Evolutionary Love & Charlie Kirk

ὁ Θεὸς ἀγάπη ἐστίν

American Pragmatist, Charles Sanders Pierce wrote in an essay titled Evolutionary Love:

Everyone can see that in the statement of St. John ((God is love) ὁ Θεὸς ἀγάπη ἐστίν)) is the formula of an evolutionary philosophy, which teaches that growth comes only from love, the ardent principle to fulfill another’s highest impulse.

At the time, Darwin’s evolutionary theories were discussed with revolutionary fervor among western elites. This essay was his foray into the metaphysical discussion that exploded out of the bio-materialism at the heart of the emerging darwinian paradigm.

In the essay. Pierce goes on to talk about the three modes of evolution: tychastic (randomness), anancastic (determined necessity), and agapestic (love). With his characteristic erudition and mathematical precision, Pierce explicates why agapestic evolution, or evolutionary love, is the highest form of evolution, as it is best fit to explain the development of Mind.

Christian theology is often summarized in St. John’s pronouncement, mentioned by Pierce in the quotation at the beginning of this post:

ὁ Θεὸς ἀγάπη ἐστίν :: Ho Theos agapē estin :: God is Love

For the modern, secular person, and even some very weak forms of Christianity, this statement obviously means God is some vague set of warm, fuzzy feelings of acceptance and affirmation that conveniently align with modern sensibilities. But this is not what ἀγάπη or agapē means. The early Christians were very self consciously trying to elevate this form of love above what people might mean by deep affection, or strong attraction.

For Christians, agape was the type of love a creator or parent would have for their creation or children. As Pierce might say, the highest impulse of the “Most High” would be to help fulfill his creation’s highest potential. It is a love that prioritizes growth and development. It is not pure appeasement and tolerance.

I was not a follower of Charlie Kirk but seeing him rise over the years, becoming an absolutely undeniable political and cultural force engaging in good faith with everyone he came across, in an incredibly polarizing and viscous environment, gave me the impression that he was a special person.

After his murder, the outpouring of support from everyone who ever met him as well as all of the people he influenced para-socially, gave incontrovertible evidence my outsider’s impression was without a doubt true.

Mr Kirk was a devout Christian who evangelized passionately and unapologetically. I believe some of the hatred that he received was a result of his modeling of Agapic Love. Inspiring growth and development in others can often be confrontational and can even feel indistinguishable from an attack on the core of someone’s identity. Agapic love does not acquiesce to and affirm every impulse, desire, or idea one might have. For those raised in the modern environment of almost endless affirmation and permissiveness, Kirk’s modeling of love is interpreted as hatred.

The agapic understanding of love makes the tension between the Old Testament and New Testament coherent. Modern liberalism and diluted forms of Christianity resemble an old Christian heresy called Marcionism. Marcionists detested the Old Testament and wanted to exclusively focus on the New. Although there are echoes of the New Testament in the Old and the Old in the New, the Old is self-evidently the text most associated with the Law, Judgement, Punishment, and Discipline.

The early Church fathers were adamant that this was a crucial aspect of agape. A good parent cannot let their young child do whatever they want. Eventually the child will injure themselves and maybe irreparably so. Never saying no and never redirecting them is not agapic love.

The fruits of Kirk’s agape speak for themselves. He built the most consequential conservative youth organization in the world that inspired a generation of young people to grow and develop in the direction he thought would nurture their highest impulses. By all accounts he was also an exemplary husband and father. It’s hard to beat that resume by 31 years of age.

Getting back to Pierce’s essay on Evolutionary Love, he goes on to say

I believe all the greatest achievements of mind have been beyond the powers of unaided individuals…

Pierce’s point is that the development of ideas is a highly social endeavor. The greatest achievements of mind are achievements of groups of people building on top of and developing prior achievements of mind by prior groups of people. Individuals develop the highest thought of others nurturing them and transforming them into their highest potential. According to Pierce, development of thought and thus Mind, requires agapestic love.

Mr Kirk was not a professional intellectual but he was someone who was maintaining and promoting sociality in the context of political thought at the level of the average undergraduate and other politically curious young people all over the world. It’s cliche to say, but nonetheless true , the success of mass democracies, like the development of thought itself, depend on a minimum level of sociality.

Mr Kirk was a great man who died a heroic but gruesome death. The murderer and those that celebrate him have engaged in an evil of the highest form. They have earned the suffering that awaits them.

We will win.