From: jimruttshow8596
Metamodernism is presented as the next step in philosophical development, evolving from and including postmodernism [01:30:00]. It proposes a framework for understanding and addressing complex societal challenges by integrating various aspects of human development. Hansie Frýnet, a political philosopher, historian, sociologist, and author of The Listening Society and The Nordic Ideology, is a key thinker behind this philosophy [00:44:00]. His work is described as potentially being “the best stuff I’ve ever read on social change” or “a handbook for nineteen eighty-four plus plus,” suggesting its radical and potentially risky implications [01:13:00].
Metamodernism’s Relationship with Postmodernism
The discussion highlights a critical relationship between metamodernism and postmodernism. While postmodernism is often perceived as “crazy” and unproductive, particularly in its academic forms [01:43:00], Frýnet argues it is a very widespread “developmental stage” of both individuals and societies [02:56:00] [03:09:00]. He estimates that 20-25% of the adult population in Western countries are postmodernists [04:45:00].
Postmodernism emerged as a protest against the “callous cold empirical hand of the Enlightenment” and modernity’s universal aspirations, aiming to redefine society through critiques and new perspectives [03:47:00] [05:15:00]. It functions as a “religion of critique,” deeply influencing media and academia with its egalitarian, multi-perspectival, and relativistic sensibilities [05:37:00] [08:26:00]. Key contributions of postmodernism include discourse analysis and exposing power structures, highlighting how injustice harms human beings [12:25:00] [12:43:00].
However, Frýnet contends that postmodernism lacks the “answers for the next stage of society,” often leading to “dead ends” and “reactionary neo reactions” [05:51:00] [05:59:00]. Its core lies in critique, not in providing a “to-do list” or the ability to make decisions for collective action [49:10:00] [49:41:00].
Metamodernism, in contrast, represents a “revolt against modernity” (because it’s “not good enough”) and also a “revolt against postmodernity” (because it’s stagnant) [14:39:00] [14:51:00]. It proposes moving beyond the limitations of postmodernism by re-embracing “growth hierarchies” and empirically testable knowledge, which are anathema to the postmodern sensibility [14:16:00] [14:32:00] [07:27:00].
Philosophical Bases: The Affective Value Meme
A foundational building block in Frýnet’s work is the affective value meme [18:17:00] [20:52:00]. This concept suggests that there are “overarching deeper structures” in how values are generated and evolve within societies [20:57:00] [21:10:00]. For example, values in agricultural, tribal, and industrial societies differ significantly and logically [21:18:00] [33:25:00].
Current modern values are adapted to an expanding industrial welfare state, while postmodern values critique it [23:30:00] [23:41:00]. However, these values are deemed “insufficient” for addressing today’s more complex challenges, such as climate change, global governance, migration flows, and existential risks from technology [23:52:00] [24:00:00]. This necessitates a “deliberate institutional change” to move people towards “meta modern value mean[s]” [24:08:00] [24:26:00].
The affective value meme is decomposed into four parts:
-
Model of Hierarchical Complexity: This is a mathematically formulated theory of cognitive complexity stages [25:34:00]. It posits that there are distinct stages of thought processes, from simple to complex, which can be observed empirically [25:53:00] [27:51:00].
- Abstract (Stage 10): Ability to reason about things not physically present, using abstract variables [28:26:00] [28:40:00]. Most adults reach this stage by junior high [28:46:00].
- Formal Operations (Stage 11): Ability to formulate linear or nonlinear relationships between several abstract variables and test them mentally [29:02:00]. This stage is sufficient for much of modern society’s work [29:30:00] [29:50:00]. More than half of adults reach this stage [29:56:00].
- Systemic Reasoning (Stage 12): Ability to create and understand entire systems of formal relations, including feedback loops [29:59:00] [30:14:00]. Only about 20% of the adult population reaches this level [30:19:00].
- Meta-Systemic Reasoning (Stage 13): Involves seeing patterns within systems and comparing their different properties and logics [30:35:00] [30:42:00]. Approximately 1.8% of the population reaches this stage [30:31:00] [54:12:00].
- Paradigmatic (Stage 14): Mentioned as a stage beyond meta-systemic [35:06:00].
-
Code or Symbol Stage: Refers to how culture itself evolves, embedding symbols or ideas of different complexity [33:02:00] [33:09:00]. These are non-arbitrarily ordered, meaning that different modern societies are more comparable to each other than to their own past [33:18:00] [33:50:00]. The culture’s code must be “downloaded” by individuals for them to use it [34:14:00].
-
Emotional State and Emotional Depth: These are also considered dimensions of the affective value meme, adding subjective subtlety to human development and experience [38:01:00] [38:44:00].
Spirituality and Consciousness in Metamodern Contexts
Spirituality is considered highly relevant to metamodernism because it taps into experiences of “wholeness, or love, or connection” that can deeply transform an individual’s life [01:09:12] [01:09:51]. These experiences are linked to “higher subjective states” of awareness, which can lead to new conclusions about reality, and have historically driven philosophy and religion [01:10:28] [01:11:08].
Metaphysics is brought into the discussion when considering whether spiritual experiences are reducible to objective physiological correlates [01:22:08] [01:22:11]. Frýnet argues that while these experiences have physiological bases (e.g., neural firing and confabulation), this “doesn’t take anything away from the depth” of the experience itself [01:23:02] [01:26:54].
Metamodernism seeks to move beyond the “sins” of both “essentialism” (ascribing literal depth to phenomena like angels) and “reductionism” (disenchanting reality by explaining away all magic) [01:20:36] [01:27:20]. The ideal is a dynamic balance, allowing one to “take issues of spirituality seriously” and live a “life of faith” in a moral project, while still maintaining a critical mind and avoiding manipulation [01:28:27] [01:28:35]. This means coordinating “crude reductionism” with “trembling spirituality” [01:29:54] [01:30:11].
Challenges and Future Direction
A significant challenge in applying metamodernism is the limited percentage of the population (less than 2%) with the cognitive “hardware” for meta-systemic reasoning [53:01:00] [53:09:00]. When metamodern ideas are “flattened” for popular consumption, they can lead to pathologies like distorted interpretations of “growth hierarchies” or even fascism [55:30:00] [55:50:00].
Despite these risks, the need for metamodernism is underscored by the current societal trajectory towards a “self terminating curve” [58:32:00]. The solution involves not necessarily popularizing the complex ideas to everyone, but focusing on influencing a few hundred key people who can commit to “serious change” and “affect the knowledge generation trajectories” [01:00:08] [01:00:10] [01:00:23]. This approach aims to change institutions, political games, markets, and knowledge creation processes [01:01:27].
The “yoga bourgeoisie,” particularly those in Silicon Valley and Burning Man culture, are seen as a core population of early metamodernists [01:32:36]. These individuals have experienced modernity, found it insufficient, and turned to spiritual practices and self-reflection [01:32:55]. They possess financial, business, and emotional capital, but often lack a “revolutionary faith” and the proper “meta modern code” or “map” to consciously change society’s structures [01:34:05] [01:34:20] [01:34:51]. The goal for metamodernism is to mobilize and radicalize this class to drive institutional and cultural evolution [01:36:00] [01:36:03].