Emergentism | 0. Introduction || A New Worldview of Real Meaning

In this "videobook" for 'Emergentism: A Religion of Complexity for the Metamodern World', we look at the contemporary crisis of meaning and consider a way forward that is both meaningful and real.
0:00 [Parameters]
0:11 The Recent Rise of Nihilism...
4:55 ...and Fundamentalism
9:52 Moving beyond the Meaning Crisis
14:14 Religion 2.0
20:11 What is 'Metamodern' Spirituality?
22:45 Designing a 'Religion that is Not a Religion'
27:38 Emergentism: A Religion of Complexity
📄 Read online: brendangrahamdempsey.substack...
📘 Buy a print copy of the book: www.amazon.com/Emergentism-Re...
The new sciences of complexity have completely revolutionized our understanding of the universe as well as our place in it. At a time when nihilism and meaninglessness are affecting more people than ever, the new cosmic story of complexification comes as a genuine revelation. Evolution, we now know, is not some senseless meandering, but part of an ever-deepening learning process by which the universe is waking up to itself. And, as highly complex, conscious beings, we have a unique role to play in this cosmic drama.
Addressing the meaning crisis head-on, this book synthesizes such insights and explains their profound implications for spirituality and human purpose. Applying a ‘civilizational design’ lens to this endeavor, it boldly presents these ideas in terms of a new religion for our time. Emergentism is the complexity-informed, sincerely ironic, co-created religion for a metamodern moment poised between breakdown and breakthrough. In a time between worlds, at the edge of chaos, the conditions are ripe for a new God to emerge.

[@SebastianHernandez-gd3br]

I’m a young man who always struggled with the existential, Settling on the semi satisfying answer of “you make your own meaning” But this spoke to me. Im ready to ride the lighting.

[@allanrowell1276]

Twenty-odd years ago I read The Long Descent by Michael John Greer, in which he intimated that Humanity would have need for a Religion in the future. He suggested that Buddhism may be the best of the current major religions though not discounting that some other religion may appear. For all of the reasons given in this book it seems to me that this has great potential to become the New Story I have been searching for. 🙏

[@Magnulus76]

Traditionally, most forms of Buddhism, esp. Buddhism popular in the West, has no eschatology similar to what is being described. It's escapist (albeit of a bit more ethical sort than Christian fundamentalism) and tends to be disinterested in what we think of as history.

[@ezreality]

Great post. Two minds thinking alike can change the world...

[@LeighCunningham121]

Thank you for taking the time to make the videos, Brendan. The enhanced auditory and visual experience helps me better understand the written words of the book. And thank you for ALL the work you're doing. I've learned so much already and am very intrigued with Metamodernism and MEANING 3.0!

[@weltenrandwanderer2626]

Beautifully put! Thank you very much for sharing your insights. I share your search for a new story and what you present here excites me on a deep level. I am very much looking forward to the book and future videos.

[@dljnobile]

Thank you, and my apologies for being a year late. What you propose is well reasoned, I follow also many of the organizations and thought leaders you briefly mention; I am particularly fond of Perspectiva and the Consilience Project; the work of Iain McGilchrist, Nate Hagens, Daniel Schmachtenberger. I would ask you to not give up on revelation but consider also, if you have not already, the teachings of Bahá‘u’lláh, which represent a renewal of religion and assume religion to be not fixed in the past but ever progressive, yet ever one in its essence. If there is one reality with always-true, eternal principles there can be can be only one religion, but it must be constantly evolving as we evolve. As you have pointed out, now that we understand enough of the science, we can see how this is so. Religion is only a problem if we are looking at those expressions of religion that are suffering from senility. It's springtime! Look for the new growth, tiny and insignificant as that may seem.

[@scottdk03]

Great job! Excited to follow your work

[@BrendanGrahamDempsey]

Thanks! Much appreciated.

[@KnufWons]

At the end of the day, the biggest thing that bugs me about this philosophy is the idea that there is anything inevitable about consciousness. It ultimately is a question of whether or not life itself is inevitable, and our current sample size of emergent life is 1. You can’t extrapolate any information from a single data point to judge the trend!

[@storyalchemist_]

Amazing content, can't wait to get my hands on the book! Also, what cartoon/anime/film are the clips you're using from? (27:00)

[@KnufWons]

It’s very interesting that Solarpunk world building shows up in this video, since a big component of that genre is denial of hopelessness. I can definitely see why it was included, but it would be nice if it was more than set dressing.

[@BrendanGrahamDempsey]

There's a deep connection between solarpunk and metamodernism. By the end of the series, I hope it becomes clear that it's more than set dressing. ;)

[@givemorephilosophy]

The solution to why I exist and what is my role is now available and thanks to Internet it is spreading fast and easy. Agitating the internal conflict can draw attention but still the agitated state will go back to normality. The scientific spirituality will give them resolution. 🙏🙏🙏🙏

[@Zelig_G]

I’m in. 🎉

[@Footnotes2Plato]

Love this contribution! Eager to read the book. A few questions/comments: Is there any sort of continuity between this new religion and the sense of the reality of spiritual beings core to older religions (Krishna, Buddha, Christ…)? This is not a question about continuity of empty forms of religion (eg, ritual, myth, community, etc) but of their concrete content. Also, while I think some sort of evolutionary cosmology is highly unlikely to be supplanted, I do wonder about the wisdom of hitching your new religion to the “big bang” model (or really, jerry-rigged model of models). Its empirical grounding is increasingly suspect given how many free parameters the models composing it contain, which make it easy to adjust as new data comes in. But this sort of “post-diction” runs counter to the predictive methods that should be expected of natural science. Model-making is essential to science. But model-centrism stemming from institutional sunk costs gets in the way of open inquiry. Happy to share more about this point of view if you’re interested. Overall though this is compelling in both form and content. ❤

[@BrendanGrahamDempsey]

Yes, there is a whole chapter on continuities with prior lineages, including ancient mysticisms as well as modern philosophies (including process theology and integral). This is in the Religio (“tying back”) section of the book. As for the Big Bang model, I am not aware of any looming threats to the paradigm. Of course all paradigms shift and knowledge is continually reframed, so we must all hitch our wagons to some falling star or another. But the ΛCDM model is still the prevailing paradigm at the moment with the strongest empirical support, so I see no immediate cause for concern there. (That flap about the JWST was all hype and misunderstanding.) All that said, if you’re hip to cutting edge cosmological theories that might supplant or replace the ΛCDM, I’m all ears 100%! 🙂 I can imagine the complexification narrative being compatible with multiple cosmological models. But the ΛCDM seems particularly harmonious with an unfolding, becoming, complexifying Universe.

[@danielvarga_p]

So the Complexity increases might be an illusion as well, so that why you might "feel" that. What is crucial here is to admit, in our current best knowledge, and that is what matters, the question when and how often we try to reframe the "holistic" approach. So the shorter and shorter perioud between paradigms shows this idea might be humanity last paradigm, after that AI might take over what we did in the last 5000 year, but this is all in more details, and not under a KZbin chit - chat. I will share why and what we can do about those as well. Future emerging here, but needs time 10 -20 years we might have a better picture. Have a great day.

[@Magnulus76]

Look, this isn't necessarily incompatible with existing religions. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin was writing this type of stuff over 60 years ago and he was a Jesuit priest, mystic, and paleontologist. Christian eschatology has been misread by Evangelical Fundamentalists, as somebody like Teilhard was quick to point out, and doesn't represent St. Paul's participatory, cosmic vision for the salvation of creation, a vision still alive in the Christian East. Quakers have been practicing a non-dogmatic, mystical communal consciosuness for centuries. So the resources in traditional religions are already there. I'd recommend anybody interested in a Christian perspective on integral spirituality look up Cynthia Bourgeault. She is an Episcopal priest and former hermit who writes and speaks alot about this topic.

[@F--B]

So what you're asking is... can we design a complex system?

[@JasperElvenSky]

Pitch perfect! I've been thinking along precisely these same lines. Where do I sign up, Brendan?

[@Krasbin]

I like the outline. But I have some difficulty with the vertical arrangement of matter, life, and mind. Since they all co-occur in us, and shape reality, I prefer a horizontal arrangement of them. I then reserve the vertical axis for time.

[@BrendanGrahamDempsey]

To my mind it makes more sense to say they unfolded in time horizontally, but form a vertical stack---just like layers or strata of the geological record.

[@dasanudas997]

Where does the matter come from and the informations that create the complex design explained in the emergentism view ? And who make such a design ?

[@Chaimiz]

This is very exciting. As a practicing orthodox jew, i must say the religious view depicted here is quite a straw man. Admitedly, there are many such scarecrows walking among us, but traditional religion doesnt have to be so narrow minded and anti science . The type of judaism i try to follow is not like that. And is actualy very emergence oriented. Im sure there are similar concepts in other religions too. I would suggest to try and work with relevant relegious minds to create emergentism versions that can work well with traditional ones i.e emergent christianity etc. Religious folks need this message as well, not only the 'nones' and it can have a lot of impact. Good luck :) Oh, and is the book out yet?

[@vu4y3fo846y]

Terence Mckenna had a similar idea about the world approaching greater novelty. Unfortunately I think the reality is closer to Nate Hagins' theory of the Great Simplification. The increasing complexity of the last several hundred years has been due to the free energy afforded by fossil fuels. That energy will run out and the world will enter a new dark age. The pulse of energy that we live in is a complete anomaly, and very little complexity makes it through the choke-point in our future.

[@dasanudas997]

"The sweet spot" exist since all time, read Prabhupada's books

[@tree_huggin_hippy]

The distinction between fundamentalism and modern science is a little reductive. Spirituality occurs on a vast spectrum and these would be the widest points of that spectrum. On another point, I am interested in how much of your idea comes from Pierre Teilhard de Chardin? It sounds very similar to his Complexity Consciousness written 100 years ago in the 1930s, he believed that the 'Omega Point' we are evolving towards is divine. (He was a priest and an archaeologist). He didn't think we could separate God from what evolution revealed.

[@metatypology]

i’ve found your work recently and appreciate your perspective. when it comes to taking a metamodern approach to a new religion, i find your earnest approach is modernistic in a way that doesn’t incorporate the irreverence of pomo deconstruction, making it hard for me to embrace at face value. it’s common among many thinkers you cite, but i’m curious how you and others who may read this comment think about the importance of self-satirizing self-awareness that seems central to what pomo thought has offered as an aesthetic of humility

[@BrendanGrahamDempsey]

Well, the book is written by an "ironic prophet" that satirizes both religious leaders and metamodern thought leaders, for starters. Have you read the entirety of the book, or just seen these two videos?

[@BrendanGrahamDempsey]

If you haven't read Chapter 6, for instance, that would be important context: brendangrahamdempsey.substack.com/p/emergentism-chapter-6-myth-poeticizing

[@metatypology]

@@BrendanGrahamDempsey 😳 i’ve only seen your videos and didn’t know of your substack. looking forward to diving in and seeing you bring irony and satire to your project, thanks for the link

[@BrendanGrahamDempsey]

@@metatypology Gotcha. Well, enjoy! The Emergentism series is just a video version of the book, which is part of the Metamodern Spirituality Series, all volumes of which are written by various pseudonymous characters. Adyahanzi is one such character. He has even been interviewed in puppet form over at the Integral Stage. In case you're looking for more satire. ;)

[@metatypology]

@@BrendanGrahamDempsey thanks for the additional information! found the interview videos, look forward to diving in :)

[@mouwersor]

Great vid, but using a digital persona is somewhat ironic seeing the fleeting unpersonal online connections are part of the problem (which comes in degrees, where a meta-world-like character is worse than seeing a real person, albeit on a screen). Btw, what is helpful is defining what Meaning is. My hypothesis is that it is a result of willing yourself to different states of your model of the world which you think give long-term desirability. (In terms of the categorizations made by Emilsson: this is the serotonin-related happiness. Endorphin-related happiness is staying in a similar phenomenological world, dopamine-related happiness is willing yourself to a state which has already been visited and found to be desirable. They are 'explore, rest, exploit' respectively.) I think it is really fruitful to try to frame these feelings in terms of predictable desirable states because that allows us to better explain how to consistently reach them and at the very least moves public debate away from the reductive view of happiness where the more short-term forms are seen as equal to the long-term ones (with obvious disastrous results, because they have wildly different properties and functions).

[@BrendanGrahamDempsey]

It was either an avatar or a video recording of me lip syncing to the audiobook, which I thought would have looked even weirder.

[@metatypology]

i appreciate your sharing how an analysis of meaningmaking beginning at hormones can be philosophically informative. definitely gunna check out Emillson more

[@zinknot]

I think a renewed Hinduism would work. Just emphasize more the scientific and philosophical side plus adding new information. Already yoga and other things from Hinduism are very popular and accepted today. It's just that it has so many cult like sects and it's so old it has become overly complicated. Sikhism is great but it is almost overly simplified. I think Yoga and other practices will be important in drawing more people to it and making it a more powerful practice.

[@danielvarga_p]

Keep up the good work. I am following you. We will meet at some time in the future.

[@BrendanGrahamDempsey]

Hello! I watched your Jumping Continuity Theory intro and thought it was great! Very much aligned. Look forward to exploring more. Cheers.

[@danielvarga_p]

@@BrendanGrahamDempsey Hello, it is great to hear that. I sent you an e-mail if you are open to explore more ideas.

[@BrendanGrahamDempsey]

@@danielvarga_p Happy to talk via email. Haven't seen your message come through yet. You might also try the Contact form on my website.

[@danielvarga_p]

@@BrendanGrahamDempsey I used that yes. Tested it again.

[@colinlawrence2605]

Hey Brendan, could you direct me to that 80% UK study of meaning?

[@BrendanGrahamDempsey]

Hi Colin. All references/notes can be found here: www.brendangrahamdempsey.com/emergentism-notes

[@colinlawrence2605]

@@BrendanGrahamDempsey Many thanks!

[@allenmoses110]

Kierkegaard already covered this.

[@mouwersor]

Does ur framework, your life-and-epistemology-recommendations, also include Moldbug? He tends to fly under the radar. Nietzsche is also a necessity. #übermenschenRiseUp (not doing a kanye rn xdxdxdxd) We should use the best analyses of political and moral trends to give worthwhile ethical advice (which is what ur doing, and rightfully so) Also love seeing Vervaeke get some love btw, brilliant guy. Doing some real good phenomenological knitting of ideas

[@sinisterminister3322]

Great video which I for the most part agree. Here’s my take away from the video. 1. Need for meaning at the level of religious faith. 2. Rejection of both nihilism and fundamentalism. 3. Saving of our biosphere (as opposed to a classless society or other utopian society) as the primary goal. 4. That science reveals a direction in cosmic evolution towards greater complexity. I do have not so much criticisms as suggestions. 1. Do not be so deferential towards science. Science has its own demons, such as the tendency towards objectifying the natural world and rejection of all teleological forms of causation. 2. The video seems to reject all of what traditional religion has to offer. Not all manifestations of traditional religion are “fundamentalist”. Great religious mystics like Plotinus, Ibn Arabi, Meister Eckhart, Adi Shankara, or Nargajuna have lots to offer Religion 2.0. 3. There also needs to be an alternative ethical structure distinct from what neoliberalism has to offer in Religion 2.0.

[@BrendanGrahamDempsey]

Well said. I have no criticism of your suggestions. ;) Hopefully some of the tonal imbalances will be evened out as the series progresses. I find it's hard to thread the needle between being dismissive of religion or science. Either "camp" is going to feel slighted, especially in the polarized contexts of today's culture wars. As this series will really try hard to defend and refurbish a religious engagement with life, I felt it important to draw some clear lines up front about what I DON'T mean by religion. That should hopefully put the scientific materialists at ease, who are probably more the demographic I'm aiming to reach with this work. PS: I literally happen to be listening to the album that 'Sinister Minister' comes from right now, so that's quite a synchronicity! (Great album, great track, great KZbin handle.)

[@sinisterminister3322]

@@BrendanGrahamDempsey I don’t know about the album to which you refer. Many years ago an acquaintance referred to me as the “sinister minister”, since I was at the time and continue to be a clergyman. A few of my close friends have referred to me over the years using that nickname so I finally decided to “own it”.

[@BrendanGrahamDempsey]

@@sinisterminister3322 Oh, I see. Well Bela Fleck and the Flecktones (my favorite band) have a track titled Sinister Minister, and it was actually the first song of theirs I ever heard.

[@sinisterminister3322]

@@BrendanGrahamDempsey Thanks, I’ll check it out. By the way, I also play the banjo.

[@RobertO-hl5kx]

Promo>SM

[@thephilosophicalagnostic2177]

The faster we develop our technology, the faster we cure every single environmental ailment. This may seem counter-intuitive, but it isn't.

[@_xis.byz_]

Nick Land? Based?

[@HakWilliams]

The audacity!

[@kuningaskolassas4720]

It's exhausting how any time people talk about religion they get so hung up on the evangelicals and fundamentalists. Why focus entirely on the dumbest, least interesting version of an idea? It truly baffles me.

[@kuningaskolassas4720]

I think you're drawing too linear an association between religion, spirituality, and fundamentalism. Less rigid, less anthropomorphic conceptions of a higher power are present in many traditions, but don't gain as much traction because they're harder to understand and most people find them less comforting. So if your conception of religion is based on evangelicalism, of course it's going to seem completely at odds with reality, but you end up painting the whole thing with too broad a brush, and lose out on potential sources of insight. When you just can't free yourself from the idea "God=Man in sky who made the world in six days" you make the same mistake as fundamentalists. I feel a lot of the more esoteric forms of religion get at the same things you're saying, but it's tempting to feel like we're the first ones to think of something.

[@1CASSIODORUS]

The main problem with the notion of creating a new "religion" is that religion , properly understood , is not a human construct at alll. Religion is a disclosure , a revelation , that enters the human domain from a transcendental source . Even a religion like Buddhism can be understood as a revelation , in which truth comes bubblling up from within the deepest recesses of the psyche , a kind of " implosion" from the " outside" .

[@miguelatkinson]

You make such a error of detaching religion from humanity is laughable wrong and easy to disprove revealtion is simply a aspect of a religion to try and legitimatize it's claims which can be investigated themselves it is not something separate from us