Metamodernism 101: What Does 'Metamodern' Mean? 

Brendan, your take on the development between modern and postmodern has a common mistake in it: You frame it only as a "critique" ; Post modernity wasn't only a critique of modern philosophy, it was addressing problems with the ways modern philosophy handles knowledge and language: The problem that for example, Modern philosophy depends too much in a structuralist approach and that it presupposes that language doesn't change through the ages. It is a well known fact that language in fact changes and evolves; Making old knowledge increasingly alien as time increases the "cultural distance" between generations. The reason the post modern philosophers didn't drop the "modern" part is that in essence postmodernity is not a philosophical doctrine but instead a series of problems that these thinkers saw in modern philosophy. They we huge fans of modern philosophy and they didn't want to replace it, but rather address these problems and predict what the outcomes would be if these issues continued. This is why postmodernity is often called a "descriptor" One of the biggest issues i see with philosophy discussed in you tube is that these philosophical systems are not seen as reactions or amendments on the past but rather as opposed one to another. But the truth is there is still a lot of modern thinking in our legal and economic systems. Modern and classical forms of art flow together with the postmodern. Residual doctrines flow with the emergent. Looking at everything as opposing forces makes us forget about the individual particular missions these philosophers were addressing. It turns nuanced systems of belief into football teams or fandoms. One of the biggest problems with Metamodern thinking is that mostly it emerged as an aesthetic movement. and it is quickly dying as one as well. Metamodernism doesn't address the fact that a lot of postmodern predictions came true and they continue to become true as we move into a society where is difficult to pinpoint what is truth and what is fiction because of the explosion of conflicting information we are always under. A lot of Metamodern thinking feels shallow , almost like the new age movement in the 90's The reason I found this video is because I'm trying to find some depth in metamodern philosophy. but sadly I mostly find misunderstandings of how philosophy developed.

This is a great introductory video for a term I have only come across in the past month or so. However, like several others who commented I had been working with similar ideas motivated not from a philosophical and cultural theorist place but from a hands on everyday experience doing psychotherapy. I began with noticing that I had to use a completely different language and set of psychological assumptions depending on whether I was working with a person who was traditional or modern. Since I live in the southern bible belt of the US and began counseling in the 80s most of my contact was with people with a traditional worldview. I think from working with the public that depending on where you live 20% to 80% of the population will have a traditional worldview and these people should not just be seen as "the problem" their need to be included in this inclusive worldview. The difference between the traditional, modern and post modern set of assumptions and structure of feeling is essential to understanding the culture wars, our suffering, and our psychological experience. I have often said it is the real reason behind most of the divorces I have seen. For over 20 years I have said that we need a new worldview or cultural environment and have worked to bring this to individuals and the local environment. However, I used to say that we were like preemies who had to build our own incubator, well with the metamodern there is finally an adequate incubator or culture that can help many more of us thrive. I hope to work with this channel and anywhere I can to help flesh out how the metamodern is already present in the areas of psychotherapy, education, and community building.

Thank you for this video - I agree it is dense, but time limitations are a characteristic of our lives. You have opened a door to what I have been searching for - to inform the work I am doing. I believe learning more about metamodernism will give me a platform to develop.

Short and dense! Introduced me to a few new thinkers around this topic! Thanks!

An excellent and concise summation.

Nice video. It was easy for me to understand

Cool to hear this lexicon. I have been calling this the era of integration. Doing the sequential: hunter gatherer, agricultural, industrial, information, and we are firmly in integration

great video. thanks!

Metamodernism seeks to integrate all of the previous viewpoints into a synthesized holistic perspective. It's not about making a judgment or critique necessarily but rather discussing the broad spectrum of integral levels of consciousness. The previous levels, such as post-modern modern and premodern, have a natural criticism amongst each other, viewing the others as inferior or bad. Metamodern analysis seems to unite all the levels of analysis and essentially create a more balanced perspective that has less bias overall. Premodernism (traditional): tends to focus on preservation, consistency, and collective morality while criticizing diverging from the collective order. Modernism: tends to focus on progressing the material or intellectual world valuing intellect and pragmatism and criticizes emotional or intuition based reasoning that is not peer reviewed or easily measurable. Postmodernism: tends to focus on the progression of social equality and egalitarianism. It values relativism and going outside of what is normal. It values the free sharing of information and shared collective emotions. It seeks to improve or grow itself as an individual with self-directed authority. It criticizes the status quo, dualistic thinking, perceptual objectivity, hard unchanging logic, and hedonic maximalism. Metamodernism: tends to focus on the synthesis and understanding of all of the previous stages. It seeks to integrate the strengths and deconstruct the weaknesses of each stage. It seeks a holistic, non dualistic, integral vision of everything. It seeks to criticize the critical and create a more inclusive perception of reality that includes the sensory, Intuitive, emotional, and thinking of the previous stages to begin to communicate with all walks, ages, cultures, and stages respectfully and inighfully.

Thanks for the video tho, great simplification for what I was looking for!

Great video! This is what I'll send to my uninitiated friends from now on.

Bless you Brendan! Yours is a “bandwagon” I can definitely jump upon! While I remain heavily influenced by the Traditionalist School of Philosophy (maintaining a “commitment” to one Tradition in particular), the School suggests a “higher commitment” to the Perennial Philosophy. Metamodernisn is also a vehicle for developing a “personal mythology” (I’m a Romantic at Heart!). I look forward to reading all the books in the Metamodern Spirituality Series, and plan to support your work.😊👍

It seems more like a reconciliation between postmodern and modern rather than something truly new.

Great video.

So good. Helps calibrate others quickly to my participatory worldview. - fellow of John Vervaeke

The spirit of the age, has to be defined by the events of the age, not just out of touch intellectuals, as such our current age is defined by environmental pressures leading to wars, wether this gets worse or better remains to be seen. So will we see decades of progress or destruction will be what defines the zeitgeist.

Nice, makes sense and easy to digest. Sounds like metamodernism is postmodernism without greed and rampant consumerism. Sounds like a good place to head for. With you on the spiritual side of things, a spiritual evolution of the species would solve many problems. Knowing who we really are as a species would be super useful, perhaps AI will unexpectedly take us there by accident.

This is exactly what I have been looking for! Thank you! Are there any particular books on metamodernism, and specifically metamodernist spirituality you would recommend?

As far as integral, the problem is that while we can recognize that each different school of thinking has value, I believe we still have to prioritize them. Wilber would have us believe we can see them all as being equal but I strongly disagree.

Thank you for your continued work covering these topics. Can you provide info/source for the chart at 7:29? It looks super interesting to me.

I found this through a song and didn't understand these complicated explanations so here's a summary for dumb people like me: Basically we should critique our old beliefs and if we find out that the truth is those beliefs suck for humanity then we should change our beliefs to the thing that's good for humanity and not be closed minded to new and weird ideas that go against our current beliefs hope that makes sense. Anyway, great idea. Evolving our beliefs to better ones seems like a no brainer.

Thank you for the video. A too overwhelming term, somehow pointless. I prefer the Liquid Modernity or Late Modernity. What are your thoughts on these other theories?

Nice video Brendan, only just saw now. Thanks for the mention. Although I disagree Game B is equivalent and as pure and well-intentioned as they think. I exposed major dogmas. Any invocation of Game B without embracing addressing the ugliness of things that have happened is de facto whitewashing, but I let a ton of it slide because it only matters if people listen and things actually change.

Would one consider Slavoj Zizek a Meta-Modern Theorist? Cuz Hegel and Marx are Modernists, And Lacan is a Post-Modernist, He also talks a lot about Christianity generally a Traditionalist View. He seem to transent and work with figures from all these traditions!

I've had a tough time with the "oscillation" idea, because (though it scratches my Jungian itch) it doesn't seem to capture what's happening. Isn't it more of a simultaneous and immediate transcendence and inclusion of prior narratives rather than a bouncing back and forth? Isn't is more like a hologram that emerges when the previous narratives are charged with sufficient energy?

Metamodernism sounds like radical centrism. I feel it's just a philosophical manifestations of the "we need to hear out both sides" meme. If that's the case, it's not going to change anything.

Everything I hear about this dialectical step into metamodernism, sounds a lot like accepting the death of epistemology in the Aristotelian sense, that is the axiomatic basis of knowledge that he formulated with the law of non-contradiction.

So in short it's about getting better with time by filtering through the pros and cons of all the pre-existing eras like modern and postmodern.

This seems to be a description of what metamodernism isn’t rather than a description of what it is. Is it a form of inquiry or a type of ethics? Does it have it’s own specific axioms or methodologies? And if so, what are they?

Listened carefully, thought about it deeply, and walked away with at best a vague idea of what was presented. Needs further clarification with concrete examples. Hopeful that I may come to understand. Might want to focus a bit on the word meta and explain how or why that modifies or influences modernism.

So . . . What is the difference between 'MetaModernism' AND 'Integral Theory' ? SoundsLike . . . 'Integral Theory' to me sans the personality & recognition of TheLifeWork of Ken Wilber ? So . . . Does MetaModern TransClude 'Wilberian' Integral? AndOr Is IT just a lateral move by Wilberian Integral 'students' to MoveTheMovement 'Forward'? DanceOn . . .

Are you aware of Paul VanderKlay’s work? He’s talked to Vervaeke and Henriques. Damien Walter hopefully soon

Why am I 2 years late to this?

I don't think this current transcends and includes most of postmodernism. It looks more like a wider version of modernism that, as a response to postmodernism, tries to integrate those people that have been marginalized by modernity and also integrate some aspects of postmodernism. It also seems to communicate a message whose essence is serious in its great majority in order to attract modernists and it covers that essence with a somewhat joking form to attract postmodernists. Seriousness is typically linked to modernism, modernized interpretations of postmodernism and most of premodernism, while postmodernism is typically linked to joking. When the essence of a message is in its great majority serious instead of significantly joking and maybe serious to some degree, the message is probably modern or premodern and/or an expansion of modernism or of a form of premodernism. The cases related to modernism apply to metamodernism in some senses. It is at its core mainly modernism but its limits are much beyond it. It includes some parts of postmodernism, but not most of it, and it definitely doesn't transcend it. Postmodernism is a set of metaparadigms from which observe, deconstruct, question, and transcend paradigms and their narratives. That includes being skeptical of the modernized but antimodern interpretations of postmodernism such as critical theories. It also implies skepticism toward modernism, and yes, toward metamodernism too. It is useful to construct a consensual reality to facilitate the interaction among individuals with diverse ideologies, and future forms of metamodernism will probably be the main ideologies through which that consensual reality will be constructed. I say future forms of it because the current ones seem quite immature if they boast about transcending and including postmodernism in general when they don't and very probably will never do. The metamodern paradigms and the postmodern metaparadigms will have to learn to coexist and collaborate. Postmodernism will permeate the borders of the mainly metamodern consensual reality and it will also permeate the space between the individual ideologies and this new consensual reality.

How does one decide as a metamodernist? When is the naivite sufficiently informed?

or just kali yuga

The background music is distracting

Is it called meta to avoid saying post-postmodernism?

Bruegel sightings

Can we say that as much as PostModernism was a "no saying", MetaModernism is a "yes saying"?

You failed to emphasize the extent to which modern virtues still exist within meta modernism, like truth, as something that can be pointed to but never gripped, as well as those of postmodernism, like relativism.

not really a defition more like conjecture of characteristics

Postmodern nihilism is the blight of our age. It can only be effectively addressed at the deepest, most profound, spiritual level.

He never metamodern he didn't like. :D

metamodanism = post Apophatic theology

I like modernism the most ngl.

Well, yeah. But the characterization of the medieval period is somewhat wrong. That period, in Europe, was a very dynamic, variable, and complex mix with all kinds of progress and development, as well as many dangers and harsh realities, which had no obvious solutions. And many developing traditions. It was not monolithic in space or time.

Why the Civil Rights movement championed by Dr ML King Jr lumped together with postmodernity? In his speeches and writings King was very much Christian and biblical by thought and conviction. In fact, he stands in the traditional of the Old Testament prophet like Jeremiah who spoke out against a ruling power under God's judgment.

The biggest blind spot on this meta modernist movement that is happen is the way brown and black people are being left out of the conversation again. Just as it happen since the modern movement. The area of study that the creator of this video talks about has been explore by many people of color since modernism. In my view modern, post modern and now meta modernism are still stuck in the same traps. One can hope that as it promises meta modernism becomes a true working system for the modern system a system that does find solutions for all humans and all problems in a oscillation between all the extremes.

It seems like you conflated metamodernism and integral, but maybe all those people mesh with each other. I really liked "informed naivete." What about "postmodern orthodoxy?" Can that be considered a thing now? How much of game 'B' is just "slave morality" in disguise?

Metamodernism doesnt seem to be saying much at all. Mostly observations with no claim or real method. Oscillation, isn't that just inquiry?

Give me neo-feudalism any day!

Unfortunately, neither postmodernism or metamodernism solve any contemporary challenges connected to problems such as neo fascism, collective psychosis or environmental catastrophe. The wars we see today are just as bad as those hundred years ago, the political extremes are just getting worse and the climate crisis is unstoppable. All these severe dysfunctions in society are acellerating much faster than previously expected. In theory metamodernism is a nice idea, like art or literature, or a fun movie. In reality it teaches us nothing. These last weeks over 4000 children are killed in Gaza. This year will be the warmest in 125 000 years according to research data. This is not metamodernism. This is the stone age.

I often cringe when I hear the word "spirituality".