Grasping the assumptions of our own thinking gives us foreknowledge of whether those assumptions must be modified to approximate ideal rationality. Otherwise, we would never reflect on them in the first place.
—Christopher Norris, Quantum Theory and the Flight from Realism (redacted)
According to naturalism, which is a universal theory, the truth of the naturalist account itself, like every other item of knowledge, is merely one more adjustment to the environment or even epiphenomenal shedding. Therefore, the naturalist account has no more importance than any other adjustment except for some possible survival value it might have.
When do we get to add the label "true" on top of naturalism's explaining and determining factors with regard to naturalism itself? What's the criteria?
And naturalists cannot criticize belief in God, when---again---according to naturalism itself, that belief in God too is legitimately explained only by the factors specified by naturalism as all-determining: adjustment to the environment for the sake of survival, reproductive advantage, and so on.
There's simply no way for naturalism itself to break out of its own explaining and determining factors to even be considered to be true in addition to being--itself--merely the product of those factors. There's no remainder because that's what any universal reduction to determining factors gets rid of.
The systemic stupidity of collectivism is that it does not--and never will because of the disincentives of its fixed relationship structures over time--realize the dangers that it creates right in front of everyone ongoing.
Notice the inherent danger and vulnerability of China and North Korea in that they have a Communist Party member on board each ship so they can second-guess any military action without regard to any military factors, priorities, or dangers. They are designed to go into total confusion and defeat, by the natural consequences of organization.
Coordination can and does occur dynamically without a formal relationship structure. Organization is the blinding of a group of people to changing circumstances, making a hierarchy into a permanent static thing which it cannot really be as soon as the clock starts ticking on the organizational relationships day in day out.