From: jimruttshow8596
Hansie Friberg, author of The Listening Society and The Nordic Ideology, grounds his work in metamodernism, viewing it as the next logical step after postmodernism [01:30:00]. However, applying metamodernism faces significant challenges, particularly concerning societal reception, inherent complexities, and potential misinterpretations.
Overcoming the “Gravity” of Postmodernism
One primary challenge is the pervasive influence of postmodernism. Jim Rut, host of The Jim Rut Show, personally views postmodernism as “essentially crazy” and incapable of productive outcomes, considering it a “heresy of modernism” that rejects science [01:43:00]. Friberg acknowledges that while only a small percentage of the general population (20-25% in rich Western countries) are actively postmodernists [04:42:00], their ideas hold immense influence, especially in academia and media [08:26:00].
This postmodern influence creates a “gravity” that prevents people from moving beyond these ideas [09:43:00]. Postmodernism functions as a “religion of critique” [05:32:00], with intellectuals acting as a “priesthood” that uses methods like discourse analysis to expose power structures and injustices [12:12:00]. While valuable for critique, this mindset often culminates solely in criticism without proposing actionable solutions [49:07].
For metamodernists, who advocate for empirical politics and a reformed Enlightenment 2.0 [07:19:00] and propose “growth hierarchies” (which are empirically observable and logically definable) [09:29:00], this makes them appear as “heretics” to the postmodern mind [13:54:00].
Complexity of Metamodern Thought
A significant hurdle for metamodernism is its inherent complexity. Metamodernism integrates concepts like the model of hierarchical complexity, which describes various stages of cognitive complexity, from abstract to meta-systemic reasoning [25:12:00].
For instance:
- Abstract reasoning: Understanding abstract variables (reached by most adults around junior high) [28:26:00].
- Formal operations: Formulating linear or non-linear relationships between abstract variables (reached by more than half of adults) [29:02:00].
- Systemic reasoning: Creating whole systems of formal relations (reached by about 20% of adults, including most academics) [29:59:00].
- Meta-systemic reasoning: Identifying patterns within systems and comparing properties across different systems (reached by only about 1.8% of the population) [30:31:00].
Friberg’s work, which deals with “inner development” and “different subsystems of inner development,” operates within this meta-systemic level of thought processes [54:33:00]. The challenge is that “meta-modern code” requires a level of cognitive hardware that less than 2% of the population possesses [53:01:00].
“If you try to run a complex code in a simpler form… you get flattened versions of it, so you get versions that are going to look at a surface level a lot like meta-modern politics or or have the same goals or ideals or norms but they’re not actually going to work, they’re going to produce lots of pathologies.” [55:06:00]
Risks of Misinterpretation and Perversion
The high complexity of metamodern ideas means they are easily misunderstood and, when flattened, can lead to serious pathologies [55:23:00]. Examples include:
- Misguided listening: People may spend a lifetime listening to “crazy people” without being able to coordinate their perspectives [55:50:00].
- Moral privileges: Believing that higher developmental stages grant moral privileges and authority over others, potentially leading to authoritarianism [56:04:00].
- Conspiracy and fascism: Misinterpreting calls for holistic societal visions as justifications for small groups to conspire against society, even leading to military coups or fascist ideologies [56:21:00].
Friberg explicitly states that these are “dangerous dreams” and warns that “a lot of the high stage people today are becoming Nazis” [56:52:00]. This highlights the inherent risk of radical social change theories.
The Role of Spirituality and its Pitfalls
Spirituality and consciousness in meta modern contexts is a significant component of metamodernism, contrasting with modern society’s tendency to neglect or reduce it [01:09:10]. Friberg views spirituality as the recognition of “very, very, very, very strong experiences of some kind of wholeness or love or or connection” that, once experienced, cannot be unseen [01:09:49]. These experiences lead to new conclusions about reality and our place in it [01:13:36].
However, the integration of spirituality also presents challenges:
- Essentialism: The “sin” of essentialism involves “ascribing of depth onto a surface” [01:20:36], leading people with high depth and state but low complexity to believe in magic or misinterpret experiences (e.g., seeing angels) [01:27:12].
- Disconnection from practicality: Some individuals, especially those with high spiritual experiences but low cognitive complexity, may offer “stupid” or harmful advice on practical matters, even if their insights into spiritual states are profound [01:24:28].
- Suggestibility: Studies show that mindfulness meditators, while entering a more malleable internal space, can have higher suggestibility and be more easily manipulated [01:29:28].
The ideal is a “difficult balance” between “crude reductionism” and “trembling spirituality,” allowing for both critical thought and a sense of an “enchanted awesome super cool world” [01:29:54].
Societal Inertia and the “Wizard of Oz” Approach
The current informational architecture of Internet society is not designed to coordinate human agency and perspective for shared goals, nor are there sufficient coordinating principles beyond the nation-state to address global societal challenges [01:04:24].
Given the small percentage of people who can fully grasp metamodernism’s complexities, Friberg suggests that popularization is a “secondary concern” [01:01:19]. Instead, the focus should be on influencing “a few hundred people” globally who can commit their lives to “game change” and engage in coordinated efforts to affect institutions, political systems, markets, and knowledge creation processes [01:00:08].
This implies a “Wizard of Oz” approach: a strategic, transparent “open conspiracy” that works to deepen existing societal structures to fulfill their original promises rather than tearing them down [01:06:51]. The aim is to align people’s agency towards a shared common goal, not to enforce a dogma [01:04:10].
Ultimately, the goal of metamodernism is to facilitate psychological, existential, cognitive, and sociological growth to navigate the “increasingly complex surrounding” societal challenges [01:14:01]. However, the path forward is fraught with the dangers of misinterpretation, the inertia of existing thought patterns, and the inherent challenges of fostering complex cognitive and spiritual development across a population.