seeks Godhood at the zenith of evolution.

Evolution as a coordinating force

Civilizing man, civilizing the beast is seen as coordinating the animal nature of man with higher man, with his higher cortex, and not seen as ridding mankind of an evil “beast of prey.” On the other hand, Rousseau was wrong if he thought of primitive man as an altruistic communist who should be set free. But Nietzsche's solution of praising the beast of prey is not the way to go either.

Evolution has civilized the beast naturally without defining the beast as “evil.” Our three brains show that we modify and add on to old structures, which is like the pace of conservatism accepting the new. Civilization should not be merely a softening effect, a weakening effect on man. If we think in terms of coordinating our animal nature with higher man we can affirm the Enlightenment spirit of progress without defining the animal as evil, as we evolve toward Godhood.

Religion has been on the side of blocking animal man, not coordinating animal man, but even this blocking, which is the Inward Path to the God Within, can be coordinated with or transformed in the Outward Path of evolution to real Godhood in the cosmos.

Religion and Theological Materialism

Nature as the expression of God? Nature is the expression of natural evolution which can at its zenith evolve to Godhood. Is divinity only reached through “manifestations” of divinity, as most religions believe? Manifestation is all there is, manifestations are real objects at different levels of evolution, different levels of consciousness, different levels of complexity.

For most religious thinkers it is not out of sight out of mind, it is the more out of sight the more in the mind only. For them God is a non-material, nameless, non-object which does not exist in the material world, this  God exists in the mind at its zenith of contemplation. But Godhood defined as a real supreme object can exist, at the zenith of evolution, and presumably there can be different levels of evolution in the cosmos with some objects evolved closer to Godhood than others.

Religion and philosophy can be made more concrete with real existing objects, described by a physical and material language, and not merely spiritual and abstract conceptions created out of thin air. This is Theological materialism. We can have religion and philosophy while still affirming materialism and naturalism. Then the antagonism between religion and materialism might fade.

There is nothing wrong with nature

Pascal said that without the Christian faith you would be like nature, a chaotic monster. First of all, there is nothing wrong with nature. Second, who says nature is a chaotic monster? This hatred of nature is what Nietzsche was upset about, and it remains deep within the great religions which seek God inwardly by blocking all the desires of the flesh and nature, which is usually not understood for what it is, a blissful but symbolic experience of the real Godhood reached through material and supermaterial evolution . So what can be done about the hatred of nature?

Science studies nature and does not reject nature but that is not enough. Keep the God Within, don't turn away from tradition, nature generally proceeds conservatively with change, but transform the symbolic God Within to the real Godhood reached by evolution. Then you have the Twofold Path, the Inward and Outward Paths with which to proceed into the future, helping to guide nature in our evolution toward Godhood, riding nature like a great horse, never rejecting nature, and never rejecting the past.

Multiculturalism, outcasts, and ethnopluralism

All my heroes seem to be outsiders who predicted or called for things that came to pass ten, twenty, fifty, one hundred or more years from their own times. One outcast prediction which still holds true today relates to melting-pots, multiculturalism, polyglot nations, cosmopolitanism, and globalism: they do not succeed and inevitably bring about breakdown or civil war. Attempts by modern liberals and neoconservatives, even some traditional conservatives, to bypass this realistic truth, such as defining nations only culturally or trying to teach patriotism to one and all is untruthful and often deceitful.

Alas, present outsiders who declare that ethnic bonds are what hold nations together usually go on to declare one race and culture as superior and all others as inferior or evil, thereby further damaging the truths of ethnopluralism. The realistic position to take is to defend the ethnic and cultural integrity of each group living within their own regions and states, ideally protected by a light federalism. This remains the long-term solution to many of our problems.  This is where we can defend ourselves with the moral high ground.

Eventually nations do break down into ethnic territories, informally or formally---the Soviet Union and the Middle-East being recent examples. Demanding impossible assimilation into multi-ethnic, multicultural states ends up causing far more pain and suffering.

But this continues to be the outcast position, even though in the United States at least, the Constitution in its original form, with its separation of powers and states could be workable with a more realistic ethnopluralism of ethnostates, avoiding future breakdown or civil war. Who benefits from being against this at the great cost of everyone else, and eventually at the cost of themselves?

Real Purposes

It seems that not only has the real purpose of wealth been forgotten, the real purpose of art, politics, and science has been forgotten, if it ever was articulated, and that is, the evolution of life to Godhood. Art, politics, and science have become mostly anti-evolutionary.

When Carl Jung helped the founder of Alcoholics Anonymous by suggesting that craving spirits was at bottom craving spirituality, Jung was relating to real purposes. The goal is inherent in life itself seeking to evolve to Godhood, and the various fields at least should relate in their various ways to this larger goal.

This is how art, politics and science can be seen as affirming the religious realm.  The greatest art has always been an affirmation of the sacred. Even sex is designed not for procreation alone, beneath this drive is the activation of life to evolve all the way to Godhood, or as close to eternal representation as possible.

This way the various fields can be seen in their ultimate themes and directions as being within the religious realm. Art for art sake, or wealth for wealth sake, or politics for politics sake is not nearly enough.

If we remove all the unnatural elements from human social life what are we left with?

First we have to ask what is natural, and what is the character and meaning of human nature and nature itself? Here is where political philosophers have disagreed.

Contrary to modern liberalism, social evolution has not displaced biological evolution, far from it. Simone de Beauvoir was simply mistaken in saying “man is not a natural species; he is an historical idea.” This Marxist spinoff set radical feminism off on the wrong course, and modern cultural philosophy as well.

There is a biological origin to cultural behavior defined best in the science of sociobiology, which has the most accurate definition of human nature at this time. Human societies are not merely a bunch of independent individuals as defined by libertarians, or a bees-nest of anti-individual altruists.  Group-selection leads other forms of selection in human interactions, as recently affirmed by E.O.Wilson. 

As often repeated in this blog, human nature consists of gender differences, age-grading, marriage-making, hierarchy, ethnocentrism, religion-making, group-selection and other typically traditional traits. Cultures can operate for a time with behavior that goes against human nature, with such experiments as Marxism, but culture is always eventually pulled back by the biological and genetic leash of real human nature to cultures that better reflect real human nature.

Answering the question “what is human nature” in this way leads to family-oriented, kin, ethnic, and group-oriented small states and regions, with as much independence as possible, which are in cooperative competition with other similar formed states, protected by a light federalism. The United States and its original Constitution could actually be workable in this most natural human configuration.

I believe this the best environment for human nature to flourish, but it also is deepened by being grounded in the religious foundation of the evolution of life to Godhood in the cosmos.

Why I Am A Bioconservative

"Never before have machines been so perfect, and never before have men sunk so low." (Lewis Mumford)

Ray Kurzweil has said: 'We're going to become increasingly non-biological to the point where the non-biological part dominates and the biological part is not important any more...In fact the non-biological part - the machine part - will be so powerful it can completely model and understand the biological part. So even if that biological part went away it wouldn't make any difference.”

Am I wrong to wonder if this is a cunning way to dodge our actual human biological evolution? To become non-biological machines would certainly do away with those evil eugenicists wouldn’t it? Pushing “singularity,” replacing man with more intelligent machines, seems far more dangerous than eugenics.

I call myself a “bioconservative,” which does not mean I am against human evolution since I am religiously for evolution as the only way to attain Godhood. Bioconservatives don't want technological evolution to supersede biological evolution. They can work together without destroying one another.  I am not a Luddite.

I want to lesson human suffering, which is called negative eugenics, but I also want to evolve healthy more intelligent people in a continuous way out into the cosmos, which is called positive eugenics, and to do so with non-coercive prenatal screening, genetic counseling, genetic engineering, etc. Raymond Cattell's work is valuable in this area.

New designer drugs, cognitive enhancers, etc. will surely happen but that is not the permanent evolution a bioconservative wants. We are evolving biological life to Godhood in the cosmos, not artificial life, even if artificial life seems to mirror biological life.

It looks like another coming competition between advocates of the biological evolution of man and advocates of artificial evolution replacing biological evolution.

-----

Here is Wiki on Heidegger's take on this from an earlier time:

"...A major critic of technology was German philosopher Martin Heidegger. In The Question Concerning Technology (1953), Heidegger posited that the modern technological "mode of Being" was one which viewed the natural world, plants, animals, and even human beings as a "standing-reserve" — resources to be exploited as means to an end. To illustrate this "monstrousness", Heidegger uses the example of a hydroelectric plant on the Rhine river which turns the river from an unspoiled natural wonder to just a supplier of power. In this sense, technology is not just the collection of tools, but a way of Being in the world and of understanding the world which is instrumental and grotesque. According to Heidegger, this way of Being defines our modern way of living in the West. For Heidegger, this technological process ends up reducing beings to not-beings, which Heidegger calls 'the abandonment of Being' and involves the loss of any sense of awe and wonder, as well as an indifference to that loss. According to Julian Young, Heidegger was a Luddite in his early philosophical phase and believed in the destruction of modern technology and a return to an earlier agrarian world. However, the later Heidegger did not see technology as wholly negative and did not call for its abandonment or destruction...."

Inside and Outside Forces of Life

“Evolution comes from within, to actualize the lifes potential, and evolution comes from without, as adaptation to the external environment.” Richard Mcculloch

Is the power coming from inside life superior to the influence of the outside environment or to evolution? They work together. But the constant here in any environment is the Will to Godhood, or the Spirit-Will within life, which essentially defines “life.” Evolution from the outside shapes the activation of life from within although not always in an upward direction, depending on the environment.

We can help the Spirit-Will in attaining its divine goal of activating life to evolve to Godhood by influencing our evolution toward higher and higher intelligence, beauty and good character, the zenith of which is Godhood.

The modern world seems mostly anti-evolution---accept in technology---and not pro-evolution. Science refuses to see any activation from within yet alone a divine destiny to life. The evolution of man has been enfeebled, to use an old word, which is a serious degeneration when the goal of evolution is Godhood. To change an idea of Nietzsche's (from Aristotle?), virtue is having the capacity to evolve and then doing so and not turning away from the natural capacity. A healthy culture will do this, an unhealthy culture will not.

Bringing Godhood back within the world

 I like the way the Pagan religions have divinity manifested within the world as part of the world. The world was largely desacralized when religion placed God outside the world. But religion can bring Godhood back into the world. The God or Father-Within which was, and is, seen in the Inward Path of the great religions  needs to be seen as a symbol-experience of the real Godhood only reached through material-supermaterial evolution.

The revelations which have been said to derive from God outside the world were coming from the God Within, the Father Within, that is, from the Soul, which is in the world at the zenith of the mind.  Real Godhood is found only symbolically in the God Within, and reached only by evolving to Godhood.

Religion this way can be seen as a force of nature, which can bring the ancient pagan religions as well as new sources of religious knowledge together with the great religions of the revelations (the Bible, the Qur’an, etc) in an all-encompassing worldview within the world and within the cosmos. With evolution religiously central, science too can enter the religious world.  The evolution of  the world needs to be praised, not blocked.

Tradition stagnates without ordered evolution

The destruction of traditional religious morality can show a will-to-power by those who don't have power. This turns around Nietzsche's idea that Christianity is the will to power of the weak against the strong when it is Christian morality that has the power.

Where tradition has lasted tradition closely followed human nature, with traits such as gender differences, age-grading, marriage-making, hierarchy, ethnocentrism, religion-making, and group-selection. But what keeps human nature and tradition from stagnating?

It is the will-to-Godhood, or the Spirit-Will activating life which harmonizes with ongoing outside evolution and change. This suggests an Ordered Evolution without which tradition may stagnate. Modern philosophers defining religious morality as a vain attempt to create order in a disordered cosmos, have less proof for their position than the orderly evolution we see around us moving from the simple to the complex, from unconsciousness to consciousness.

Theological materialism sees life evolving to Godhood in material and supermaterial evolution, which is an order not yet seen by science or religion, or by Nietzsche with his goalless will-to power in an amoral world.

Definitions of the Divine

Paganism as defined by modern Wiccans as well as the ancient Neoplatonists tend to acknowledge both dimensions of the divine as transcendent and immanent, according to Gus Dizerega. The whole world is divine to the pantheist, whereas to the panentheist the divine is more like the soul within the body, both transcendent and immanent.

The transcendental vision of Christianity sees God outside the material world, like Newton's clock maker God, and the world as the clock he made, but Christians can contact God by way of the Inward Path to the Father Within, so God is also immanent in the world.

The Goddess giving birth to the world brings the divine into the world in an intimate way, which seems to relate better to the material view of creation than a transcendent God outside the world.  But we evolve to Godhood from the Primal Material, from the simple to the complex, from the lower to the higher, and the Goddess view of creation doesn't fit as well with this more naturalistic view, since from the lower to the higher doesn't fit the higher Goddess source, although the Primal Material could be considered a "Goddess" in another sense.

Theological materialism of the Evolutionary Christian Church sees the material world evolving to Godhood in the material world, Godhood is at the zenith of material evolution, which is not a God outside the world. The Spirit-Will activates within material life, and life is shaped by outside evolution. The Soul is at the zenith of the mind, and one can experience the Soul or the Father Within if one rids the body of all physical desires. The Soul is a reminder, a symbolic experience, of the goal of the Spirit-Will, which is supermaterial Godhood evolved to in the cosmos.

Evolution being central in theological materialism the cosmos is seen as linear and historical, as the Christians see the world, but also cyclical and mythical, as Paganism suggests, although no cycle is exactly the same in our continual evolution toward Godhood.

Masters of abstractions and the language of real people

I try to write religious and art philosophy that is accessible, my instincts seem to go in that direction in thinking and writing, trying to make things clear, wiping away my own fog. For me this means using real language used by real people. I like to think that this helps me avoid the problems of religious and philosophical writers who bury real things, real truths, in too many abstractions.

The irony is, saying that living objects are more important than the definitions of the objects, and even the truths about the object, is itself placing a truth above the object. In seeking the truth with real independence and courage the optimism or justification comes from the hope that the truths presented will one day help people, actual objects, at least in the future, even years from now.

The masters of abstraction seem to create fiefdoms with their abstractions where they play games with others who are trying to be masters of abstractions in academia and the arts. They don't really care if people prefer real language, but they do want to at least dazzle the proles enough to look up to them as masters and pay their salaries. This does not seem like a good way to find the truth.

Hello to materialist-supermaterialist religion and Godhood

Materialism and naturalism exclude God by definition, so say most atheists and scientists, but this is not accurate if Godhood is material-supermaterial and evolved to in the cosmos. So much for the materialist rejection of religion and God, and hello to materialist-supermaterialist religion and Godhood, and hello to theological materialism.

This is actually the way to reconcile religion and science, but it does involve acceptance of the idea of life evolving upward in intelligence, beauty and character all the way to Godhood, beyond the human species. Now is materialism courageous enough to see the implications and sacred possibilities of materialism? Perhaps it's easier just to debunk the non-material religions. And the non-material religions reject a material or even a supermaterial Godhood. Goodbye to that. It is too bad they cannot get together, as they are in theological materialism.

When egalitarianism is considered a duty

“Under the cover of the holiest names is found the most destructive tendencies.” Nietzsche

Egalitarianism is considered a duty, to adapt a line of Nietzsche's, and actual human evolution is considered bad, or even evil. This is the state of modern culture, which alters the value of evolving life and belittles and disfigures everything in its path. Technological advancement is allowed but not human biological advancement. So we have the transhumanists who want to meld humans as cyborgs. This version of evolution is allowed or is only slightly considered politically incorrect.

This is acquired decadence, scholars have not been taught sociobiology and so their students have not, they have been fed politically correct egalitarianism instead. Nietzsche thought of these modern “virtues,” intellect and science, as forms of disease. The best is considered the worst.

This spiritual blockade has put a stop to any talk of human evolution. We are continually reminded of the abuses of WWII, which were in fact terrible, but it is demanded of us that we must permanently have the attitude of “never forgive and never forget” which is simply not a healthy attitude to have. Life is evolving to Godhood and this blockade has got to at last open up. But contrary to later Nietzsche, ordered evolution,  not war, is assigned the higher place.

Godhood is not beyond, is not a Being outside the real world of evolutionary Becoming. This saves religion and includes science. This does not kill religion as Nietzsche tried to do, and this does not make of God an abstract philosophical form or definition.

Godhood within the world of nature

Our “ultimate concern,” to use Paul Tillich's phrase, is the evolution of life to Godhood, not “merely” the Inward God or the Father Within but our evolution to Godhood within the world of material and supermaterial nature. The idea of God outside the world of nature has become an idolatrous symbol, the symbol has become the holy.

To try to separate religion from science, as Tillich and Catholic thinkers before him did, seems like a desperate pretense at saving religion, even though saving religion is a noble cause.

Elements of faith, like theory and hypothesis, will remain in both science and religion, absolute truth is still to be discerned in both fields, but I believe that the ultimate center of both religion and science needs to harmonize with philosophical naturalism and philosophical sociobiology, which I have been expanding with theological materialism.

This is how to save both religion and science in a way that modern man can, eventually, embrace.

Advancing evolution, but not so fast

 The more daring we are in advancing our evolution the more problems and failures we may have, which suggests that going a bit slower will bring advances slower, but safer advances none the less. Our survival depends on solving cosmic-size problems which will require higher and higher intelligence. It is long term evolution that we pursue.

The transhumanists need to slow down a bit. We don't want to become artificial intelligent machines with our beauty and biological instincts disintegrated. We want to become increasingly better men and women. The ability to delay action shows strength, lack of restraint often shows weakness. We need to advance meritocratically the best of ourselves, the best within all groups. Computers are tools, not our relatives.

Advancing needs to be understood biologically, physiologically, genetically and not solely through melding with artificial intelligence---and not through militarism either, as Nietzsche once suggested in “The Will To Power.” The remedy away from our decline and toward our advancement is not only cultural, it is genetic selection within all groups. We need to advance not merely in the negative way of trying to end all suffering, but also in the positive way of improving ourselves as we evolve toward Godhood.

At bottom this is a religious evolution connecting with traditional religions. The Inward Path to the God Within of traditional religion turns away from the material world---this needs to be applied but transformed in the Outward Path of material evolution to Godhood, which was first seen inwardly but incompletely as the Father Within. The new is brought into the old, conservatism can be validated in Ordered Evolution. We can live in balance with nature and evolution, as we all rise in the cosmos to Godhood.

The basis for ecumenism and beyond

Christianity teaches that Jesus is God. Judaism and Islam deny it. Hinduism says there are many incarnations of the divine, many mystics have seen, united with, and become one with God. Hinduism is more right in their view. This does not take away power from Jesus, it brings him within an ecumenism of a very ancient religious tradition.

It was not because of “original sin” that we have lost sight of the God Within, it is ignorance. Ignorance may not help us live better lives but it is not a sin. Jesus died because he brought knowledge of the Father Within to the West, which was knowledge already experienced in the East. Jesus died for this reason as a martyr, not because of our original sins.

As to the differences between the trinitarian God of Christianity, the unitary God of Judaism, or Krishna of Hinduism, they are all defining the same God Within, the same Father Within, which means their differences in this regard fall away. Every religion is a genuine response to the God Within and each have their methods of reaching and speaking about the God Within. This is the solid ground of ecumenism.

The real difference in religions is seen between the God Within and the Godhood reached through materiel and supermaterial evolution. It is here where the Evolutionary Christian Church (ECC) moves beyond the God Within or the Father Within of the great religions. It is in the Evolutionary Outward Path where variety is encouraged. Variety and cooperative competition are helpful in the upward evolution of all groups toward Godhood in the cosmos. In this sense pluralism is the way to proceed among religions, the same as among different political states.

We need to transform the Inward God, the Father Within, experienced by many great masters, and convert this incomplete God into the real Godhood reached by material and supermaterial evolution. This is the Twofold Path. Real Godhood is independent of our experience of the God Within, which is only a blissful symbolic experience (a beatific vision) of the Godhood reached by evolution, and first seen in the Inward Path of the great religions.

We will not correctly define Godhood, Absolute Truth, or the Real until we have actually evolved to Godhood. At this time our mission is to improve our minds and bodies through upward evolution toward Godhood. This can complete and fulfill the earlier revelations of the great religions, not reject them.

Ending the war between the spiritual and material

Theological materialism and the Evolutionary Christian Church are certainly not anti-religion, as philosophical naturalism tends to be, on the other hand, philosophical naturalism is not anti-bourgeoisie, anti-progress, or anti-science as traditional religion has tended to be. The theological materialism of the ECC is a religion availing itself of science in our sacred evolution to Godhood.

The war between bourgeois secular progress and the sacred world can be resolved, the material and supermaterial world are required to evolve to Godhood. Belief in progress is vital in this great religious and scientific adventure.

The traditional church was right in calling the secular world decadent for rejecting religion, but the world can be redeemed with a new sanctity when religion is transformed by our evolution to Godhood, the God first seen incompletely as the God Within, or the symbolic Father Within.

The global elite, not religion, are in the process of destroying all boundaries, all cultures, and creating a global world devoid of the deeply rooted traits of real human nature. Theological materialism and the ECC can bring back the missing moral check on the secular world, while becoming a steward of the religious world.

This is an epic process, yes, but no smaller process will redeem both the material world and religion while unblocking the great spiritual blockade against evolving to Godhood.

No need to live in the past

Do you kind of like the order of the medievalist age? According to James Wilson (Modern Age, Summer 2013) de Tocqueville thought decentralized federalism, as in the United States, might be an analogue to the order of the feudal age. This political view also better allows human nature to flourish, which was evolved over thousands of years and prefers its own locality, variety and its own people.

Our Constitution originally affirmed the separation of powers, which we need to get back to. Pining after the old aristocracies, which basically created the West, will get us nowhere. We can be an ally to the material world and the bourgeoisie which overcame the aristocracies, they can be included in the great evolution of life to Godhood. The acquisitive appetites and the “progress” of the bourgeoisie in fact balance with the thrust of life evolving to Godhood. Theological materialism lives in the world.

The conservatism of the Evolutionary Christian Church looks forward and not backward as much of conservatism does. Religion is brought back to the world since we evolve materially and supermaterially to Godhood. It is the Godhood of future evolution that is featured. The Father Within of the old religions is transformed, not rejected, into the Godhood reached in evolution. The great religions can be seen as the prototype of order, unity and dedication transformed in the ECC.

Does this “disenchant” religion or the aristocratic past? No, it revitalizes and redeems the past, which has been dying, slowly at first and now quickly.

Comparing the “isms” with evolutionary conservatism

James Kalb does an excellent job defining the various political “isms” in America without mentioning sociobiology, (Modern Age, Summer 2013) This is like defining an automobile without mentioning the engine.

"Social conservatism" and sociobiological conservatism relate well to each other because the traditions of family, religion, particular cultures and local autonomy relate to the real preferences for these things inherent in human nature, as evolved thousands of years ago, which helped us survive and prosper.

The revitalized-conservatism (evolutionary conservatism, sociobiological conservatism) reflected upon in this blog has something in common with most of the “isms” as defined by Kalb. Like the left-liberals: people do sometimes need to be protected and led, like the right-liberals (conservatism): most institutions need to be independent of government, like the anarchists: the state cannot manage peoples lives. The “neoconservatives” seem to be phoney conservatives because they promote conservative, nonliberal elements (family, religion etc) because they realized that these things help strengthen liberal causes.

As to the "managerial elite" who dominate our society, evolutionary conservatism does not negate elites, but it affirms sociobiologists as science-oriented managers, not to rule democracies but to actually help people get the mostly traditional things that real human nature wants and needs, and votes for.

But the conservatism of theological materialism, and the Theoevolutionary Church, also affirms the ongoing evolution of man, all the way to Godhood in the cosmos.  It is this which forms the sacred base of our Ordered Evolution.

The religious transformation needed

It has been said by most religious masters that liberation consists of coming to know ones absolute unity with God, nirvana, the beatific vision. Alas, that is too easy. “Easy” you say? What is easy about ridding the body of all material desires to attain unity with the God Within? It's easier than evolving in the material and supermaterial world all the way to Godhood.

It is time to unblock the Great Spiritual Blockade against the material world which is the only means we have to evolve to real Godhood. The Inward God seen as absolute unity by humans is a symbolic experience of the Godhood evolved to in the cosmos, it is not a blissful stopping off place.

The religious transformation needed: it is not the material or supermaterial world that is an illusion, it is the Inward God that is an illusion, the Inward God is a symbolic-experience of the supermaterial Godhood evolved to in the cosmos. We can retain the Father Within in the Twofold Path, tradition matters, but it is time to move on.

Objects don't require the validation of language

 "Everything is what it is, and not another thing.” (Bishop Butler, 1726)

In the beginning was the material-supermaterial object that was later described by the word. An important distinction. Absolute truth cannot be described precisely in any language mainly because absolute truth is a supreme living object, not language.

It turns out that God is only language in many esoteric schools, who demand that God is beyond material or even supermaterial objects.

Language is not a curse but our ability to construct meanings, formulas, definitions can get in the way of the truth, which is found in living objects, and not in their definitions. Objects don't require the validation of language---although of course language can be useful, in its place.

Universals, abstractions and even traditions can be hollow and not really exist without the actual material or higher-evolved supermaterial objects that they should be seen as secondarily defining, including Godhood. 

Evolutionary and natural human traditions follow this material-supermaterial, non-abstract, trajectory in their evolution to Godhood. Existing, evolving, objects offer the real resemblance between lower evolved human beings and higher evolved Godhood, not language or an ascetic bliss-experience describing no real object.

The hierarchy of means and ends

Nietzsche first caused me to see that unhappiness and happiness were means more than ends. Philosophy can move far off into unreality when it misses this important concept---think of communism claiming to seek happiness for absolutely everyone at all costs. But religion can make this mistake too in seeking only unending bliss ( the beatific vision ) in the Inward Path to the Father Within.

Decay, decadence, unhappiness, these things happen naturally, to try to rid society completely of these things is unnatural. We need to try to save what is healthy and evolutionary, that is the realistic task.

Looking to deeper causes we find that nature and evolution use happiness and unhappiness as a means to encourage survival and reproductive success, just as good tasting food encourages you to eat, not for the sake of the good taste of the food but for the sake of survival.

Deeper still I believe is the material Spirit-Will To Godhood which activates all life, all happiness, unhappiness, even all survival and reproductive success to evolve toward Godhood, and it works along with the outside forces of evolution and natural selection.

Getting this hierarchy of means and ends right is the religious, artistic, philosophical, political and scientific sacred task.

Bringing purpose and Godhood back to the real world

When philosophers and theologians placed God outside of time and not of the material world, what would you think would eventually happen? Intelligent people rejected God.

Nietzsche's cynical and perhaps snide remark that people would rather have the void as purpose than no purpose at all presumed a purposelessness based at least somewhat on rejecting that outside-of-the-world God, and this was picked up by Nietzsche's postmodern children.

Bringing God back into time, back into the material world, or at least into the supermaterial world, can bring the modern world and all that we have learned back to God or Godhood---even science can return. Do we still need the elaborate games of the religious philosophers creating such things as a hierarchy of Gods so that the top God need not have to be involved with the nasty world---which was indeed nasty, short and brutal in their times? The material world needs saving, not blocking, or murdering.

We evolve materially and supermaterially to Godhood in the cosmos, which means we need the material and supermaterial world, it is the vehicle we use to attain Godhood. The blissful state of reaching the Father Within was achieved by the great religious masters by ridding the body of all apparent material desires, but then this blissful state was confounded with being beyond time and beyond the material world, when it was not. The God Within, the Father Within was/is a symbolic experience of what Godhood is like when we evolve to Godhood.
 
This is better than having the void as purpose, or having to place God outside of the world, and this is truer than the relativity or nihilism of postmodernism.

Restarting stalled civilization and evolution in our colleges and universities

 
My livelihood and reputation don't depend on adhering to political correctness (although outsiderhood ain’t easy), so I can say it: postmodernism and deconstructionism are a fraud, and also dangerous, as were their progenitors, Marxism, radical feminism, psychoanalysis, egalitarianism, and anarchism. These have been de-civilizing forces, a step down for Western civilization.

Our educated but ignorant elite have told us that all cultural practice is first shaped by political forces, which is not true, these things are first shaped by sociobiological instincts, that is, the biological origin of social behavior. Postmodernism finds only despair and irony in the world, after having rejected all the religious and philosophical “narratives” that people live by, because they could not, or would not, face the real narrative of human biological evolution. It is sociobiology which needs to seriously enter our colleges and universities and dislodge postmodernism and deconstructionism in the humanities and in the sciences.

When this happens then the stalled process of civilization and evolution can begin again. But sociobiology tells us that our educated but ignorant elite have gained survival and reproductive power, at least in the short term, by applying this fraud, which will make it difficult to dislodge them. Will we end up having to build new colleges and universities along side the decayed ones? We will see who benefits from these lies by who fights against exposing them.

Unbound reflections on upward evolution and art

If form is determined by content, what is ugly content? The opposite of the classical standards of beauty, simplicity, restraint, proportion, harmony, intelligence, clarity, strength...

Upward material evolution might be called  the art and science of attaining beautiful form and noble content. The goal is attaining the zenith of form and content, which is Godhood.

When we define classical standards we can't stop at human perfection, as classical standards tend to do, the ideal is Godhood which means materially evolving beyond human form and content.

In defining Godhood we channel all the subject matter we have. The Romantics used to say all the arts end in music, we could say all life, art, politics, all evolution, tends toward their highest completion in Godhood.

Not “evolutionism”, which might be called evolution for evolution's sake. That is a limitation, like art for art's sake in aestheticism. Evolution has the sacred goal of ascending levels of Godhood, for the sake of Godhood, and for the sake of the material activation within life, or Tirips,  which seeks Godhood, while it is also shaped by outside evolution.

Can we live with the discontent from seeking higher evolution and not stopping at the status quo? The conservative connection with evolution comes in Ordered Evolution toward Godhood, beyond the Father Within, which was first seen in the Inward Path of the great religions---now transformed in the Outward Path of material evolution to ascending levels of Godhood.

Revolutions, like war, tend to sweep all gains away. That might slow down evolution which over time needs the order of tradition and peace, seeking and keeping the best of the new, using all fields in eugenics and genetic engineering to define and attain the best, but still grounded in classical standards.

A limited return to tradition is possible in the following way

I suppose the old WASPS did not purposefully cause the decline of American culture, it was greed, the old “root of all evil.” This made it easier for what Mark Steyn calls the PORGI, post-religious globalist intellectuals, to overcome the WASPS (Chronicles, Aug. 2013).

The PORGI have accomplished their “long march” through all of American culture, from the globalist business world through the universities and the media, and now not much of real America remains. What is real America? The modernists have of course tried to change the historical and biological facts, but culture is derived from race, religion and ethics, and shared language. Global modernism is the opposite of these things, as Robert Beum points out in the same issue.

So, can the country defeat the PORGI empire? The old demographics, which determined American culture, were also treacherously changed by the PORGI, and so a return to tradition is no longer possible, accept in the following limited way:

Our original Constitution still prefers nearly independent regions and states, protected by a light federalism. Since the PORGI made sure to distribute apparently unassimilable people and cultures throughout the land, it will be a gradual thing, and it won’t be perfect, but eventually even the WASPS may return in this way, living in their own regions or states, in cooperative competition with other demographics in other regions and states. This is the way the de-civilizing PORGI empire can collapse without the whole country crashing down around us. I love my country and I think this can be done to save it.

Goal and purpose

Nietzsche decided that a goalless “will to power” would have to suffice. He said, “The reality of becoming is the only reality that is admitted.” (“The Will To Power”). But within the heart of man, including members of all religions and schools of philosophy, is the activation of life to survival and reproductive success, in whatever way we have found to do so in relation to human nature and the environment. This is a fundamentally optimistic outlook, although it can be cynical about the claims of religion and philosophy and culture in general.

Without purpose there are no goals, without goals there is no purpose, so Nietzsche defines the origin of nihilism. The problem with nihilism is that there are essential goals and there is purpose to life, and that purpose is fundamentally biological. Is biology not enough for you? Biology is evolving toward Godhood in the cosmos, from the simple to the complex, from unconsciousness to superconsciousness. That should be enough goal, purpose, and sacredness for anyone, although it does require the sometimes difficult realities of evolution.

Many destroyed by Hollywood

Hollywood began years ago slowly destroying Western values, then vamped it up exponentially until  now we have former Disney goody-goodies constantly dropping the F--bomb and performing low-brow simulated sex acts on national television in prime time. It isn't  even bad art, it's foul soft porn.

I blame Hollywood first, but why was it so easy for them? One would think that even the growing number of atheists, or the secular humanists, would not approve of this garbage. The marijuana ethos of the 60's boomers won't even let them protect their own children. Don't worry, be happy.  Turn the program off if you don't like it. 

There is no social morality, only individualism.  Post-modernism (Hollywood's more intellectual cousin) has taught women to actually dislike chivalry, that is, men of courage, honor, courtesy, justice, and a readiness to help the weak. 

It is especially angering to watch Hollywood exploit and then destroy young women, one after the other, with increasing perversity. Hollywood has been exploiting and corrupting beautiful people for years, especially blond young women, who come innocently, one after the other, from places like the Midwest, and end up playing prostitutes and proudly giving the finger to the world. Now all the "mean girls are blonds." What's with that?

Changing Hollywood now seems impossible, they have obtained the power to tell you to go to hell. Back in the early days they had to submit to traditional movie codes, and so on, but not anymore.

Hollywood promotes everything that has nothing whatever to do with real human nature, but unlike the ugly nerdy college professors who promote the same garbage, the Hollywood zoo does it with beauty and emotional effectiveness. The one hopeful sign is that people have been tuning out television and movies and turning to alternative internet sites.

I wish somehow another show-business could rise alongside the declining Hollywood zoo; build it in the Midwest, and make it a rule that any producer found abusing actresses would be canceled. Let's see creative films that affirm real human nature, which is---according to science and common sense---genetically and culturally conservative and traditional.

On Miracles

The miracles discussed in the great religions are not related to natural events or a violation of nature, they are, almost without exception, religious symbols for moving from one bland awareness to another grand awareness, often compared to moving from being blind to seeing. Philosophical arguments skeptical of miracles, such as David Hume made, therefore seem almost silly. Atheists make hay regarding the truth of miracles using arguments that religious masters never claimed. It's like socially challenged nerd's missing the non-literal meaning of things. Certainly the placebo effect from strong suggestion can cure ailments, and that has happened with highly respected religious figures, but that is not what they meant by miracles.

The way out of Nihilism

We might not have the right to assume the existence of transcendental objects, as Nietzsche believed, but I think we do have the right to assume the existence of highly evolved material and supermaterial objects evolved in the cosmos. We can assert the right of the material over the spiritual and still allow supermaterial Godhood. This is nearly a scientific fact, evolution proceeds from the simple to the complex, from unconsciousness to consciousness, and supposedly superconsciousness, with backward steps along the way.

We also have a right to assume “things in themselves” by refusing to play the games of philosophers. The object does not need the support of human definition, it does just fine on its own. Definitions and formulas have become Gods in themselves. God is lost when God is rejected as a material object, then meaning becomes lost in trying to define God or Being as a non-object. The soul was once thought to be material (Lucretius?, the Carvakas of India ?)---which it is---and definitions of the soul went down hill from there. No wonder nihilism arose in this lost intellectual world.

Nietzsche defined morality only as being an antidote against practical and theoretical nihilism (“The Will To Power”), but morality is developed naturally, sociobiologically, as a method to aid in successful survival and reproduction. Morality hypertrophied can be seen as creating the values for attaining the zenith of successful survival and reproduction, which is Godhood.

When is “ought” not “is”? All things human, such as culture and morality, are essentially biologically derived. We ought to survive and evolve because life and evolution is what is. The written law of ought harmonizes with the natural law of is. What bestows real value on men and the universe? We are evolving to Godhood materially and supermaterially, and we ought to harmonize with that goal.

The Inward Path requires the Outward Path in Religion

When we close off all bodily sensations and desires we no longer experience the outside world, we experience the inside world. Our experience of the outside world, our consciousness, is related to the brain being conscious of certain states, thoughts, memories, which come mainly from the outside world. The blissful experience of the Father Within derives from the inside world, from blocking out all the sensations and desires of the outside world. This is not a super-consciousness, as is often claimed, it is a lack of consciousness, a complete blocking of consciousness.
 
Why would the religious masters seek to block all bodily-derived consciousness, and strongly promote this state to followers? They do so for the blissful experience of the Father Within, which they often define as God. Who would not want to contact God? The problem is, the Father Within is not God, it is only a symbol-experience of God.  We may pursue the Father Within, but not exclusively, and not stop there, as if drugged.  It is only a stopping off place to help us understand what Godhood will be like when we evolve to Godhood.

Godhood is the highest evolved material and supermaterial consciousness, mind and body, not the complete blocking of consciousness, mind and body. Godhood is the zenith of material evolution, requiring the highest consciousness, truth, beauty and goodness, which is a supermaterialism, not a cessation of these things.  Godhood is the attainment of the highest materiality, or super-materiality, not the blocking of materiality. The evolution of material life needs to be refined in the Outward Path to attain Godhood, not stopped, blocked or called evil.

Superiority disguised as equality

I don't think people object to equal opportunity for all, but they do object to what they sense is the disguise of one people seeking superiority over another. It is of course the zenith of political incorrectness to say so but Martin Luther King's speech was in fact a dream, in the sense of a fantasy. People in general do prefer their own kind. This defines the very same human nature today which was developed by evolution many thousands of years ago, nothing has changed, only the dreams of humans have changed. And this does not condone the great evil of slavery.

Admitting real human nature is not something to be depressed about, facing reality can help us find real solutions that can allow us to live together, without open warfare. Culture has gone against basic human nature in trying to make all people the same, and this has not worked, even when it was imposed by force. Cultures ultimately exist on a biologically-derived leash, and human nature always pulls our cultures back to what we actually are, often after causing much pain and suffering.

The best we can hope for is cooperative competition between different states and regions with distinct populations and cultures, with some sort of light federalism to protect the differences. This will be the political movement of the future, if we can survive our dreams and fantasies. The next religious goal is based in the material and supermaterial reality of human evolution to Godhood. But to get there, beyond the human species, we have to admit reality and affirm the desirability of differences, as we seek to improve all of us.

Thoughts on the foundation of theology

Contrary to gnosticism, which the traditional religions affirm in their occult base, the Spirit, or Spirit-Will-To-Godhood does not seek to be free of the body since the body is the only means the Spirit-Will has to reach Godhood, by way of activating the body to evolve to Godhood, shaped by outside evolution. This is why the material world is not satanic, as implied by the Gnostics.

Godhood is what we and our bodies aspire to in a cosmos which has no beginning and no end. There is not even a duality since the primordial, primitive, Primal Material, and the Spirit-Will, are one and never separate, and it is they who create and recreate the cosmos, which is driven by evolution, but also falls back in devolution, all on the path to Godhood for the evolving life within the cosmos.

Conservatives and the instincts

The instincts of human nature are defined by such biologically based traits as gender differences, age-grading, marriage-making, hierarchy, ethnocentrism, religion-making, group-selection, and any culture that tries to bypass or deny these things is fighting a losing battle.

Progressives often do try to block these things with their social schemes, whereas classical conservatives do not. But conservatives need to affirm the evolutionary dynamics behind culture more than they do. Evolution is a sacred element in the instincts, human nature and culture.

I am no Freudian but Freud thought that blocking the instincts was the root of neurosis if the instincts were tamed before reason was developed enough to handle things. And Nietzsche thought human culture became decadent and declined as a result of blocking the human instincts.

Reason cannot really tame the instincts but it can see that a truce must be declared between reason and the instincts, a balancing needs to take place, with reason riding the instincts like a horse and not trying to go it alone. Science is too cold, and religion is too warm, a middle ground is needed.

If we pay attention to the instincts, human nature and evolution then we can reach our full potential, the zenith of which is our evolution to Godhood in the cosmos. We are only in our infancy now and we don't want to be strangled in the cradle.  Life demands instinctively that we never give up on evolving life, which is the ground of the activating Spirit-Will.

The religious transvaluation

The religious masters have said that when we know with “direct perception” it is a knowledge beyond the mind and the senses. No it is not, it is knowledge at the zenith of the mind, which is the soul, and it may be supermaterial but it is not beyond the mind and the senses.

It is not the material world that is the “chains that bind us,” it is the spiritual world which blocks the evolution of the material world to Godhood. The Inward Path needs to be transformed into the Outward Path.

The priest-craft and philosophy are steeped in dogma and rituals and they do not want this religious transvaluation, but real Godhood cannot be reached without this transformation.

The Inward God, the Father Within, the Radiant Form of bliss, is a symbol-experience of what Godhood will be like at the zenith of evolution, it is not a stopping place.

The real “civilizing of the beast” happens when we learn to refine material evolution toward evolving to the highest intelligence, beauty and goodness, which helps define Godhood, and not when we utterly block this evolution.

The Middle

Someone said the progressive movement wipes out the past and the conservative movement kills the future. I think of Revitalized Conservatism in the middle between libertarian/populist ideas and the importance of a light protecting federalism of economic nationalism. I believe in fair and free markets but I don't think an unfettered free market can solve all our social problems, far from it.  I reject the present centralization in agreeing with Richard Weaver that widely distributed ownership of small private property is a barrier against the encroaching state and against rampaging capitalism. I don't believe in mono-racial imperialism but I do believe in plural-racial independent states, even ethnostates, with their variety and independence protected by light federalism, which could work in accord with the U.S. Constitution. I also seek a bonding of traditional religion with evolutionary science as I see mankind evolving toward Godhood in the cosmos.  Does this sound too complicated? I think it avoids simple stereotyping and it is in accord with real human nature, as traditional human nature is more or less defined by both religion and sociobiology.  I am a patriotic American and I think this kind of revitalized conservatism could save America from decline. I also think this worldview could be healthy for Europe, Russia, China, Africa, etc---but of course this would not at all include our meddling in their affairs.

Courage for the truth

When one says “ truth wherever it leads” this to me has always meant courage is involved, probably even more than intelligence. Intelligence does not go very far without courage, but courage requires intelligence in pursuing the deepest truths in religion, philosophy and science. One of Nietzsche's notes: "A very popular error: having the courage of one's convictions; rather it is a matter of having the courage for an attack on one's convictions." And of course his other quote: “What does not destroy me, makes me stronger.” I pursue truth believing that where there is truth there is true religion, true philosophy and ultimately Godhood. I have found that this requires courage.

Traditions and universals regarding Burke and Strauss

Abstractions and formulas are secondary to the real thing or the real object, which they should be describing. If God is merely an abstraction or beyond the natural or material world this tends to place abstractions on the top of the hierarchy in religion and in philosophy, where truth or absolute truth, free of material ground, also often stand-in for God.

With that in mind, human traditions are usually based in human objects, not non-physical abstractions, or universals, which suggests that Burke's philosophical respect for tradition takes precedence over the Strauss non-material universals. But then Burke goes on to define God as beyond the material world, which brings in universals beyond living traditional objects.  This God is defined as essentially the Inward God of the great mystics, and often the absolute truth of philosophers. Burke's Christian God has a Gnostic/Judaic quality which fits in better with the Strauss universals and with the so-called non-material Father-Within of the great religious masters.

If the Godhood of religion, as well as the absolute truth of philosophers, is an actual supremely evolved materiel-supermaterial object and not the mere denotation of a non-object, or a mere sacred Word or a supreme abstraction, then both Burke and Strauss worship spiritual abstractions and universals as God, and as truth, even though Burke has more room for actual human traditions in defining truths.

Universals, abstractions and traditions are hollow and don't really exist without the actual material or higher-evolved supermaterial objects that they should be seen as secondarily defining, including Godhood. Human traditions follow this material-supermaterial  non-abstract trajectory in the evolution to Godhood.

The Twofold Path seeks to end the spiritual/material war

Jesus Christ and other great Masters did not come into the world to bring worldly peace, they came to bring the heavenly peace of the Father Within (the “beatific vision” in Christianity). Worldly peace is a secondary result or reaction to ridding the physical body of all material desires. This is often misunderstood in religious social philosophy. The Involutionary Inward Path is not concerned with worldly things for this reason.

This is also why the Inward Path is incomplete without the Evolutionary Outward Path to real Godhood. Without the Outward Path there would be little happening in the material life, little business, little material creativity, less everything.   The more successful a culture is in finding the Inward Path and reaching the God Within, the less successful it will be materially---look at India in this respect, up until their recent materialistic advances.

When the Father Within is understood not literally as God---which is only the symbol of experiencing Godhood---and when Godhood is seen as the zenith of material and supermaterial evolution, then we can affirm both spiritual and material success.

The war between the religious masters and the satanists needs to cease, with both sides totally excluding the other side, with the religious masters calling the material world satanic, and the satanists calling the religious masters anti-life.  These are fear tactics not truth.  The Involutionary and Evolutionary Twofold Path seeks to end the spiritual/material war, which damages both sides and prevents or slows our evolution to Godhood out into the cosmos.