From: jimruttshow8596
Metamodernism is presented as a philosophical base and the “next step” in societal and individual development, aiming to include and transcend preceding philosophical stages like postmodernism [01:30:00]. It seeks to provide answers for the next stage of society, unlike postmodernism which often leads to “dead ends” and reactionary movements [05:51:51].
Metamodernism’s Relationship with Other Philosophical Stages
Critique and Inclusion of Postmodernism
The discussion highlights a tension regarding postmodernism. The host expresses a personal view that postmodernism is “essentially crazy,” unproductive, and not widespread [01:40:40] [01:51:00]. They describe postmodernism as a “heresy of modernism” leading to a “swamp of idiocy” because it fails to offer useful, actionable solutions for building a better world [04:43:00] [04:52:00].
In contrast, guest Hansie Frygnet argues that postmodernism is very widespread, particularly as a “sensibility” that emerged after 1968, breaking through in academia in the 70s and 80s, and in popular culture in the 90s and 2000s [02:24:00] [02:31:00]. He views it as a “developmental stage” for both individuals and societies [02:56:00]. Frygner estimates that 20-25% of the adult population in wealthy Western countries are postmodernists, expressing postmodern values in their lives and works [04:42:00] [04:45:00]. He describes postmodernism as a “religion of critique” [05:34:00], providing real methods like discourse analysis and the ability to expose power structures and injustice [12:12:00] [12:25:00].
Hansie Frygner asserts that postmodern ideas, when taken to their “utmost conclusion,” collapse under their own weight and lead to metamodern conclusions [41:25:00]. Metamodernism, therefore, involves revolting against both modernity (because it’s “not good enough”) and postmodernity (because it gets “stuck in dead ends”) [14:39:00] [14:51:00]. It addresses the valid critiques of postmodernism while offering a path for action and synthesis [04:52:00] [47:50:00].
Reformed Enlightenment
Metamodernism is characterized by a “reformed enlightenment” or “enlightenment 2.0,” which incorporates empirical politics – policies and practices based on the “best available information and empirically tested knowledge” [07:37:00] [07:41:00] [07:49:00]. It seeks to fulfill the unfulfilled promise of the Enlightenment [01:07:49].
Core Components of Metamodernism
Metamodernism utilizes a framework involving four key components:
1. Affective Value Meme
This concept posits that there are overarching, deeper structures in how values are generated through the development of societies [20:52:00]. Values evolve with societies as they face different systemic challenges, putting new demands on human beings [22:12:15]. This explains the fundamental differences in values between, for example, a Roman citizen and a contemporary Swedish citizen [18:30:00] [20:19:00].
Modern and postmodern values developed over the last 200 years [22:40:00]. However, humanity now faces more complex challenges like climate change, global governance, and existential risks from technology [22:50:00]. Current values, adapted to an expanding industrial welfare state, are insufficient for populations to self-organize around these “bigger and deeper and more complex and more universal issues” [23:33:00] [23:55:00]. This necessitates a “deliberate institutional change” to move people towards metamodern values [24:08:00]. This battle of values is a “cosmic battle for the human soul” and for survival [24:37:00].
2. Model of Hierarchical Complexity
This model, clearly formulated by mathematician Michael Commons, describes key elements of different stages of cognitive complexity [25:34:00]. It suggests that thought processes can be mathematically patterned [27:00:00]. There are 17 such stages of adult development, ranging from amoeba to Einstein levels [27:09:00]. Not all adult human beings are at the same stage of cognitive complexity [28:02:00].
Key stages of hierarchical complexity relevant to adults include:
- Abstract (Stage 10): The ability to formulate and reason about abstract variables, even when they are not physically present [28:26:00]. Most adults reach this stage, typically in junior high [28:46:00].
- Formal Operations (Stage 11): The ability to take several abstract variables and formulate linear or nonlinear relationships between them, testing these relationships mentally [29:02:00]. More than half of adults reach this stage, which is sufficient for many modern labor economy functions [29:50:00].
- Systemic Reasoning (Stage 12): The ability to create whole systems of formal relations, understanding feedback loops. Only about 20% of the adult population reaches this stage, common among academics [29:59:00] [30:19:00] [54:05:00].
- Meta-Systematic Reasoning (Stage 13): The ability to perceive patterns within systems, compare different properties of systems, and understand that different systems have different logics, leading to less reductive thinking [30:33:00]. About 1.8% of the population reaches this stage [30:31:00] [54:12:00]. Metamodern thought processes generally operate in this complex space [54:58:00].
- Paradigmatic (Stage 14): A stage beyond meta-systematic reasoning, likely reached by a very small fraction of the population (e.g., “one in a thousand or thereabout”) [35:05:00] [54:20:00].
3. Code/Symbol Stage
This refers to how culture itself evolves, embedding certain symbols or ideas of different stages of complexity [33:06:00]. These cultural codes are non-arbitrarily ordered, meaning there’s a logic to how culture evolves [33:18:00]. More complex thinkers are more likely to resonate with the complex code available in a society, and exposure to complex code can spur more complex thoughts [34:20:00].
4. Emotional State and Emotional Depth
These are subjective dimensions that contribute to the emergent patterns of affective value memes [38:01:00] [38:40:00]. “Depth” refers to one’s relationship to existence [38:48:00]. Metamodernism considers these as crucial alongside cognitive complexity and cultural codes.
Challenges and Implementation of Metamodernism
A major challenge for metamodernism is that only a small percentage of the population has the “cognitive hardware” to operate successfully with its code [52:59:00]. When metamodern ideas are run on a lower stage of cognitive complexity, they can be “flattened,” leading to pathologies and perversions of the code [55:23:00]. Examples include misinterpreting “growth hierarchies” to justify moral privileges for “higher stage” individuals, or advocating for military coups [56:04:00] [56:30:00].
Despite these dangers, it’s crucial to continue developing and applying these theories [57:48:00]. The approach to implementation might be a “Wizard of Oz” strategy: working behind the scenes to affect “knowledge generation trajectories” and institutions, rather than popularizing the concept directly [01:00:08] [01:02:22]. This could be an “open conspiracy” since the goals are ethical (deepening democracy, aligning goals, fulfilling the promise of the Enlightenment) [01:07:09] [01:07:21]. The focus is on aligning human agency in a complex weave of relations towards a shared common goal, including changing the informational architecture of internet society and political structures [01:04:13] [01:04:24].
Spirituality and Metamodernism
Spirituality is considered important because, in some sense, religions “got something right” that modern society forgot: the potential for profound inner experiences of wholeness, love, and connection [01:09:10] [01:10:00]. These “higher subjective states” can lead to new conclusions about reality and are crucial for human agency and meaning-making [01:13:34] [01:13:52].
Metamodernism embraces these spiritual insights while rejecting literal interpretations of religious texts (e.g., Jesus walking on water) [01:12:44]. It acknowledges that spiritual experiences, even if physiologically explicable (e.g., brain rhythms and confabulation), offer profound depth and can be useful tools for personal growth and breaking mental circuits [01:16:30] [01:19:32].
Metamodernism seeks a balance between two “sins”:
- Essentialism: Ascribing inherent depth onto a surface (e.g., believing angels are real because one saw them in a spiritual experience) [01:20:36].
- Reductionism: Explaining away the “sparkles of reality” by reducing everything to mechanics, leading to a “disenchanted” feeling [01:27:20] [01:27:41].
The ideal is to integrate “crude reductionism” and “trembling spirituality” [01:29:54]. This means acknowledging the reality of spiritual experiences and their value, without conflating them with objective scientific knowledge [01:23:34] [01:24:05]. The goal is to have “inner depths matched by complexity” and to live a “life of faith” in a moral project larger than oneself, while remaining critically minded and able to question [01:28:17] [01:28:50].
Key Groups in Metamodernism
The “yoga bourgeoisie,” often found in Silicon Valley or core European cities, are identified as a core population of metamodernists [01:32:36] [01:33:39]. These individuals have typically achieved modernist success, then sought spiritual or therapeutic paths after realizing they were still unhappy [01:33:08]. They possess financial, business, and emotional capital, valuing spirituality and seeking to use their lives for good [01:33:20] [01:33:27] [01:36:09].
However, this group often lacks “cultural capital” or a proper “map” like the metamodern code [01:36:20]. They tend to be too limited in their perspective, needing a more “revolutionary faith” and a sociological understanding of society [01:34:02] [01:36:33]. The goal is to mobilize and radicalize this class to consciously change society’s structures [01:36:00].