Socialism and Evolutionism

There have been two main groundings of Socialism--that it is the inevitable outcome of Dialectical Materialism, and that it corrects the de-humanization of Capitalism.  The first is of dubious value, since Marx-Engels frequently represent Socialism as voluntaristic, and, hence, as transcending a Necessity such as that process.  The limitation of the second is that it pertains to the Good of the Members of a Society, without addressing that of the whole of a Society.  In contrast, a derivation of Socialism from Evolutionism is as follows: The Good of an Organism is Health.  The Health of an Organism entails the Health of each of its Parts.  A Species is an Organism, the Members of which are its Parts.  The Health of an Organism is dependent on the beneficial factors in its environment.  Thus, the Health of an Organism entails that each of its Parts benefits from such environmental factors.  Likewise, the Health of a Species entails that each of its Members benefits from environmental goods.  But, only Socialism guarantees such universal benefiting.  Therefore, Socialism is the best Economic system from an Evolutionist perspective.

Evolutionism, Monotheism, History

The best evidence suggests that there have been two main periods in human history.  First, given that the species is generally believed to have originated at a single location, and later achieved a worldwide presence, a diaspora constitutes an initial era.  Second, there has been a planetary solidification of those scattered humans, as tribes, as basic units of organization, have become cities, provinces, nations, continents, and, currently in progress, a cosmopolity.  Now, a significant factor in this second main period has been the emergence of Monotheism, which, because of the focus on what it entails regarding the nature of Deity, is sometimes under-appreciated as also entailing and effecting a unification of the race.  So, beyond the not insignificant question of the origin of the human species, Evolutionism and Monotheism are not in much disagreement about the general patterns of subsequent History.

Evolutionism, Marxism, Anthropocentrism

Necessity entails omnipotence, i. e. the absence of resistance.  Thus, the thesis that Dialectical Materialism determines Human History by Necessity entails the omnipotence of the process. However, according to Evolutionism, the History of a Species is at least partly determined by the resistance of an environment.  Thus, Evolutionism exposes the unexamined Anthropocentrism of Marxism.

Evolutionism, Organism, Political Philosophy

The subject of the evolutionary process, according to the theory, is a Species, which, as is, is open to either a Platonist or a Nominalist interpretation, i. e. a unit or a multiplicity.  However, the apparent antithesis is simply, and appropriately, resolved, by conceiving a Species as an Organism, i. e. as a structured multiplicity.  Now, the structure of the members of most species is often plainly evident, e. g. the formation of birds in flight, and is easily attributable to an instinct.  In contrast, as is the case with many Human features, that instinct is somewhat deficient, forcing the race to construct its own structure, the process of which is commonly known as 'Political Philosophy'.  So, in other words, from the perspective of Evolutionism, any Political Philosophy the foundational unit of which is an individual person is fundamentally mis-conceived.

Political Philosophy and Evolutionism

Though some version of Evolutionary Theory is now widely accepted, its implications for Political Philosophy have rarely been considered.  To begin with, if the thesis is that Human History is an episode in Natural History, then any pattern of events in the former must be derived from the principles that govern the latter, e. g. Survival, Adaptation, Variation, Mutation, etc.  Accordingly, the goal of the formation of a Polity must be derived from some such principle.  Furthermore, the fundamental subject of the episode is the Species, so any positing of its individual members as foundations of a Polity, including attributes such as 'freedom', 'right', etc., is, as is, ungrounded.  In other words, Evolutionism invalidates Modern Political Philosophy, as well as its Contemporary successors, to the extent that they accept the undermined premises of their predecessors.

History, Happiness, Power

According to the standard model in the Modern Era, the function of the formation of a Polity is to maximize the pursuit of Happiness of the Individual.  But, historicizing this process re-conceives the latter as having being liberated from preceding Oligarchical conditions, in the context of which entering into collaborative construction with others can, thus, be interpreted as in itself a process of Empowerment.  Now, Kantian Autonomy reflects a recognition of that historical development.  However, he is unable to completely jettison the pursuit of Happiness as a fundamental motivation, leaving him needing to combine the two goals as the telos of History, i. e. a Happiness that humans make for themselves, not one that is merely fortuitous.  Marx, too, rejects fortuitous Happiness as a complement to human Labor in the achievement of his concept of a goal of History, but replaces it with Necessary Happiness, i. e. Dialectical resolution.  In contrast with both, Nietzsche eliminates the complementary factor, with the result that Empowerment is the sole principle of these Historical developments, with Happiness nothing distinct from that principle, i. e. he conceives it as a concomitant of Power.

History and Species

Kant and Marx agree that History is converging on a solidification of the human species. According to the former, the motor of that History is Nature, while according to the latter, it is Dialectical Materialiism.  Thus, neither considers that it is the Species itself.  The likely reason for that neglect is that each accepts the traditional premise that the individual member of the species is given as such.  But, that premise is preempted by that of the concept of the Individual as a part of the Species, which entails the re-conceiving of the Individual as the product of a process of Diversification, thereby transforming the concept of History