09.05.08
Beyond Darwinism: A Theoretical Self-defense
The study of the eonic effect gives us a self-defense toolkit for seeing through the oversimplifications of Dawinism.
From the conclusion to World History And The Eonic Effect.
Time to get the book!
Beyond Darwinism: A Theoretical Self-defense
Our demonstration of a non-random pattern in world history is complete, and along the way we have stumbled on much more, a system of macro-history that matches a discrete-continous model, a stroke of luck, and reflecting a process operating over tens of millennia, one that we can only call ‘evolution’, by default. The result grants a self-defense against claims of science in the confusions of Darwinism applied to history.
The use of the term ‘evolution’ might prove a stumbling block. Nothing in our data requires the use of this term, but by a process of elimination that’s all we are left with. Slowly it dawns on us that this is the right concept, taken descriptively. The discovery of this pattern must confound us, in its magnificence, and stealth action, and induces a kind of double take, what are we seeing? An unnamable Something operating globally over tens of millennia, able to remorph whole time slices of culture in one evolutionary eye blink. What are we seeing? We can ascribe no agency to this X. It seems impossible. Yet the evidence is overwhelming, whatever its interpretation, once we have focused our perceptions with organized periodization. Short of such interpretation, our method is beyond reproach, the opinionated foibles of an eonic observer apart. These could be replaced with volumes of precise tracking data, and a project of ‘dialectic’ to unify, perhaps, the contradictory productions of eonic emergence. But we can merely point to these contradictions, and still make our case. And we are done without indulging in the distinction of ‘spiritual and material’, set aside as a species of pidgin talk, often with reference to the nth god name sequence. Set aside, but never replaced. We can hardly hope to reform the linguistic habits of millennia. A Kantian tune-up, or the formulation of a Schopenhauer, at least allows us to slip away from the distinction. We tried hard, but a Cartesian dualism seems destined to persist as a basic human confusion.
Armed with nothing more than simple periodization, pointing to, we have detected a system rich in structure and almost fantastic subtlety. Propaganda and a failure to examine history as a whole have blinded us to the obvious, once seen. Our eonic model gives us the means to stand up to the misleading claims of Darwinists, and expose the social agenda this represents. The same can be said for the accretions of mythology arising around the emergence of monotheism. This theoretical self-defense allows us to challenge claims for science in the promotion of Social Darwinism by the violent gangs of flat history, given a free gift of theory in the presumptive teleologies of social conflict.