From: jimruttshow8596
Metamodernism, as a philosophical base, extends beyond previous paradigms by re-evaluating the role of spirituality and consciousness in contemporary society [01:09:10]. This includes recognizing the significance of deep subjective experiences and how they inform human understanding and action [01:09:45].
Defining Spirituality in a Metamodern Sense
For Hansie Hyttinen, spirituality encompasses anything related to “higher subjective states” [01:10:26]. These states are described as profound experiences of wholeness, love, or connection, characterized by a “pristine clarity” and a “super presence” that transcends verbal description, often leading to a sense of beauty and meaning [01:09:51]. Such experiences, once had, are difficult to “unsee” and can fundamentally alter one’s perspective, akin to becoming a “believer” [01:10:03].
The Philosophical and Religious Impetus
Historically, philosophy and religions have been driven by individuals experiencing these high subjective states [01:11:10]. For instance, Descartes’ “great insight” while sitting by the fire is cited as a spiritual experience [01:11:33]. Religions, particularly “post-Faustian” ones like Christianity, originated from these “exceptionally high states,” offering compelling images and stories around which people built their meaning-making structures [01:12:03]. These experiences often connect individuals to notions of terror, hell, or the “seriousness of the matter of existence,” emphasizing profound suffering and the need for spiritual struggle [01:12:11].
The metamodern mind acknowledges that while literal interpretations of religious texts may be incorrect (e.g., Jesus walking on water), the underlying insights from contemplation as a “psycho-spiritual technology” remain valid [01:12:44]. It suggests that prevailing materialist assumptions about consciousness may be insufficient, and views informed by these higher states could be more relevant to understanding the nature of reality and guiding human action [01:13:09].
Consciousness and Altered States
Neuroscience consciousness and nontraditional religious experiences are also relevant to the discussion. Recent research suggests that during high states of awareness, such as those induced by psychedelics, there is widespread neuronal firing and connection-making in the brain, acting as a “reset button” that can radically change cognitive structures [01:15:10].
Critique of Altered States
The host, Jim Rut, acknowledges personal experience with psychedelics and mystical states, confirming their reality [01:15:47]. However, he argues that these experiences are “less than we think they are,” suggesting they are products of “unusual network and atypical rhythms” in the brain, processed by what he calls the “confabulator”—the part of the brain that invents narratives to create cohesion [01:16:40]. He views them as enjoyable and useful tools for breaking circuits or resetting, but cautions against interpreting them as insights into “fundamental reality itself” [01:19:51].
Metamodern Response to the Critique
Hyttinen responds by addressing two “sins”:
- Essentialism: Ascribing inherent depth to a surface, such as believing angels exist because one saw them during an experience [01:20:36]. He aligns with the postmodern insight that there is often “just a surface,” but acknowledges that subjective experience, like seeing a doorknob, is undeniably real [01:21:26].
- Reductionism: Explaining away subjective depth by reducing experiences to their physiological correlates, such as attributing spiritual experiences to neural firing and confabulations [01:27:20]. While accepting the physiological basis, Hyttinen argues this doesn’t diminish the “depth” or significance of the experience [01:26:51].
For metamodernism, the challenge is to hold both perspectives simultaneously: acknowledging the physiological basis of spiritual experiences while valuing their subjective depth and the insights they can provide about the “enchantment of existence” [01:23:10]. It’s crucial not to conflate spiritual insight with objective scientific knowledge (e.g., a “wordless song” won’t tell you about atomic composition) [01:23:56].
Balancing Depth and Complexity
Integrating spirituality and science effectively means balancing inner depth with cognitive complexity [01:28:19]. Individuals with high depth but low complexity may fall into “magical thinking” or dangerous beliefs [01:27:14]. Conversely, those with high complexity but low depth might experience a “disenchanted” view of reality, always wanting to “dispel the magic” [01:27:38].
The ideal state involves a dynamic balance between “crude reductionism” and “trembling spirituality” [01:29:54]. This allows for critical thought and non-sucker attitudes while maintaining a sense of awe and commitment to a moral project greater than oneself [01:28:47].
The “Yoga Bourgeoisie” and Metamodern Development
A key demographic in the metamodern context is the “yoga bourgeoisie,” often found in Silicon Valley or European cities [01:32:36]. These individuals are typically successful modernists who, after achieving conventional success, seek deeper meaning through meditation, psychedelics, and therapy [01:33:02]. They value spirituality and aim to use their resources for good, sometimes engaging in “conscious capitalism” [01:33:20].
However, Hyttinen suggests this group often lacks a sufficiently “revolutionary faith” or a “proper map” (i.e., a coherent metamodern code) to consciously transform societal structures [01:34:09]. They tend to seek personal platforms or workshops rather than engaging in collective, coordinated efforts that entail real risks for societal change [01:35:47]. To fully contribute to political metamodernism, they need more “cultural capital,” particularly an understanding of societal critique often found in postmodernism, to move beyond personal well-being to systemic transformation [01:36:20].