"the foundation of what makes human societies possible at all—the capacity to construct and maintain shared meanings that transcend individual experience". "the difficult creative work of cultivating meaning systems adequate to contemporary knowledge yet responsive to perennial human needs." - My position would be: Life as such is devoid of 'meaning' - still 'meaning' is the glue keeping societies together. When someone has had the 'capacity to construct' a 'meaning system' this has always been as part of a ruling technique. Your call for a communal emergence of a new 'meaning system' through 'cultivation' may easily end up as just another case of the same.
This essay articulates so well something I’ve been circling for years: the ache of a culture that has lost its stories, and the desperation with which we try to fill that void with ritualised consumption, politics, and curated identities. It reminds me of Joseph Campbell’s work. Campbell saw myths not as outdated relics, but as soul maps. They are psychological, spiritual, and communal narratives that help us navigate the trials of being human.
Today’s “myths” do not serve that soul-making function. Instead of guiding us through death and rebirth, they romanticise endless growth without transformation. Instead of situating us within a cosmic order, they fragment us into content niches and identity performances. We’ve kept the structure of myth (pilgrimage, initiation, transcendence) but severed it from its depth. It’s the Hero’s Journey, stripped of the descent into the underworld.
“Science explains how but not why.” That, to me, is the heart of the issue. We’re surrounded by tools, technologies, and data but are starved for meaning and coherence. I wonder if part of the work ahead isn’t just reconstructing myth, but remembering how to inhabit it again, using it as living, evolving language for what it means to be human.
I am not convinced by these “vulgar Confucianism” style arguments for religion. If you believe in the revelations of an Abrahamic religion you are affirming that it is true, not merely useful. To use Abrahamic myth cynically as some means of social harmony is to betray the very foundation of the Abrahamic tradition. Likewise I disbelieve in all of them not because I believe they are not useful, but because I believe they are false.
Deeply disagree! For majority of the history the humanity was en masse more religious and more totalitarian. European totalitarian regimes were supported by religious organizations. Communism was opposing church but hardly due to the void that it had left rather in the wake of the war. Life meaning and ritual doesn’t have to be rooted in religion.
Very good article. Theres nothing i overtly disagree with, however i do feel like there are a couple points that must be made to make this a little more comprehensive. First, i think its important to recognize the evolution of material relations in society when analyzing the evolution of philosophies. The enlightenment itself was not simply an uncaused phenomena, nor was it the sole cause of the weakening of religion and culture. Secondly, I feel that this article overly romanticizes religion and culture. While there are certainly some benefits to be had from false consciousness, there are just as many drawbacks. They give false meaning, offer false explanations, and ultimately prevent or slow down the process of attaining truth. Third, I think there is a profound truth that has been uncovered, and humanity has to grapple with. This truth being, there is no meaning. We have arisen from the natural laws of the universe accidentally, without purpose, and exist only to cease existing, and live a pre-determined life with the illusion of choice. Ultimately accepting that there is nothing more to life, and that all spirituality is a comfortable lie, is the best we can hope to achieve. The ultimate truth is found with the synthesis of marxist dialectics and sapolskys determinism.
This goes well with your essay on individualism. "The early modernists imagined that reason alone could discover universal ethical principles, that scientific progress would eliminate suffering, that democratic institutions would realize human flourishing without reference to transcendent values." A very accurate portrayal of early modern philosophy-- Max Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adorno in Dialectic of the Enlightenment would agree that Reason went too far.
Thank you for this deeply insightful and coherent analysis of a crisis in modern society.
"the foundation of what makes human societies possible at all—the capacity to construct and maintain shared meanings that transcend individual experience" is profound and central to our situation.
We can see how traditional belief systems have often failed to respond and evolve to changing understandings and needs. Christianity in the west is a classic example where from Darwin and science, two world wars and the counterculture in the 1960's it kept losing credibility, intellect and theology until there is almost nothing left. Efforts such as Alain de Botton's Religion for Atheists tries to replace ritual and belief with secular equivalents, without much power or success.
Both parts of the equation are necessary to create new traditions: shared meaning and a concept/experience of transcendence.
"The development of modern mythologies offers intellectual coherence but lacks embodied power" is very accurate. Since the counter culture and the influx of eastern traditions and ideas groups are run on an almost pay as you go basis. You are very welcome as long as you are a paid up member. It's not like walking into a church or temple whenever you need in moments of overwhelm, distress or just contemplation. The relationships are more transactional, temporary and conditional.
Technology, media and consumer society is atomizing us, preventing public discourse and the formation of shared understandings and values. The need is to create societies which support humanity and community as their primary organizing principles.
Science and rationality have distinct limitations. They can't tell us much about feelings, emotions, questions of why , or create meaning or values. We need coherence and wholeness. We need new narratives to grow a new culture based on care, compassion and wonder.
Fascinating article. I wonder whether you see this atomization of society’s cohesion as fitting with Emmanuel Todd’s ideas in the Defeat of the West, and whether all societies are in the same state of dislocation, or just those in the West.
Certain illusions most probably exist for the better once we dismantle them there is disorder. On an individual scale I personally don't think myths in the form of religion are necessary to wrestle with the crisis of meaning and existential dread in general however if we're talking about a community or groups of people then the multi utility function of unifying myths can't be denied.
well this is a thorough existential diagnosis . i like that you have identified contemporary ersatz/simulacra that fulfill our need for ritual but ultimately leave us unfulfilled. are we spoiled for choice, fearful of stepping across the void into premodern metaphysics?
ontological hardforks seem antithetic to the discombobulating proliferation of product categories, niche beliefs and systemic collapse of credibility but also precisely the conditions for extreme populist offerings.
Nevertheless, I wonder why most of the authors of this type of comments (this one being one of the most comprehensive on the matter I ever read) prefer to deplore the "rise of populism" rather than analyze the causes or try to explain the betrayal of the elites which is, at least in part, at the root of it.
I don't think people turn to so-called "populism" only out of boredom or lack of better meaning of life...
Excellent. Dense but very well held together. Thank you for writing and posting. My own take is that we have 'ceremonies' instead of rituals. Rituals are a technology all to themselves. Without an understanding of this technology, we replace it with ceremonies, which will always feel fake and counterfeit because our psyche, (both individual and collective), remembers what a true ritual is and also yearns for it.
"the foundation of what makes human societies possible at all—the capacity to construct and maintain shared meanings that transcend individual experience". "the difficult creative work of cultivating meaning systems adequate to contemporary knowledge yet responsive to perennial human needs." - My position would be: Life as such is devoid of 'meaning' - still 'meaning' is the glue keeping societies together. When someone has had the 'capacity to construct' a 'meaning system' this has always been as part of a ruling technique. Your call for a communal emergence of a new 'meaning system' through 'cultivation' may easily end up as just another case of the same.
Impressive essay. Would like to know more about the difficult but essential path forward
This essay articulates so well something I’ve been circling for years: the ache of a culture that has lost its stories, and the desperation with which we try to fill that void with ritualised consumption, politics, and curated identities. It reminds me of Joseph Campbell’s work. Campbell saw myths not as outdated relics, but as soul maps. They are psychological, spiritual, and communal narratives that help us navigate the trials of being human.
Today’s “myths” do not serve that soul-making function. Instead of guiding us through death and rebirth, they romanticise endless growth without transformation. Instead of situating us within a cosmic order, they fragment us into content niches and identity performances. We’ve kept the structure of myth (pilgrimage, initiation, transcendence) but severed it from its depth. It’s the Hero’s Journey, stripped of the descent into the underworld.
“Science explains how but not why.” That, to me, is the heart of the issue. We’re surrounded by tools, technologies, and data but are starved for meaning and coherence. I wonder if part of the work ahead isn’t just reconstructing myth, but remembering how to inhabit it again, using it as living, evolving language for what it means to be human.
Thank you for such an important piece.
I am not convinced by these “vulgar Confucianism” style arguments for religion. If you believe in the revelations of an Abrahamic religion you are affirming that it is true, not merely useful. To use Abrahamic myth cynically as some means of social harmony is to betray the very foundation of the Abrahamic tradition. Likewise I disbelieve in all of them not because I believe they are not useful, but because I believe they are false.
Deeply disagree! For majority of the history the humanity was en masse more religious and more totalitarian. European totalitarian regimes were supported by religious organizations. Communism was opposing church but hardly due to the void that it had left rather in the wake of the war. Life meaning and ritual doesn’t have to be rooted in religion.
You need to to start a step earlier with the reformation. The wars that started was the cause of the Enlightenment secularism.
Very good article. Theres nothing i overtly disagree with, however i do feel like there are a couple points that must be made to make this a little more comprehensive. First, i think its important to recognize the evolution of material relations in society when analyzing the evolution of philosophies. The enlightenment itself was not simply an uncaused phenomena, nor was it the sole cause of the weakening of religion and culture. Secondly, I feel that this article overly romanticizes religion and culture. While there are certainly some benefits to be had from false consciousness, there are just as many drawbacks. They give false meaning, offer false explanations, and ultimately prevent or slow down the process of attaining truth. Third, I think there is a profound truth that has been uncovered, and humanity has to grapple with. This truth being, there is no meaning. We have arisen from the natural laws of the universe accidentally, without purpose, and exist only to cease existing, and live a pre-determined life with the illusion of choice. Ultimately accepting that there is nothing more to life, and that all spirituality is a comfortable lie, is the best we can hope to achieve. The ultimate truth is found with the synthesis of marxist dialectics and sapolskys determinism.
This goes well with your essay on individualism. "The early modernists imagined that reason alone could discover universal ethical principles, that scientific progress would eliminate suffering, that democratic institutions would realize human flourishing without reference to transcendent values." A very accurate portrayal of early modern philosophy-- Max Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adorno in Dialectic of the Enlightenment would agree that Reason went too far.
Thank you for this deeply insightful and coherent analysis of a crisis in modern society.
"the foundation of what makes human societies possible at all—the capacity to construct and maintain shared meanings that transcend individual experience" is profound and central to our situation.
We can see how traditional belief systems have often failed to respond and evolve to changing understandings and needs. Christianity in the west is a classic example where from Darwin and science, two world wars and the counterculture in the 1960's it kept losing credibility, intellect and theology until there is almost nothing left. Efforts such as Alain de Botton's Religion for Atheists tries to replace ritual and belief with secular equivalents, without much power or success.
Both parts of the equation are necessary to create new traditions: shared meaning and a concept/experience of transcendence.
"The development of modern mythologies offers intellectual coherence but lacks embodied power" is very accurate. Since the counter culture and the influx of eastern traditions and ideas groups are run on an almost pay as you go basis. You are very welcome as long as you are a paid up member. It's not like walking into a church or temple whenever you need in moments of overwhelm, distress or just contemplation. The relationships are more transactional, temporary and conditional.
Technology, media and consumer society is atomizing us, preventing public discourse and the formation of shared understandings and values. The need is to create societies which support humanity and community as their primary organizing principles.
Science and rationality have distinct limitations. They can't tell us much about feelings, emotions, questions of why , or create meaning or values. We need coherence and wholeness. We need new narratives to grow a new culture based on care, compassion and wonder.
"We got no mythologies to follow"
-MØ
https://genius.com/8094383
Fascinating article. I wonder whether you see this atomization of society’s cohesion as fitting with Emmanuel Todd’s ideas in the Defeat of the West, and whether all societies are in the same state of dislocation, or just those in the West.
Certain illusions most probably exist for the better once we dismantle them there is disorder. On an individual scale I personally don't think myths in the form of religion are necessary to wrestle with the crisis of meaning and existential dread in general however if we're talking about a community or groups of people then the multi utility function of unifying myths can't be denied.
well this is a thorough existential diagnosis . i like that you have identified contemporary ersatz/simulacra that fulfill our need for ritual but ultimately leave us unfulfilled. are we spoiled for choice, fearful of stepping across the void into premodern metaphysics?
ontological hardforks seem antithetic to the discombobulating proliferation of product categories, niche beliefs and systemic collapse of credibility but also precisely the conditions for extreme populist offerings.
red pills multiply uncontrollably.
fantastic essay. thank you.
Very well said.
Nevertheless, I wonder why most of the authors of this type of comments (this one being one of the most comprehensive on the matter I ever read) prefer to deplore the "rise of populism" rather than analyze the causes or try to explain the betrayal of the elites which is, at least in part, at the root of it.
I don't think people turn to so-called "populism" only out of boredom or lack of better meaning of life...
Excellent. Dense but very well held together. Thank you for writing and posting. My own take is that we have 'ceremonies' instead of rituals. Rituals are a technology all to themselves. Without an understanding of this technology, we replace it with ceremonies, which will always feel fake and counterfeit because our psyche, (both individual and collective), remembers what a true ritual is and also yearns for it.