Resurrexit Spiritus

Resurrexit Spiritus – MAGNA SYNTAXIS

Spiritual Phenomenology, Evolution of Spirit, First Other Theory of Fatherhood Attachment, and Structural Virtues System

These articles can also be downloaded in one convenient PDF by clicking here.



Dear Reader,

Thank you for reading this special foundational issue of 24K Journal of Virtues Science. In this issue, you will find seven articles comprising the Resurrexit Spiritus series of revolutionary philosophical ideas. Originally there had been twenty-seven articles planned for the series but those have since been broken up into their own article series to be published here in issues to come, so keep checking for updates here: Issues

Live Well,
Dr. Roe




Resurrexit Spiritus part 1

Dr. Marcus Aurelius Roe (2023)

This article series comprises a phenomenological philosophical treatise beginning from within my specialisation, psychology appropriately. In the first three articles, I rework Reversal Theory into a coordinated system of structured motivation. I then expand out from this new phenomenology to theories of society, virtues, fatherhood, civilisation, and spiritual human evolution.

Reversal Theory focuses upon polar states within four domains: means-ends, rules, social transactions, and relationships. This theory predicts human reactions that spur contradictory switches between states, such as buying ice cream after exercising or seeking refuge from the boredom of studying with a movie from a favourite genre. These differing states present certain perspectives, expectations, and goals, guiding common categorisation of tasks or decisions with certain traits.

Means-ends domain has means and ends states, having to do with task focuses of craft involvement or product orientation. Rules domain has conform and rebel states, having to do with acceptance or rejection of things. Social transaction domain involves self-mastery and others-mastery states to do with power. Relationships domain has self and others states, to do with relationships with the self and others.


Historically, Reversal Theory domains are resistant to theoretical relationships due to their reactive, dependent, and sometimes paradoxical states, however the underlying psychology of an individual actor is common to them all. If individual psychology itself is the commonality of the four domains in Reversal Theory, then what is it specifically? Is there a backbone on which the eight states might find structure?

Critical analysis for such a dynamic theory of motivation must aim for identification of any unqualified differences in motivation. For this end, a field of activity must be selected for the object of analysis. This object must be able to fulfil any four of the eight states equally yet retain potentiality for other real differences in motivations between individuals. After identifying such a field that defies Reversal Theory in this first article, I will extract the actual difference in the second article. I will then reconstruct and integrate the missing component in the third article.


The classic example of artists comes immediately to mind. Consider two painters who generate paintings demonstrating equal skill. One paints a realistic copy of a photograph while the other paints purely according to artistic prerogatives. What is the difference according to Reversal Theory?


Within the means-ends domain there is little difference to be found between the artists. Either could be serious or playful and the dynamic cannot define the difference. Some may claim arts are decidedly means-oriented however artists engage arts for both craft and product. An artist focused on realism can find just as much joy in their techniques as one following their imagination.

Rules are dependent upon the surrounding society. Both artists could conform to different social circles. Neither can power nor caring transactions define the difference between the artists. Both artists could be equally motivated by self-improvement, prestige, emotional appeals, or inspiring others.

The relationships domain may at first appear fit for the purpose. Perhaps there is enough evidence to contend the photo-realistic artist is painting to profit themselves. However, an artist seeking a profit may be doing it for the benefit of neighbours. The profit might be used to pay for medical bills of destitute family or some charitable endeavour. Likewise, the second painter can be just as selfish or social in their motivations.


These domains do not distinguish between the motivations of the painters as described above. There is something missing between the mimic and the creator that will account for the difference. It must have to do with some common element between the domains.

Apter (2001) writes that states are “‘nature’s’ way of ensuring, in the normal way of things, that the individual has the possibility of every type of psychological satisfaction.” What would “nature’s” interest be in doing this? Regardless of interest, those most psychologically fit to environment were selected for an ability to seek experience. For what purpose? The contrastive value.


The usual philosophical use of the word eros implies reasoned affection. This affection is based in the beauty of things, that is the good to be expected of them. This simple erosic affection is often described as a sort of movement toward truth in phenomenology. Erosic affection is indicative of much more encompassing all under eros, including erotic. The perspective of the erosic eye includes both universal and particular truths, whereas philosophy extends from just past the end of the particular and infinitely deep into universals. So, a movement toward universal truths, as opposed particular, is a definition better aligned to philosophical thought, generally.

Perhaps the difference between the activities of the artists has to do with their individual erosic judgements within the works. One is attempting a more absolute reflection of reality, placing less of the self in the art. The other attempts a more abstractive representation of creative imaginary reflections composite of reality, cultural traditions, and personality.

Beauty is experienced as contrast against other things of a similar category to extract the subjective meaning for the particular, the basic good, relative to everything else. The process of beauty judgement requires difference to exist for definitional value. This is the purpose of the reversals in experience, to provide the tools for definition. The second artist can definitely be said to be engaging more of their own erosic judgements.

The individual erosic judgement event can be labelled here as a “psychomenon”, the reasoned evaluation and selection of the perceived greatest good. Reason stands at its core. Psychomenal contrasting relies on binary oppositions in attributes, such as abstract or concrete and calm or anxious. Binary oppositions exist between all options. Not all erosic activities rise to the level of the psychomenal, this is largely dependent upon the level of reason involved.


Intentional behaviours become most psychomenal when the contrast is apparent, recognised, and remembered. Intentional behaviours inspired by psychomena move in the direction of culture, art, religion, and philosophy. This indicates it is not limited to any specific definition in philosophy or domain of psychology. The missing element needed to deepen Reversal Theory, and therefore structural phenomenology, must transcend most modern schools of philosophy, approaching something similar to Hegel’s own construct.

Memories of psychomena, or learned preferences, compile across a lifetime and manifest as structures of human experience that grant meaning. A deeper level of this meaning can be described as spiritual understanding. This spiritual understanding informs intentional behaviours, signifying the presence of psychomenal activity. Spiritual understanding changes throughout the human lifetime. These changes can force massive shifts in motive.

Can spiritual understanding and psychomena provide clues to differences between the artists in the example? How do shifts in motive occur and are there perceivable patterns? The next article will deconstruct the elements of Reversal Theory and attempt a reformation that reflects patterns aligned to spiritual understanding and motivation domain shifts.


Apter, M. J. (Ed.). (2001). Motivational styles in everyday life: A guide to reversal theory (1st ed). American Psychological Association.



Resurrexit Spiritus part 2

Dr. Marcus Aurelius Roe (2023)

The eight Reversal Theory states are described as forming a randomised “matrix” with no inter-domain patterns (Apter, 2001). That is a strange matrix. This article attempts to prove it is a matrix, however completely non-random as a matrix should be. The integrations, to do with psychomena and spiritual understanding as described in the previous article, are hidden primarily due to basic misconfigurations. In order to identify the missing structure of Reversal Theory, it is first necessary to consider and reformulate some of the definitions, extract meaning from inter-domain patterns, and then designate the greater order.


The primary problem with systemising Reversal Theory is the conflation of elements in transactions with relationships. Since the dynamics and structure are to be completely shifted, it is reasonable to adjust some of the state definitions. So as not to confuse literature in Reversal Theory, I will use alternative terms for the domains.

Two of the states from the Reversal Theory domains, “caring for others” and “empowering others,” are redundant. Truly empowering others can only be accomplished after having mastered the self. This is simply a form of altruism or “others-sympathy” altered by advancement in another domain.

To alleviate this problem, the others-sympathy state in relationships becomes altruism in Eros domain and others-mastery in transactions is replaced by power in Logos domain. Power then becomes the wider state of empowering the self in the world. This can be accomplished by empowering others but that is not the only means. Power and mastery are completions of altruism and egoism, so they must contradict at the same time as interacting. Table 1 clarifies differences and similarities between the domains and states in the theory and proposed reforms.

Table 1. Four Domains Equivalencies Listed by Theory and State Dynamics

RESURREXIT Domains > Telos Kratos Logos Eros
RESURREXIT States Product-Craft Conform-Resist Mastery-Power Egoism-Altruism
REVERSAL States Telic-Paratelic Conformist-Negativistic Self-Others Mastery Self-Others Sympathy
REVERSAL Domains Means-Ends Rules Transactions Relationships

Here in Tables 1 & 2, the domains are lined up in the prescribed non-order of Reversal Theory: means-ends, rules, transactions, and then relationships. They are placed under their Resurrexit Spiritus replacements: Telos, Kratos, Logos, and Eros. The primary problem described above also establishes the first visible ‘issue’ Logos creates for Eros, as seen in Table 2, in the ‘issues’ row

Table 2. Four Domains Analysis

Telos Kratos Logos Eros
ISSUES None Eros Kratos Logos
OBLIGATION Involuntary Obligatory Voluntary Non-Voluntary
IMBALANCE-cost Particular Particular Universal Particular
DEFEAT-by Procrastination Ignorance Corruption Disgust
SPIRIT Unspiritual Material Spiritual Religious
DISTINCTION No Issues Obligatory Universal Most Variable
EXTRAPOLATE Most Common Foundational Difficult Most Energy
RESULTS Production Confrontation Victory (Love) Definition
PREORDERED 2 (Informative) 1 (Directive) 4 (Objective) 3 (Relative)

In Table 2 ‘issues’ row, Telos has no issues with other domains. Kratos has an issue with Eros, Eros with Logos, and Logos back again with Kratos. This means seeking power and mastery causes problems for relationships. Relationships cause problems for conformance and resistance, which in turn conflicts with real power. Based upon this information alone, we cannot perfectly determine order, however we can ascertain that Telos must act in mediation somewhere and so should be in the second or third place of an accurate system.

The ‘obligation’ row of Table 2 is fascinating and very revealing. The only obligatory domain is Kratos; conformation or resistance to things is a basic condition of existence. This would appear to be the seed, or the first domain. However, it is a waste if it does not provoke action, making Telos involuntary if growth is desired. The non-voluntariness of Eros implies people tend to welcome novel experiences that provide unpredicted yet needed definition, so some of the best self-definition derives from the unexpected. To a great degree this is because of a human need to be desired and learn more about the self. This is instrumental to personality development and definition.

Logos is the only domain that is of a purely voluntary nature, there is no way for it to be obligatory, involuntary, or non-voluntary. The reason that Logos is a hurdle for Eros is that it is the domain immediately after it. Logos is the fulfilment of the self-definition and understanding won in the Eros domain. Further confirmation of the supremacy of Logos is found in ‘imbalance cost’, where it is the only one to bear a universal cost to individual imbalance. Logos requires especial energies of self-other-referential-regeneration through the product and craft in universalist completion. In essence, Logos is the mirror reflecting a summary of the other three domains.


I have now derived an order, but perhaps still more can be learned. The ‘defeat-by’ row from Table 2, as laid out in the last Table 3 column, appears to confirm the newly configured order. Generating a phrase from this ordering, it might state that “ignorance precipitates procrastination, in turn misdirecting disgust which contributes to corruption.” Nothing appears glaringly faulty with the reasoning. Another way of phrasing it, in reverse, is that the knowledgeable person seeks expedience and finds delight in justice.

The ‘spirit’ column also confirms the order from material to unspiritual, followed by religious to spiritual. Eros domain has a primary ‘distinction’ in its greatest variability of experience, which is responsible for and in turn due to its ‘result’: definition. This is in reference to all the various emotions, thoughts, ideas, and abstract type notions that occur in this domain. All relations include everything. This is something of a superset, and must mean the most energy is expended here, hence the ‘extrapolate’. The most common domain of interaction in a well-adjusted individual, however, should be Telos.

Logos, then, is the most difficult because it is the extractive meditation of meaning in interactions of the first three domains. The Logos result includes all victories of comprehension extracted from the definition. This is because it judges judgement itself, first of conformance in Kratos domain and then progressively more of the psychomena in Eros domain. Logos is the result of results. This leads toward finer definitions of beauty, that is love in itself. The definition result of the energetic and astounding Eros domain is sparked by the continued confrontation and production of Kratos and Telos. Production of Telos is impassioned at the foundation by confrontation in Kratos.

Table 3. Four Domains Ordered and Described

Kratos Confrontation Foundational Obligatory Material Ignorance
Telos Production Most Common No Issues Unspiritual Procrastination
Eros Definition Most Energy Most Variable Religious Disgust
Logos Victory(Love) Difficult Universal Spiritual Corruption

Table 4. Eight States Analysis

Specific Nonspecific
Conform Resist
Product Craft
Egoism Altruism
Mastery Power

Table 4 has the states ordered correctly and delineated between the specific and nonspecific. These states contain incomplete particulars and universals, so I chose to use alternative names instead. However, extremism in a more nonspecific state will invariably lead to extreme and bad universality. The same is true of extremity in a specific state leading toward extreme and bad particularity.

Table 5. Erosic Scale Analysis

Domains V Hylic Psychic Pneumatic Purpose
Kratos Dependent Unaware Unaware Liberation
Telos Dependent Aware Unaware Progress
Eros Interdependent Dependent Ignored Knowledge
Logos Independent Interdependent Dependent Love

In Table 5, is found the ordering of the domains listed under spiritual categories and, finally, purpose. Purpose is a description of the promise appropriate for both states in each domain. The promise of both conformation and resistance is liberation. Product and craft promise progress. Egoism and altruism promise knowledge. Mastery and power promise love, that is the completed erosic eye. In each case, the domains are the completion of their predecessors.

There are hylic dependencies in the Kratos and Telos domains, indicative of material and bodily reliance. In Eros, hylic are interdependencies to the psychic. Psychic dependence implies an application of internal ethical rules. It is the progressive production of Telos that initiates awareness of the psychic. Logos is the singular domain involved with its only dependency, pneumatics or spirit. Essentially, this is domain self-awareness or reflection in the depths of experience. This is demonstrated in the individual by pneumatic interdependence with the psychic, as well as independence from the hylic.


So, returning to the problem of the painters in the previous article, are we any closer to a solution? Perhaps and some of the difference may exist in the newly uncovered power state. However, there is something else missing for description of this difference that can incorporate everything learned here. That is elevational motive.


Apter, M. J. (Ed.). (2001). Motivational styles in everyday life: A guide to reversal theory (1st ed). American Psychological Association.



Resurrexit Spiritus part 3

Dr. Marcus Aurelius Roe (2023)

There is something fundamental missing in psychology. Spirit is often recognised, however quickly brushed aside. This cannot do. Figure 1 presents the new theory. I call it Resurrexit Spiritus Doctrina, Risen Spirit Theory, or Resurrexit Theory.

The states in each successive domain spur anticipation for higher domains. This is all represented by the central arrows inside the “summerling” (butterfly) of Figure 1. Ascension is only accessible through the moderation invoked of understanding and experience in preceding domains.

Figure 1. Resurrexit Theory – Summerling of Domains Over Arrow of Elevational Motive, All Pointing Generally Toward the Spiritual

Summerling of Domains.png


In the creation of a new order, I have generated an additional factor called elevational motive. This can just as easily be described as “spiritual ambition.” Hegel had a lot of elevational motive as evidenced by his devotion to explicating the concept of absolute spirit (Hegel, 1807). This was his use of “geist” closest to an English meaning of spirit, as opposed to mind alone.

Regenerative intentionality refers to the intentionality in behaviours that promote psychomena, such as thought. Spirit continuously activates through regenerative intentionality upward, causing elevational motive. This momentum encourages transformation. The trend of elevational motive is in finding solutions through the wholeness offered in ascendant domains, as guided by reason.


The Kratos domain represents the most primitive psychomenal activity, that is nearest the material, hylic, or bottom of the spectrum. This contains the basic requirement for entry into human community. Whether it is better to resist or conform is very situational. Here it is the individual learns what is worthy of conformation and what is not. This is heavily dependent upon their spiritual currency, or most common mental locations on the domains summerling in Figure 1.

Defining the self is performed through a comprehension of potentiality and values contrasted against environment, in other words the optimal personality for time and place. These conformation selections represent proto-socialisation, and provide the first guidance and foil to definition. The next domain, Telos, provides the first stage for the visible activity of this personality, as resistance or conformation alone are meaningless without product and craft.

Those driven by product are often given the good advice to enjoy the process, or the craft in activities. Similarly, those focused on craft receive the opposite good advice to avoid procrastination, that is to focus more on the product. In this way, the Telos domain is an application of the lessons learned through the Kratos domain, establishing values fit to optimal personality. A resisting reaction in Kratos domain is more likely to carry into craft. Likewise, a conforming reaction can carry to product. It is the Telos domain as directed by the Kratos that factors into the reactive positioning of personality development amid social interactions, or entry to the Eros domain.

The Kratos domain presents proto-_erosic_ activity. The overall societal norms do not matter so much in Kratos domain. Rather, positioning is the most determinant factor within the overall intersection of societies. These typically predetermine alignments and predict erosic tendencies in the Eros domain. If Telos is the sports field, then Kratos domain provides the boundaries and Eros domain represents the goal posts.

The focus built in Telos domain demands development of Eros or relationships, to the self and to others. This provides greater definition for the productive Telos domain. Although it is the productivity and progress of the Telos domain that necessitates the later dialectical power dynamics of Logos, this can only occur through definitional values in Eros. It is moderation in Telos domain that enables more activity in the Eros domain.

Altruism and egoism in the Eros domain are natural by-products of progression and productivity in the Telos domain. The relational developments in definition develop into complex opinions and values, which create impetus for control. This control comes in the form of both power and mastery states, the Logos domain.


Balance is important to all of the domains. Balance is fundamental to human nature and the very nature of reality. Being far off from the centre in any of the states leads to imbalance. This imbalance causes spiritual defeat in the event, relationship, or life. More extreme possibilities exist in the lower domains, enticing people to veer into greater imbalance.

Extreme residency in the lower domains traps a person to those abused states, as expressed in Figure 1. In order to attain being in higher domains more often, an individual must achieve balance in the lower domains. Those most resident of the higher domains still partake in all of the states of the lower domains with regularity, however more centralised and in particular order.

Each state only finds greater solace in the wisdom of the opposite. This is because tighter spurring between opposing states creates pressure for greater momentum upwards. The wider the movement, the more shallow, extreme, and long-lasting the reaction. With entrance to more being in states of Logos comes a prismatic reaction of spirit-dedicated regenerative intentionality, which is a meta-level and encapsulating creativity. This provokes an even greater desire to expedite the lower domains, encouraging ever more balance in them.

Sustainable and beneficial altruism is impossible without the knowledge afforded by product and goals. Mastery cannot occur without the thought and knowledge of others afforded by craft. Power cannot be achieved without self-knowledge, mastery, and goal setting. Mastery which is unattached to power is incomplete and degenerate. Power without mastery will always be corrupt.

Those naturally disposed to resistance must learn to embody product to achieve a balanced egoism. Those naturally disposed to conform must learn to embody craft in order to achieve a balanced altruism. Completion in each of the preceding domains anticipates balance because power and mastery are the embodiments of balance themselves, since extended residence in Logos domain implies contribution to the human dialectic.

The beloved and balanced superhuman Logos domain is definitively spiritual. Spiritual failure is an inability to enter or maintain moderation between power and mastery states. The Logos domain requires balance in lower domains for making optimal psychomenal judgements. This is especially crucial at moments of psychomena of psychomena, or judgments of mental beauty.


Resistance natively seeks craft, a key trait of craft being a general independence from guidance. Direct rejection of any and all guidance falls back into extreme resistance. Conforming is an extant product-focused action in itself, so that not resisting any intentions at all falls back into abject conformation.

Product focus is disposed to the immediacy of solipsism and its completion in the mastery of self. This is confirmed by the basic individualistic format of most goals. The ultimate goal of all individual goals is an unincorporated plan, meaningless to society without power state activation. This extremism in mastery is not mastery and exits Logos domain. It falls back as bare extreme egoism in Eros domain, or egotism. Egotism can also be defined as a self-obsessed product-focus in Telos domain.

Without mastery, ascent into power will be aimless and fail. This appears as the simple desire of authority for its own sake, and falls back into extreme altruism. The ultimate of craft in extreme altruism involves using power to force what is believed to be best upon others. This usually has very bad consequences without self-knowledge and mastery.

The states in all domains only discover their purpose through the meaning of their opposite. Craft without product guidance can never realise the intentionality needed in higher domains. _Product_ focus cannot achieve ideation, an egoist activity, without the realignment and basic joy learned of craft, or regeneration in the craft of setting new goals.


Continuing with the earlier sports field metaphor, Logos domain is the sport itself. All people do on the field before Logos supremacy is make up their own games. Some are better than others but all are nothing compared to Logos. It is unsurprising that many believe this to be “simply” a “random” game they are playing “by accident” and, importantly, against their will. Games are usually intentional and can be very serious, depending on the stakes. Further, I do not believe reality can manifest accidentally.

The sport of the Logos domain is so literally intentional and serious that even a cavalier attitude in rejection plays into it, because everything is at stake. The supremacy of the Logos domain in life, however, attends a realisation of the sport. This is important but it is more crucial for the person to perceive the seriousness involved. They must realise that they do not get to make up the rules themselves since they already exist.


The spiritual life is one devoted to higher love. This most commonly manifests in the areas of human activity to do with religion, art, culture, and philosophy. This higher love is greater than the individual human. Spirit manifests as deep affection for the best in humanity and the inheritances that supplant mere temporal or material benefit.

In simplest terms, spirit can be defined as life led by love, and human spirit as love of the Universal good in humanity. Spirituality, as the ultimate end of the erosic process, is a focus on this love of life-improving life. This is a love of the most especially universal aspects particular to life. Love of the universal particulars of life manifests ultimate balance. This balance underlies motivations in religious, artistic, cultural, and philosophical endeavours. Could this explain the differences between the two painters from the example used for parts 1 and 2? Absolutely.

The patterns of this theory are unlimited and cut across all human systems. Resurrexit Theory, as a theory of appearance in all human experience, is larger than psychology, sociology, religion, and politics. These states can be seen not only in individual development, but in the evolution of society, human relationships, personality, and spiritual enlightenment.

In the proceeding series of articles, I will explore the social, evolutionary, sexual, political, and religious ramifications of this systematic and ambitious new structure for phenomenology. I will also propose additional theories to do with spirituality, the psychological science of virtues, physical reality, and evolutionary psychology. All of these theories will be directly tied to Resurrexit Theory.


Hegel, G. W. F. (1807). Phenomenology of Spirit (1998 English Translation by A. V. Miller with Analysis by J.N. Findlay). Motilal Banarsidass Publishers.



Resurrexit Spiritus part 4

Dr. Marcus Aurelius Roe (2023)

“Sick and yet happy. Imperilled and yet happy. Dying and yet happy. Exiled and happy. Infamous and happy.”


Reflective acceptance of the lower domains is central to the Logos domain of Resurrexit Theory. Instrumental to this process is a critical review of psychomena, ignorance, and rejections. The most common and original rejection is that basic to life, rejection of death. Every life must approach death with this same native bias, especially in youth. Perseverance upon this rejection predisposes people to the most awful fear.

The dread of death drives extremism in the Kratos and Telos domains. Those naturally resistant and craft-oriented seek escape through rebellious action or distraction. Those naturally conformant and product-oriented reject death through simple ignorance, focusing instead upon expectations, goals, and egotism. Wilful ignorance only serves to intensify the fear. The understanding of death in relation to the self becomes ever more convoluted in its expressions and reincorporation throughout life.

Death rejection repeatedly reincorporates into fear of completion, as each achieved goal attends a heightening subconscious mortal dread. These circumstances are especially present in things heavily dependent upon the temporal limitations of mortality, such as careers or relationships. Fear of completion takes on the features of procrastination and disinterest, or personal distraction from living or daring to do. This state results in alienation, anxiety, and depression. Suicide after chronic depression ultimately occurs when it is falsely believed the only correction is a forced acceptance of death through the total rejection of life.


Epictetus’s quote at the beginning of this article describes a state of mind utterly incomprehensible to most people. It implies undeniable happiness through Stoical clarity. You cannot destroy the facts of accomplishment. You can destroy records and convince the World against someone yet you still cannot destroy the facts. A person who has accomplished something in their life, then, has nothing to fear from sickness, peril, exile, infamy, or death. They have proven themselves capable of happiness and more by living properly and speaking truth, so they are all the happier if vilified for it. Nothing can be done against such a person to humiliate them.

Those ancient philosophers used death as an allegory for their existences before philosophy; the philosophical life was their art through moderation. It is forever a true comparison. Logos domain supremacy is a philosophical rebirth that frees a person from the fears inherent of an incomplete life. The Logos domain provides a reflection in summary of preceding domains. This reflection is a refolding of mental function, like an ever-sharpening sword, externally manifesting universal order, which is identical to wholeness. It is wholeness that provides a mature acceptance of death. This is confirmed by the fact that a fulfilling life can only occur through wholeness. Wholeness is existence beyond the fear of death.

People who believe untrue things are consequently misled in life. Those captivated by untrue things are spiritually dead. Resurrection is made possible through comprehension of truths, an arising from the dead in this very life. This is resurrection to the divine life accomplished through spiritual devotion to progress in culture, religion, art, and philosophy. It was never a literal rising from the dead.

Being in the Logos domain demands realignments in lower domains to fit the changing environment and deepening definition, or actualisation, of the self. These psychomenal realignments, or continuous rebirths, aim for the self-other moderation closest to universal good as possible. Personality developments are further refined in light of environment and change, to meet the predicted moments with reason instead of submission. This is essentially what Logos domain supremacy is: use of reason in reordering the lower domains for advancing discourse and contribution to the human dialectic.

Expedience becomes primary when the mental attachments meet the creative abstract. It is a common mistake to abandon reality completely in the exuberance. The creative abstract without foundation in the nature of reality has no reason. Only the guidance of reason can enable access to the Logos domain. Reality without the creative abstract is uneventful. Change is not navigable without the guidance of consciousness. Consciousness has no purpose without change. This is similar to how self and other are meaningless without their mutual definition. Since consciousness represents the state of self, the subconsciousness is the imposition of simulated change that creates opportunity to define the future condition of that state.


Particular and universal form a spectrum of relative specificity and non-specificity between. Ideals cannot exist in these absolutes since nothing can be perfectly universal, nor can any living being be entirely particular and survive. Universal can only be served through service to the most universalised particular. This is what all people look for in politicians, yet from very diverse perspectives and with imperfect information. Typically, they select weak people who are imbalanced, venal, and easily manipulated by the powerful people that paid for their campaigns. These types always offer simple solutions to complex issues and are believed. These simple solutions are similar to the solutions offered through escapism and distractive frivolities.

Simple solutions distract from absolute resolution of Logos domain reflection. Simple solutions to complexity represent mere submissions, so that the old cycles continue unabated. These cycles only end through absolute resolve. This is because complexity is eternally ceaseless where simplicity is rare and mostly temporary.

Complexity, therefore, belongs to the universal and simplicity to the particular. Simplicity applied directly to the universal folds the inherent complexity upon itself. Application of simplicity to the particular, on the other hand, establishes the calm presence of mind needed for the first stages of unfolding complexity.

Simplicity can only exist within the conscious mind of a singular person, the so-called individual, or indivisible particular. The admittance of complexity into the mind creates division through basic instability. The unstable mind admitting complexity internally mistakes it for the only thing it evolved to understand from birth, simplicity.

The rules inherent of simplicity are then repeatedly applied to complexity, which can only increase complexity generally. The mind cannot function properly this way, with every phenomenon multiplying internal complexity. The human mind evolved to unravel complexity from within its own incorruptible simplicity. There is nothing more fit for unfolding complexity than the simplified and stable mind.

Understanding imperfection and accepting things that cannot be changed are key to simplicity. That is relinquishing complexity in the self and understanding the complex social matrices built upon the simple confusion of most people. Ostensibly, the Logos domain may appear complex due to the universalising activities. However, it involves objective externalisation of complexity and internalisation of simplicity subjectively, so that universalising is tempered by simple and clear reason.

Once Logos domain supremacy is achieved, and appropriately identified, its regular commission becomes a primary goal with mounting creative confidence. The wisest residents of Logos domain will do everything in their power to maximise the amount of time spent in it. It is only through the Logos domain that the lower domains gain higher meaning in redefinition, first of immanence and then Universe.

Logos activities lead to ever greater internalised simplicity. This is an unfolding of compiled complexity and retractions of mistaken simplicity. This unfolding by internalising simplicity is identified with the psychomenal actions of regenerative intentionality that creates the pressure behind elevational motive, as discussed in part 3. Persistence in the Logos domain is a refusal to submit to any internalised complexity or externalised simplicity. Consistent internal simplicity in contemplation of absolute complexity forces greater creative coordination of the conscious and subconscious. This creativity is a simplifying function to unravel complexity.


Humans harness the subconscious to manifest a presentation of internal otherness modelled upon observation, assessment of self-efficacy, and all imagined refolding therefrom. The reason psychedelic drugs shift a person’s perspective so much is it shines a mirror on the underbelly of this internal otherness. However, any attempt at drawing meaning from the mechanics of the inner-workings is a false representation.

The image of the self is the shadow of conscious and images of others are the shadows of subconscious, which is an inference of the consciousness or selfness in others. Subconscious is used to prepare consciousness for change, or otherness. These were the first evolutionary stirrings of thought, or internal dialogue. In fact, the subconscious generation of internal goals presumed for others was likely the seed for the mirror in self-awareness itself.

Subconscious-conscious interaction in dreaming evolved to prepare the waking consciousness for unforeseen events similar but different from those experienced during the day. Before the mind developed more advanced recursive hardware, it first developed the constructive, creative, and potentialising imagination. The conscious and subconscious first evolved together as one and then divided later through development of the greater conscious precision and subconscious creativity.

Dogs and other animals dream, but it is seemingly less creative for animals, apparently providing similar practise for living. The original state of the human mental phenomenon was not always as it is. This being was less imaginative than our modern consciousness but closer to the subconscious. Ancient myths around the World allude to a waking-dream period in human history, when everything was ruled by different gods.

The Greek manteia, or state of deep thought, is much like that primitive waking-dream consciousness of distant ancestors. This is the engagement of both conscious and subconscious functions. A person lost in manteia is neither actively mindful of reality nor asleep. All forms of meditation and deep thought focus on some simple wholeness in the present being. Manteia is the simple wholeness of the complex wholeness. This can be neither sleeping nor the typical reflexive awareness that most humans instinctively prefer. The balanced deep thought state is glorious in its absolute honest coordination of grounding reality and elevating potentiality. It is the material that directs change, as its master in reality, and it is the self in manteia or the “manteic” state of Logos that is the creative neophyte of higher reasoning, the element necessary to adapt in the midst of change.

Memory and thought, or reapplications of memory, are physical features of energy. The immanent dialectic of mental construction basic to the constitution of the mind is tied to fundamental aspects in the nature of energy and reality. This is set into development during the course of childhood before any inter-human languages are learned. Language itself is nothing more than constant memorial replications fit to the shape of this internal dialectic. Thoughts are physical recollections of memories as shaped by reality. Memories and thoughts, then, are manifestations of reality. They are derived through the physical attributes of energy, which is to say they are native to energy and merely differentiated by a trick of the mind to aid individual survival. This is not the state of consciousness in which humanity began and neither can it be the final one.

Ultimately, the dialectic mind of Logos domain supremacy is internal alignment with universal potentiality. To stare for too long in the face of potentiality without the grounding of reality is to be driven mad. Consciousness and subconsciousness plan creatively in potentialised moderation. Which is to say it manifests the optimal internal reflection of the self and other into reality. It is from this vantage point that the Logos domain provides insight into reality and acts as an ever-steadfast advocate for moderation, being its very incarnation.


Power in the hands of an imbalanced person is evil, it is like placing the highest value object on an unbalanced table. For those who are imbalanced, moderation in the lower domains will feel like a denial of the self. This is why many will enter the Logos domain for as long as they need and can maintain it, with the goal of resting upon the laurels of the success based in it. Once they have enough resources, they will give up on the art and focus again upon their lower domain extremities, the distractions that make Logos domain so seemingly challenging.

The reason why so many fail at power is largely because of basic misconceptions of power and its purpose. A primary reason for failure in mastery is that its attempt feels self-denying. This is especially true without achievement of some moderation in the lower domains. It is also true that the states in the immediately preceding domain of Eros are infinitely lovely and captivating. Achievement of moderation in Eros domain is especially difficult for many. In theory, it can be more easily accomplished after acquiring dialectical skill, i.e., advanced moderating experience from within the Kratos and Telos domains.


So, what is mastery and power? Mastery is dominion of the consciousness over itself. Power is a recognition and engagement of that which can be reasonably changed. This is not wielded power in itself but rather the absolute truth of self-efficacy in place and time. Since anything not of self or other beneficence cannot possibly be more than Kratos domain rebellion, it falls short of Logos back into simple ignorant evil with a veneer of craft, altruism, or power. The most essential lesson of power is the realisation that freedom is the ability to recognise and do Good.

Stabilised power is recognisable by its own recognition of power, which is the ability to detect true Logos domain balance in others. The personal actualisation of power into the World is accompanied by a redoubling of mastery, as the value becomes self-appreciating in evidence. Most people who have achieved this are unrecognisable to anyone not also resident in the Logos domain, content to simply do Good in the World without much recognition.

Guiding reasoning must include psychomenal judgements otherwise their counter-existence undermines the basic moderation allowing for Logos domain residency. Logos is then intrinsically tied to love, which is the personal grounding in reality. The best love is based in preferences toward the most universal of particulars, or truth. Without this bias toward the greatest available truth, moderation fails and a person falls short spiritually.

Benefit to particulars is never to outweigh the universal. When it does, it is temporary and eventually returns to the universal. Societal stability depends on the greatest particular arising to serve the universal. The greatest particulars are the freest, or the most capable of recognising and doing good.


Everyone thinks the truth will prevail but that depends on willingness to cope with the fact that lies are accepted by the majority of the World, some very ancient and others quite a bit newer. There is not only a basic human right to question experts, there is an essential responsibility to challenge them. There is no discourse without dialog and reason. Creative confidence and elevational motive are necessary to challenge the status quo. How would societies recognise problems in spirit that limit righteous dialectical challenges? Some people must see and point it out, then enough must act to change it.



The Dozen Skills in Reason – Resurrexit Spiritus part 5

Dr. Marcus Aurelius Roe (2023)

“That which exercises Reason is more excellent than that which does not exercise Reason. Since there is nothing more excellent than the Universe, nothing exercises more Reason.”

-Zeno of Citium

“The wise man who knows himself and has in constant comradeship his own Spirit to fight at his righthand, will neither cringe at what the vulgar fear, nor dare to do what most men do without the slightest shame.”

-Apollonius of Tyana

“The anxieties of these times, deceitfulness of riches, and appearance of other desires choke Logos, and it becomes unfruitful.”

-Jesus Christ

Figure 1Virtue Chart – The three aspects of Reason are labelled on the left with the four moments labelled above. The ‘Diligent Dozen.’

The twelve virtues are the products of three aspects of Reason through four moments. Each virtue is a skill in itself. The three aspects in Honesty, Analysis, and Perseverance are the necessary components of Reason. These aspects of Reason must be activated through the moments of Awareness (reflect), Propriety (response), Morality (right), and Spirit (culture). These twelve virtues together comprise the thirteenth overall skill, Reason itself.

Skill-building is the increase of familiarity with a category of action through repetition, including aligned physical and mental exercises. These are chosen, generally, given the preferences of the developed personality, and then further refined through experience. However, it all gets pulled in and forward, though not fundamentally changed, with the interpositions of virtues.


Figure 2Sphere of Reason – The virtues are acquired in order, generally inward from the outside. Primarily, this demonstrates the relationships between the virtues.

I followed the model of the Universe to construct an immanent replica in placing Reason, as retaining highest potentiality of all thought energies, at the centre of mental systems. As above, so too internally. Magnanimity is the primary entrance to the virtues. This remembrance of identification, or self-valuation, allows the institution of Honour, valuation generally. The Temperance virtue restricts distasteful things contradictory to those Honourable values. In the demonstration of Honour comes Loyalty towards the same seen in others.

Application of this Loyalty in true Honesty results in the recognition of Excellence. Patience derives from the revaluation in Excellence and an appreciation for the time that this takes. Conservation, the most paternal virtue, is based in the desire to retain that which is Excellent through the perspective of Patience. Prudence is the most maternal virtue and, alongside its siblings in Excellence, Patience, and Conservation, foundational to the continuance of all virtues. Figure 2 demonstrates how they underlie the rest while generating first attachments to Reason. The caution in Prudence generates the demand for Ethical realignments of values and desire for Justice in the wider World. This righteous protectiveness of values grants Courage. The final virtue replicates the first, Magnanimity. This is Willpower, the realisation of the self in full complement of community and virtues.

A numerological mnemonics system has been carefully threaded throughout this theory, for ease of processing and understanding. This is logically constructed out of basic relationships between the virtues coordinated with a comprehension of philosophical relationships within numerical topography. The concepts behind Elevational Motive of Resurrexit Theory served as an essential backdrop throughout its construction. All of reality is coordinated and so proving relationships that are at least allegorical should be a simple task throughout.


One is the ruling principle, Reason that exists because of memory and recollections. All numbers are through Reason, self-multiples of One. Its presence is recognisable through the first perfective virtue, Magnanimity. Magnanimity is the natural result of identity remembrance through the moment of Awareness and the Honesty aspect of Reason.

This Awareness in relation to Honesty comes from extended time in moderation of the Eros domain. This extended moderation in Eros domain naturally evolves into a recognition of the new dialectical form in Logos domain, mastery and power. This introduces potential conditions by which the virtues can increase and expand, since the remembrance of true self is required to begin the Logos work.

The Reason for entering the Logos at the cost of Eros is never to ignore the World. Rather, the Reason is to set the person into order for greater contributions to family and community. Ultimately, personal actions either help decide the fate of the World or they do not. The moment of true power and mastery is when a person stops considering the present World as an end of history, but rather the beginning of a history yet to be forged.

Magnanimity is, essentially, the appropriate ordering of forgetfulness, to forget all the things the person is not. This order naturally develops as the other virtues blossom. It prepares the self for Logos domain. The differentiation between desired future self and undesired non-self in Magnanimity is the initiating behaviour of the conscious dialectic, which can be called proto-spirituality. This is similar to how Kratos, the first domain, is proto-socialisation. Magnanimity replicates Kratos domain in this way.

Two is the negating and contrasting principle implied by One. It is the Reason for Reason. Two manifests the primary divide that exists between Spiritual and Material, and is reminiscent of One, in the original separation from zero, nothingness or potentiality. The first divide is replicated in every domain, imperfectly and ignorantly until Logos. The second perfective virtue is Honour and is made possible through Love. The functions of Qualification and Noble Negation, or Honour, are based in willingness to maintain Moral alignments in the face of resistance and through the Reason aspect called Honesty, which is essential to acquiring the other virtues. Honour can also be described as devotion to an advantageous moral ordering. If Magnanimity is avoidance of unimportant and harmful things, then Honour is loving that which is best for the self and hating those things most antithetical to the self. These effective arrangements are determined by culture, moral education, and experience.

As witnesses to the contrast in the World’s obsessions with frivolities, those exercising Magnanimity and Honour develop Temperance. The addition of the third pillar provides the balance in personality upon which others can rely. Three represents the defining principle, measuring the contrast and negation represented in two. Thus, three fulfils the promise of One, in defining and locating it. The third virtue is Temperance that evolves out of comfort in identity, or the ordering of pride. This evokes measured responses to change and appears first as humility, until onset of the later virtues. Temperance measures the World and the self through the moment of Propriety in Honesty, increasing order through pride in order.

The fourth apparent virtue is Loyalty, naturally evolving out of ordered pride and the authority of budding mastery in the Honesty aspect across the four moments. Four represents harmony, or negation of contrast, and involves a reordering of perspective, or comprehension of greatness. Confirmation of the identity, as first remembered in Magnanimity, is the natural course of Loyalty. This is a devotion to the bond with others closest in alignment with the personal Honour. Loyalty is the most mature virtue in the four moments of Reason’s Honesty aspect, as it is the first to answer the moment of Spirit, the meaning of Logos.

Of course, this increases harmony in all actions only possible through true Honesty. Harmony opens the first peek into the Analysis aspect of Reason. This starts with the Excellence virtue in the moment of Propriety, nearest Temperance. Excellence is indeed an exceedingly harmonious phenomenon. People who have fabricated falsehoods most of their lives will find it impossible to attain to the moment of Excellence identification, which fails upon the false Honesty. Living in unwelcoming environments forces lies. This blocks most spiritual advancement. This is because the Analysis aspect of a chronic liar is permanently damaged before achieving harmony.

Five presents alignment or perfective material exclusivity. This means the inclusion of higher Reason into the harmony of reality. This ordering of the nature into alignment with the attained Honesty, also entails negation of definitions for the purpose of reintegration. Old definitions must be negated to forge new comprehensions through Honest Analysis in Propriety.


Figure 3Sin Chart – The three aspects of Materiality are labelled on the left with the four moments labelled above. The ‘Dirty Dozen.’

Figure 4Star of Demoralisation – This represents the sins and the relationships between them. The centre sins are the most immanent and least visible. The rays are the visible sins.

If a liar is able to accomplish the four moments of Honesty, which is impossible without strong group support, it will be false and fail at Analysis, proceeding no further. In fact, liars fool themselves through Amnesis, Disdain, Obsession, and Hubris, the four basic moments of the Conceit aspect of Materiality. These are the results of the diminishment of Magnanimity, Honour, Temperance, and Loyalty, respectively.

Instead of the harmony of Honesty revealing the first glimpse of Analysis, Excellence, the liar finds deepening Envy. This is usually quickly followed by the other errors in the Conceit, Confusion, and Sloth aspects of Materiality at the moments of Ignorance, Lust, Apathy, and Fear. In order, these are Dependence, Greed, Delusion, Corruption, Absolutism, and Cowardice, as demonstrated in Figure 3 and Figure 4.

This Sin Chart is recognisable as a reflection of the Virtue Chart in Figure 1, with each sin being overcome systematically through manifestation of the preceding virtue, acting as the tool for unlocking the next virtue. Each of the sins must be overcome or managed. Sinners forget who they are, hate what is Good, obsess over insignificant things, and cower from revelation. Some liars will recall who they are in perverted honesty, and then show a degenerative loyalty for things and people aligned to their own base urges. This is called ‘viral perversion,’ where such behaviour is encouraged by organisations who then receive that perverse loyalty.


The Propriety of Excellence judgement forces Awareness in Perseverance, or the sixth apparent virtue of Patience which is practically a replication of Magnanimity in its absolute ordering of interests. It is the remembrance of other identification and who they must be, implying an immediate forgiveness above and beyond mere Magnanimity. Six is ultimate definition or division, identical with sex. Six is negation through redefinition of the defining factor, or lying. This means six also represents deception, being half of the full twelve or one half of the face, as on a clock. Similarly, Patience is an acceptance of delays due to differences, based in the realisation of how little is controllable.

The seventh virtue appears as Conservation. Conservation is the fulfilment of the promises inherent of Temperance and Excellence, based on Patience. Perseverance aspect of Reason is basic to virtues to do with timing, including Patience and Conservation. The onset of the Conservation virtue marks the completion of the moment in Propriety. The first wholeness occurs here. The completion of the four moments of the Honesty aspect and the three aspects of the Propriety moment encourages the maximisation of Logos domain residence. Seven is easily recognisable as the very quintessence of Life, and is essential to the Logos domain. It is the addition of Reason, the One, to the duplicity of differing definitions. The application of Reason turns division toward the greatest Good possible. Seven is the definition of harmony, contrast of alignments, and Reason for division. This Logos domain redresses and improves all aspects, which is to say Reasoned activities of perfection, in its constant duplication of the lower domains.

The earlier nascent level of Analysis, with just Excellence, included only one moment of Awareness and could not proceed without the greater identifications of others and universals. This is because Prudence, the Awareness moment of the Analysis aspect, can only be acquired after the other virtues in the moment, Magnanimity and Patience. Prudence requires appreciation of worthiness, through completion of the three virtues in the Propriety moment, Temperance, Excellence, and Conservation. Eight is grand harmony, definition of alignment, contrast of division, and Reason of Life or Logos. It is harmonisation through negation. Above all, eight is Spirit.

Nine represents Death, the produced conclusion of material perfection or perversion activities. It is harmony of alignment, definition of divisions, contrast of Logos, negation of Life, and Reason for Spirit. In many philosophical systems, Death represents the cessation of internalised materialism. The ninth virtue is Ethics, occurring through the Analysis aspect in the moment of Morality. The Ethics are inward products of completion in Propriety and Awareness moments, alongside Loyalty and Honour. This comes from a desire for stability and the fair application of rules, stemming from Prudence.

Ten is Progress or grand realignment. It is harmony of division, definition of Logos, and contrast of Spirit. It is the Reason for Death. The tenth virtue, Justice, is a desire for the presence of morality in society. This is the projection of Ethics into the realm of universals, or contest of particular interests. It is a reconfirmation of the material exclusivity of five through the redoubling of Excellence in negating action.

Eleven is Universal Order. It is the Reason of Progress, alignment of division, harmony of Logos, definition of Spirit, and contrast of Death. The eleventh virtue is Courage which is won directly from actions toward Justice. The Courage of the virtuous overcomes any hatred of virtue, or “evil,” simply by existing and serving Good through the Universal Order. The knowledge of this alone is extremely powerful. It is this Courageous empowerment, after the completion of the three Morality moments of Reason, that drives Willpower.

Twelve is Truth. It promises grand redemption and division of deceptions. This is the alignment of Logos and harmony of Spirit through the definition of Death. It is the contrast of Progress, and Reason for Universal Order. The grace of all aspects and moments of Reason provokes optimisation of the Logos domain, as realised through wisdom. Willpower is the twelfth virtue, Life driven by Love through completion in Reason.

Truth is a simple ideal and infinite in domain, whereas wisdom is finite but limitless in expression. Truth, the ideal, is ignorant of the infinity of falsehoods and relies upon none for its definition. However, the mind will also be imprinted by falsehoods in the immanent erosic dialogue.


Wisdom is the reasoned stratification of knowledge and experience for the optimal retrieval of Truth. Wisdom is inclusive of less than the total Truth but with greater diversity, giving a sampling more representative of particular reality. Wisdom presents an open exchange between Truth and falsehoods. As an embodiment of reflections, wisdom encompasses falsehoods and organises them.

This reorganisation of falsehoods that shadows the immanently constructed Truth enables objectivity. The mind is free to imagine anything, and reject that which is unworthy for being pertinent to neither particularity nor universality. The triumph of Willpower, after first conquering the self, sets the mind free. This is the completion of the Sphere of Reason and the final grace of virtues. A person with a free mind focuses efforts toward meaningful contributions to society. Where Justice is a redoubling of the negating action in Excellence, Willpower is a mission to project Justice through Reason, or moderation, in the power and mastery states of Logos domain. Justice, Courage, and Willpower together comprise a rebirth in Reason through Progress, Universal Order, and Truth. The unjust believe they use others, however friction in the longstanding engine of Good is only ever meant to be overcome.



Resurrexit Spiritus part 6

Dr. Marcus Aurelius Roe (2023)

“They are no more two, but one flesh.”

-Jesus Christ

“The first bond of society is marriage. The second, raising children.”

-Marcus Tulius Cicero

Human mind evolution is an ongoing development including a diverse array of forming modules (Gerrans, 2002). These mind modules first appear in raw states that then stabilise to select additional skills and related abilities. Advantages create population booms that alter the dynamics across generations, giving rise to gene migrations and then recombination. The dispersed advantages in mental abilities are then refined further through competition between novel recombination in various environments. The modern mind can be thus described as an accumulative ordering of talents out of chaotic and diverse origins.

These mind modules evolved alongside proclivities and behavioural tendencies. All tendencies must have been subject to the same forces of selection as any other mental attributes. Matrices of behavioural tendencies, or “personalities,” constitute the sum of individual responsiveness to situations.

There is a special connection between behavioural tendencies comprising human social personality and mate selection. This is a selection process that involves significantly more possibility for error, since misalignments of opposing or contradictory traits can create major behavioural dysfunctions. The fitness benefits compensated all historical risks in this regard. This is proven by the fact that human beings are the most populous and mentally complicated form of life known on Earth.


An individual life is an extended series of interactions. Humans judge themselves and their potential through physical and contextual social realisations based upon those interactions. The self is witness to the failures and successes in interaction with reality as it is. This starts from the very first stages of social interactions as an infant.

These realisations occur through the interaction dynamics, as explicit and implicit communication compiled for understanding and personality development. Potential personality is analysed in terms of self and other, which is to say a dialectic formatting of proto-socialisation. This format first manifests as the resistance and conformance states of the Kratos domain in Resurrexit Theory.

Shock occurs at the inopportune imposition of new normalities, and then abhorrence in disgust. The abhorrence triggers desire for restoration to the old normality. A new normality must entail integration or rejection of the shocking things. This can cause greater extremes without an understanding of appropriate moderation. Abhorrence is disturbing and can confuse sensibilities. Perseverance on accessories of abhorrence and rejection encourage secondary rejections of related and similar things.

So-called overreactions force a person into an extreme residency in the lower domains. Protective reactions are beneficial and can be justified in the right circumstances. These become opportunities to learn and generate a new normality, or adjustment of lifestyle and personality, upon the affiliation of the self between opposing ideals.

The action of witnessing, aligning, and affiliating the self builds a tool for judging traits and abilities in others. There are many advantages to this. By thorough comprehension of relative position in the World, an individual is more realistic and reasonable. This includes nuances of cultural norms. The broadened perspective directly mediates important elements of mate selection.


In the advancement of life, instincts have been gradually replaced, or dulled toward outmoding, by sets of social and logic-oriented behaviours. This is especially true for mammalian life. Many basic reactive instincts found in the most primitive life have been progressively outmoded. For instance, the iron-coded will to survive appears to have been supplanted by mechanisms of life value analysis in humans. This must be true, otherwise any rational explanation for suicidal kin altruism fails logically.

Instincts in human beings were displaced by more flexible cognitive behavioural traits on bases of general adaptive fitness. In this theory, the greater propensity for suicide than most other species is a side-effect of this process. Sensitivities should naturally decrease with the fitness advantages of intelligence and community gradually replacing instincts, which is to say when instincts begin to be selected against because of the new behaviours. This is demonstrated by average human being attenuations in smell, sight, and sound, relative to other mammals. This process also attended greater acuity for specific visual spectrums, such as with colour depth especially for social purposes.

I theorise spiritual mate selection first enabled the advanced displacement of instincts that occurred in hominids beyond that typical of mammals. The honest critical judgement of poorly-adapted behaviours seen in the self encourages the selection of opposite adaptations perceived in potential mates. This is similar to how people select mates to overcome their own perceived shortcomings, as described in regards to physical traits by Schöpenhauer (1818), who left the psychological and spiritual trait selection up to a coordinating godly genius.

Theoretically, such a “selecting traits” trait began as the ability to select the most flexible behavioural traits in harsh environments. This makes the ability to decipher optimal mate selection the most flexibly advantaged trait across generations. This constitutes an entire mind module unto itself, and explains the fickle nature of courting in human beings. People, of course, betray true intentions with their attempts at extending courtship, as suggested by Schöpenhauer.

Psychological triggers, especially moral and social, are capable of epigenetic influence of suicide or death conditions in terms of evolutionary selection. People can be selected for the same genes selected against in relatives by not exhibiting a set of behaviours. This is to say that combinations of certain genes and behavioural sets imposed suicidal conditions for genetic cohorts. This can be described as a sort of behavioural sieve for social and religious organisation.


A person is attracted to personality traits in others based upon judgements developed experientially and alongside their own personality. This is due to a mind module evolved to discern best compensation for traits observed of the self. It is this mechanism of personality shaping through reflective negative-image selection that mimics the act of creation itself. This is the very process that evolved spirit, which is the formation of spiritual personality.

One of these personality traits is a willingness to devote energy to a centralised body, through the state and religion. The most important of these traits are those that imbue meaning and importance to activities that assure group survival. Some of these behaviours manifest as devotion or submission to something deemed greater than the self. Some of these are not behavioural traits that immediately lend themselves to survival, however rely upon the survival of the community, culture, and group.

This process appears to have been metaphysically unavoidable. Metaphorically, a self-programming social “computer virus” or, perhaps, an “evolutionary sinkhole” through recursive function of trait accumulation would naturally target some optimal personality. The definition and accuracy of the selection-traits increase exponentially across populations in consistent cooperation with the advantageous selected traits themselves. Such a dynamic makes development of spiritual traits inevitable. Inevitability is a very good sign that something is an important particle of the patterns built into the fabric of reality.


It is this spiritual tendency that informs the most pro-social behaviours. Spirituality in daily life contributes to an exuberance for the accumulative collective. There is a momentousness in the personality of spiritual people. They express a higher love through their family, community, and culture. These are a group of traits that were extremely self-selective.

They encompass an attitude toward the World amenable to congregational and religious behaviours. People most enthusiastic toward community and family naturally selected mates with similar dispositions. The communities with more exuberant behaviours out-competed more mundane groups.

Forced to contend with ecological disasters, human beings meet uncertainty with extremity in the resistance state of Kratos domain. These situations force generations to explore novel social dynamics when they sense cultural upheaval and disarray, as a means of identifying optimal lifestyles. Religious groups continuously attracted people with similar behavioural phenotypes throughout these periods.

These groups would then be benefited by the greater proportion of the population sinking their immediate survival costs, for contribution to the whole. All the members of these groups would benefit from the increased fitness of individuals contributing to the culture. Selection for these behavioural types will occur no matter the religious situation. Actors of religious schisms react with similarly increased investment into selection for spiritual personality.


Archaic religions were far more particular at the same time as being more universal. This is to say schisms were nearly always coordinated and calculated, not occurring through procedural change. These were communal religions that permanently attached the person, in the same way foreigners to their own communities.

‘Love thy neighbour’ can also be interpreted as ‘do not live near people you cannot love,’ and so people not only selected their own mates but those of descendants by setting required living and moral standards for neighbours. Through that reality they shared in universality with the rest of humanity similarly devoted to their own municipal deities. These deities and standards were as similar as the cultural and racial continuance between cities, wider archetypes notwithstanding.

Ironically, modern Western religion turns people away from their communities with promises of greater universality. Believers neglect the charge of improving their families, communities, and descendants which was essential to the evolutionary formation of spiritual emotions. These are the same spiritual emotions their ancestors felt toward a personal deity devoted to everyone and everything they knew. Modern believers are disconnected from legitimate and beneficial community, severing their universality with the empty promises of an alternative and impossible universality.

The environment of modern religious culture maintains an extractive and predatory normality by distancing people from their actual communities. So many people have left the churches. Is it because the churches have stopped serving their evolutionary and communal purposes?


Gerrans, P. (2002). The theory of mind module in evolutionary psychology. Biology and Philosophy, 17(3), 305–321.

Schöpenhauer, A. (1818). The Metaphysics of the Sexual Love (R. B. Haldane, Trans. 2018).



Resurrexit Spiritus part 7

Dr. Marcus Aurelius Roe (2023)

“For where there is envy and strife, there is an incompleteness; but where there is unity, there is completeness. Since this incompleteness came about because they did not know the father, from the moment when they know the father, incompleteness will cease to exist. As one’s ignorance disappears when one gains knowledge, and as darkness disappears when light appears, so also incompleteness is eliminated by completeness.”

-The Gospel of Truth

Matrilateral bias has been theoretically linked to historical paternity uncertainty, evolutionarily. However, I demonstrated matrilateral bias in relationships to nephews and nieces, or niblings, is predicted by the more original matrilateral bias in relationships to the connective siblings, in my dissertation (Roe, 2021). This suggests much more immediate and primary evolutionary mechanisms in attachment and familism for explaining matrilateral bias. I concluded the study by theorising matrilateral bias as more accurately characterised greater paternal disinterest and male criminality informing a general patrilineal and patrilateral alienation within families.


Mother and child present the monadic toward dyadic staging of mammalian life creation. They are pregnancy, neonate, and infancy. The first stage is purely mother and child. In both successive stages, a child discovers greater independence and otherness. Throughout infancy that original bond is reaffirmed with each breastfeeding (Linde et al., 2020). The first and most important other to this monad is the father. This is a special distinction in social behaviour.


Before the presence of the father, all is still of the self. At first, the mother is not clearly divided from person. The child is first part of the mother. Slowly the child separates from self-maternal socialisation into the self alone, separate from mother.

Contrarily, the secondary socialisation in the paternal relationship is separate from beginning, setting the precedent of all interactions afterward. The father is the first other, ever-present, modelling all future social procedures. He is the first introduction the child has to the society of others. Siblings and kin provide the more erratic tertiary social experience within the primary context of a father figure. In the absence of a stable father, social procedures are modelled on sibling errata and interactions with family and friends, or 21st century internet friends (Lei & Wu, 2020).

One fact that can be deduced from the attachment theory is that people are triggered into various behavioural modes by differences in parenting styles. Perhaps the most imposing determinant of parenting styles are the basic social, cultural, and physical realities surrounding that parenting endeavour (Su & Hynie, 2011). Personality derives largely from genetic divergence and parental attachments felt as environmental signals. Fatherhood plays a central role in the development of personality (Borisenko, 2007). This is logical as overall parental posture to the child and the World are likely the most accurate indicators to the child of important environmental factors and feasibility of lifestyle.

With these behavioural modes travel basic expectations of the World at large. This is extremely valuable for readying generational behavioural customisation in anticipation of changes. Individuals were especially selected for providing appropriate solutions to complex social problems. Those with attitudes and personality traits best adapted to the problems, found the greatest fitness.

Without the additional resources of a father figure, many children can only hope for fortunate windfalls. Such windfalls in difficult environments might come from violence and erratic spectacle, but rarely ever from peaceful or docile behaviours. Likewise, children raised by a father with resources would likely not benefit from displaying violence or erratic behaviours, at least not publicly. Regardless, different behaviours serve these lifestyles, and their missteps are opposite. So it is risky behaviours are more common among people who were raised without a father (Seidel, 2022).

The parental style has a great influence upon sexual behaviours (Rupp & Rosenthal, 2007). Parental behaviours and attitudes influence children and their outcomes tremendously (Boonk et al., 2018). The witnessed and understood behaviours of the father and mother strongly signal social standing, gender ratios, and commonality of infidelity within a community. Those accurately reactive to these signals prove the most beneficial mode given the criteria by demonstrating fitness through the resultant behaviours. This suggests an evolutionary cause for the phenomena explained by attachment theory. Personality disorders then evolved as different evolutionary survival modes reactive to environment, childhood adversities acting as models for navigating difficult societies (McDermott & Barik, 2014).


In first other theory, the paternal attachment begins by the neonatal stage. The paternal attachment develops with the child so long as the father remains a consistent figure in life. From the earliest moments, it is the father who is best placed to create those interactions with a first other.

The best predictor for a man’s paternal behaviours are those of his own father (Gettler et al., 2019). Witnessing and experiencing fatherhood prepare boys for the role. Witnessing the interactions with the father throughout the family sets the stage for the future society of the children. The presence of the father enables the trigger of a certain mode of fatherly and monogamous behaviour, based upon perceived fitness of lifestyle.

It is the bond of fatherhood that endears a boy to humanity. The presence of the father figure keeps boys out of trouble (Mackey & Coney, 2000). Without the bond of the father, a boy will find a more difficult path to love. He is less forgiving of fellows their inferred insults against him and more likely to insult others. Fatherless boys and girls have substantially higher rates of criminality and recidivism (Seidel, 2022).

The presence of an emotionally stable father should theoretically signal more modelling behaviours in children. The father figure provides a foundation for alignment in the Kratos domain. The demonstrated preferences of the father in proto-socialisation, conformation, and resistance guide those selections in the children.

It is the positive interactions of fathers that socialise males for lower cost interactions with others. It is the fatherly presence that acculturates males, creating stronger bonds between the generations for the transference of culture (Haufiku, 2013). Behaviour opposite to fatherhood weakens this course. This also means that opposite behaviour patterns could potentially contradict fatherhood across the proceeding generations. Without the father figure, it seems, the social man degenerates to a lesser version of himself.

It is the bond of fatherhood that teaches a girl to understand and not to fear or hate men (Mackey & Coney, 2000). The strength of her father’s bond and the modelled presence of his monogamous interactions to mother set the stage for her own relationship expectations and sexual behaviours. Monogamous relationships best enable the bond of fatherhood to occur.

Fatherhood enables fatherhood. It is fatherhood that allows for the productive coexistence of the sexes. It is fatherhood that empowers men to value and promote the continuance of their own culture and civilisation. Logically then, fatherhood is the self-perpetuating lifestyle that acts as the engine of civilisation. In short, fathers generate civilisation.


Boonk, L., Gijselaers, H. J., Ritzen, H., & Brand-Gruwel, S. (2018). A review of the relationship between parental involvement indicators and academic achievement. Educational Research Review, 24, 10–30.

Borisenko, J. (2007). Fatherhood as a personality development factor in men. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 10(1), 82–90.

Gettler, L. T., Kuo, P. X., Bas, A., & Borja, J. B. (2019). The roles of parents in shaping fathering across generations in Cebu, Philippines. Journal of Marriage and Family, 81(3), 662–678.

Haufiku, J. (2013). The interplay between fatherhood and male identity in family life among the Ovawambo of Namibia: A pastoral hermeneutical approach.

Lei, L., & Wu, Y. (2007). Adolescents’ Paternal Attachment and Internet Use. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 10(5), 633–639.

Linde, K., Lehnig, F., Nagl, M., & Kersting, A. (2020). The association between breastfeeding and attachment: A systematic review. Midwifery, 81, 102592.

Mackey, W. C., & Coney, N. S. (2000). The enigma of father presence in relationship to sons’ violence and daughters’ mating strategies: Empiricism in search of a theory. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 8(3), 349–373.

Roe, M. (2021). Aunt and Uncle Matrilateral Bias Towards Niblings Predicted by Bias Towards Siblings. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing, Evolutionary and Social Psychology.

Rupp, R., & Rosenthal, S. L. (2007). Parental influences on adolescent sexual behaviors. Adolescent Medicine: State of the Art Reviews, 18(3), 460–470.

Seidel, F. L. P. (2022). The Proclivity of Juvenile Crime in Fatherless Homes: An Urban Perspective.

Su, C., & Hynie, M. (2011). Effects of life stress, social support, and cultural norms on parenting styles among mainland Chinese, European Canadian, and Chinese Canadian immigrant mothers. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42(6), 944–962.