Beautiful video, and its clarity helps me resolve the details of my own project more clearly. Thank you for posting and doing the work of reconstruction.
Thank you…. Real Profound Truths often become poetic. Thank you for your poetry/truth. I’m beginning to think of myself as a 77 year young metamodern abstract painter just beginning to ripen some six years ago when not long after beginning a series of paintings- my Waking Up series that then has flowed into my Into the Mystery paintings….both ongoing…..
This is the first video I’ve seen of yours Brenden Dempsey, and I thank you for making it. I wonder if you have read Salman Rushdie’s essay from 1990 titled “Is Nothing Sacred?” It’s a quick read, but well worth while. Even in 1990, he was grasping metamodernism.
The irony of your sarcasm wasn’t lost on me, sharing an affinity with past experiences (and possibly similar scars from collapsing coercive exegetical paradigms). Ah yes, disillusionment, “hello darkness my old friend”. Escaping the nihilistic malaise may be more akin to Nietzsche’s “eternal recurrence” than previously anticipated. But some of us still feel an inherent need to lean heavily on the crutch of a scientific model while trying to elude the siren call of panpsychism, but willing to embrace some form of medium between the two. The prospect of adopting the recycled, regurgitated, reinvented myth or religious experience of the past, in hopes of making a metamodern reality seem daunting in the least. But try we must. Wonderful discourse here, as you touch on all of the basics, with the background music adding the much needed sentimental touch. I shall recommend it to a friend, after all, isn’t that the way to share the light. 🫶🏻
truly marvellous, brendan. at once deeply serious and whimsically light. your ever-present luminous soul reflects the detail of your precious life's work. your insights are life-changing, educational and inviting ... i hope you find outlet to share your message more widely....
This was a great distillation of the metamodern project, Brendan! A strong follow-up for me to share with people after they've seen your "Metamodernism 101" Thanks again for your efforts! 🙏❤️
Beautiful! What has lead me to the similar thinking was being born into atheism, and then learning about history, nature and space, and things like Drake equation. But I feel that creating metamodern myths from scratch will be very chaotic, in this age of splintered media, its harder to notice good things behind all the noise. Like this channel - won't stumble on this by accident :) So going back to the Bible and illuminating the allegory, and combining it with scientific fields like cosmology, may be a good "Bridge" for many people. Also not all religions read the Bible "literally". Judaism in fact is very comfortable with science and using the Torah as a "moral" compass that is not to be taken literally in its descriptions of creation of the universe, for example.
Thank you for anotherextreamly well written, great video. ❤ Have you read VALIS by P. K. Dick. And the second and third books( Divine Invation, and The Trasmigration of Timothy Archer) I would love to hear your take on his theology and if you feel like there is a place for Dickian gnostisism in metamodernism spirituality?
Embrassingly, I have not read any P K Dick! *covers face in shame* On my list for sure. Thanks for the suggestion. Maybe other folks here have some thoughts about that. He's definitely been raised in metamodern spirituality conversations I've been a part of.
@BrendanGrahamDempsey Dick's VALIS trilogy gets into deep theology, theodicy, mysticism, epipháneia, the qumran scrolls, meaning crisis, struggles with faith in the light on modernity and post modernity.... I think it was one of the last things he wrote, 1980ish 11/10 Must Read! And my personal favorite work of his by far. Your discussion here today reminded me of what I feel like Dick was articulating in the novels
@@alykathrynhe had some insane real-life experiences with synchronicity as well. A troubled soul for sure, but it definitely seems like he was tapped into something spiritual
I really like a lot of what you say, although I am a product of liberal Xianity who built his personal form of faith piece by piece from childhood and thus never felt the need to deconstruct. Let me ask you a question. If, as did mainstream journalist Leslie Kean in the presence of physical medium Stewart Alexander, you found yourself seeing and talking with deceased loved ones, or like millions of people from all walks of life, you had a near death experience along what have now come to be considered "classic" lines--out-of-body vision and hearing, traveling through a tunnel toward a being of light, meeting deceased relatives and friends, experiencing a vivid life review of all of your actions and their impacts on others, etc.--how would such experience influence your thinking about how best to assimilate AND transcend the traditional, modern, and postmodern worldviews? Would you be dwelling so much on metaphor as the key to moving forward? IMHO, we deny the reality of such supernormal phenomena at our peril, the peril of reverting to just another modernist/postmodernist stance, albeit dressed up somewhat in warm and fuzzy mystical or mythical language.
Thanks for the question. First, I’d suggest that NDEs are far more empirically compelling than mediumship, which I do think is mostly suggestion and trickery (whether intentional or not). When it comes to NDEs and other exotic metaphysical/out of body experiences, I remain entirely open to them. As I say many other places, science is incomplete, our paradigm will inevitably shift and our knowledge will update further. So I’m epistemologically open. I just think that if these phenomena do point us to ontic realities then they will become amenable to naturalistic causal assessment. I don’t believe in magic (precausal reasoning), but I do think there are many, many things beyond what are dreamt of in our philosophy. That said, I think the next move spirituality needs to make is thoroughly into the naturalistic domain. We can and should articulate a robust form of meaning and purpose and value that does not need to posit miracles, nor even rely on exotic or fringe case phenomena, to speak to our souls. Let’s get there first, updating meaning to our current paradigm, before we already start eagerly trying to push beyond it.
Decadence of the wooing young witch's trinkets faded like dew in the dissolution of dopamine currency, integral of instinct under the fig of time where the wavering wake of Nietzsche comes to center- mechanized to degree of suffering. And may the pleasure of destruction to idolatry sway in the transformative light of dissolution. So much I can learn from your realized journey, knowledge and quest!!!?
This makes out to be a great Unitarian Universalist sermon Brendan! If I could get them interested, would you be willing to speak to my church sometime? They pay a little speakers fee. 😊💓
I’ve listened to several hours of Brendan’s talks and just finished this one. For me, there’s nothing much to argue with, and I know he likes poetic expression, but somehow putting it all together that way made me more skeptical of his project instead of less. I’m a Joneser from the days of 70’s gurus, too young to be enthralled but old enough to detect a disturbing pattern of rhetoric.
Interesting! Can you name/point to any of the things that made you more skeptical? I wonder, too, how my presentation of this stuff has shifted in the 3 years since I did this talk
@@BrendanGrahamDempsey I didn’t realize it was 3 years old and that matters. That is, I’ve enjoyed your recent talks more that sound a little less “enlightened” in that 70’s way. I’m probably not your ideal audience as they say. In this talk I felt a “pain point/solution” and poetic combination that made me think of the Terrance McKenna types the kids today (30 somethings lol) are enamored with. Long time Vervaeke listener. Resonate with the concept of metamodern.
@@TimStorey-op7tg To my embarassement (I am 42) I have just discovered Terrence Mckenna. I am quite enamored with him so far. So seem to use his name in a pejorative way - could you explain why?
@@EMDEEW Sorry...I replied but didn't know links weren't allowed so I guess it was taken down. As far as T McKenna and similar, they, and others, use what I call Type 2 Pseudoscience to support their message and prescriptions for society/happiness. Type 1 is just junk science or infomercial tricks. Type 2 is when the speaker "establishes" credibility by demonstrating his superior familiarity with science/literature/philosophy, then typically creates an analogy directly related to his proposal in the pain point/solution priming. The demonstration and analogy don't necessarily have anything to do with each other. I found a lot of this in Maria Popova's work (Brain Pickings blog originally), impressive as she is. Going all the way back to the Sophists and the death of Socrates is a good place to start here, then I jump to Ralph Waldo Emerson and the Transcendentalists. At least a few famous philosophers or pseudo-philosophers like Sartre have recommended the use of poetry to "sell" their ideas, which is almost always part of persuasive speech, especially effective with complicated/new subjects. Compel, compel, compel. That's something we can't entirely get away from and don't need to. But when it sounds like someone is selling/rationalizing what we already kinda want in the first place, it's easy to get caught up in their "reasoning" without really grasping alternatives or further ramifications. The only reason I know of T McKenna is because of the psychedelics craze of the last few years, since TM had been a strong proponent in the 70's/80's. I am too in terms of learning more in clinical settings and probably incorporating them into treatment, but a culture of free access doesn't look plausible, and the more meta question is why we're still going down this sex/drugs/rocknroll path after 50+ years of counter indications. I'm guessing it has a lot to do with the environments we've found ourselves in. All kinds of gurus are spontaneously generated in unfulfilling environments. Why are they unfulfilling? What's the real problem as opposed to the rhetorical/psychedelic/sexual/sensual/psychological bandaid? I very much believe in Brendan's metamodern proposal, but when a crowd comes for the information then stays for the music, there's reason to be extra careful.
Three things: 1) You have a viseral reaction to creed and given your path I get it. I think a conversation should happen about the proper role of creeds. My sense is that they are models + common language about perceived reality, but also a process to "move on" from thinking to living in unity. (way more here, but I'll stop) 2) I wrote a short story on such things. I'll probably write another. I'm not a poet but one page allegories are fruitful for processing. In the realm of popular myth makers, Stephanson is my favorite but perhaps to on the nose. 3) I view Christianity as the incorporation and grounding narrative (for me/many). Christianity done well incorporates and synthesizes alongside philosophy and science. Vested in literalism and walled it is brittle. The new narrative should I capsulate the old (and arguably has done so though the ages). Reading Teihard; promising bridge.
Internet memes might be thought of as the first publicly created meta-modern art. Yes they have the irony and critical nature of post modernity but also are essentially iconography (traditional). I wouldn't follow any social scientists today who are completely obsessed with memes. I don't think we've ever had a better look into the psyche of the public
Beautiful video, and its clarity helps me resolve the details of my own project more clearly. Thank you for posting and doing the work of reconstruction.
I deeply appreciate what you are sharing and building. Thank you.
Thank you…. Real Profound Truths often become poetic. Thank you for your poetry/truth. I’m beginning to think of myself as a 77 year young metamodern abstract painter just beginning to ripen some six years ago when not long after beginning a series of paintings- my Waking Up series that then has flowed into my Into the Mystery paintings….both ongoing…..
how wonderful you feel 77 years young lester .... keep flowing
This is the first video I’ve seen of yours Brenden Dempsey, and I thank you for making it. I wonder if you have read Salman Rushdie’s essay from 1990 titled “Is Nothing Sacred?” It’s a quick read, but well worth while. Even in 1990, he was grasping metamodernism.
The irony of your sarcasm wasn’t lost on me, sharing an affinity with past experiences (and possibly similar scars from collapsing coercive exegetical paradigms). Ah yes, disillusionment, “hello darkness my old friend”. Escaping the nihilistic malaise may be more akin to Nietzsche’s “eternal recurrence” than previously anticipated. But some of us still feel an inherent need to lean heavily on the crutch of a scientific model while trying to elude the siren call of panpsychism, but willing to embrace some form of medium between the two. The prospect of adopting the recycled, regurgitated, reinvented myth or religious experience of the past, in hopes of making a metamodern reality seem daunting in the least. But try we must. Wonderful discourse here, as you touch on all of the basics, with the background music adding the much needed sentimental touch. I shall recommend it to a friend, after all, isn’t that the way to share the light. 🫶🏻
Yes, but try we must.
Yes, but try we must. 😊
truly marvellous, brendan. at once deeply serious and whimsically light. your ever-present luminous soul reflects the detail of your precious life's work. your insights are life-changing, educational and inviting ... i hope you find outlet to share your message more widely....
Thank you so much. Those are very kind words. 🙏
This was a great distillation of the metamodern project, Brendan!
A strong follow-up for me to share with people after they've seen your "Metamodernism 101"
Thanks again for your efforts! 🙏❤️
Thanks, mate! Appreciate it. :)
Really enjoyed this
Amen, brother
beautiful 🙏❤️
I am with you, brother!
Beautiful! What has lead me to the similar thinking was being born into atheism, and then learning about history, nature and space, and things like Drake equation. But I feel that creating metamodern myths from scratch will be very chaotic, in this age of splintered media, its harder to notice good things behind all the noise. Like this channel - won't stumble on this by accident :) So going back to the Bible and illuminating the allegory, and combining it with scientific fields like cosmology, may be a good "Bridge" for many people. Also not all religions read the Bible "literally". Judaism in fact is very comfortable with science and using the Torah as a "moral" compass that is not to be taken literally in its descriptions of creation of the universe, for example.
" poets of the sacred" - yes!
💚
Thank you for anotherextreamly well written, great video. ❤
Have you read VALIS by P. K. Dick. And the second and third books( Divine Invation, and The Trasmigration of Timothy Archer)
I would love to hear your take on his theology and if you feel like there is a place for Dickian gnostisism in metamodernism spirituality?
Embrassingly, I have not read any P K Dick! *covers face in shame* On my list for sure. Thanks for the suggestion. Maybe other folks here have some thoughts about that. He's definitely been raised in metamodern spirituality conversations I've been a part of.
@BrendanGrahamDempsey Dick's VALIS trilogy gets into deep theology, theodicy, mysticism, epipháneia, the qumran scrolls, meaning crisis, struggles with faith in the light on modernity and post modernity.... I think it was one of the last things he wrote, 1980ish
11/10 Must Read! And my personal favorite work of his by far. Your discussion here today reminded me of what I feel like Dick was articulating in the novels
@@alykathrynhe had some insane real-life experiences with synchronicity as well. A troubled soul for sure, but it definitely seems like he was tapped into something spiritual
I'm hoping the mundanity of A.I. art will challenge/inspire artists to bring in the new (the Neo?) creations for our collective future.
I really like a lot of what you say, although I am a product of liberal Xianity who built his personal form of faith piece by piece from childhood and thus never felt the need to deconstruct. Let me ask you a question. If, as did mainstream journalist Leslie Kean in the presence of physical medium Stewart Alexander, you found yourself seeing and talking with deceased loved ones, or like millions of people from all walks of life, you had a near death experience along what have now come to be considered "classic" lines--out-of-body vision and hearing, traveling through a tunnel toward a being of light, meeting deceased relatives and friends, experiencing a vivid life review of all of your actions and their impacts on others, etc.--how would such experience influence your thinking about how best to assimilate AND transcend the traditional, modern, and postmodern worldviews? Would you be dwelling so much on metaphor as the key to moving forward? IMHO, we deny the reality of such supernormal phenomena at our peril, the peril of reverting to just another modernist/postmodernist stance, albeit dressed up somewhat in warm and fuzzy mystical or mythical language.
Thanks for the question. First, I’d suggest that NDEs are far more empirically compelling than mediumship, which I do think is mostly suggestion and trickery (whether intentional or not). When it comes to NDEs and other exotic metaphysical/out of body experiences, I remain entirely open to them. As I say many other places, science is incomplete, our paradigm will inevitably shift and our knowledge will update further. So I’m epistemologically open. I just think that if these phenomena do point us to ontic realities then they will become amenable to naturalistic causal assessment. I don’t believe in magic (precausal reasoning), but I do think there are many, many things beyond what are dreamt of in our philosophy.
That said, I think the next move spirituality needs to make is thoroughly into the naturalistic domain. We can and should articulate a robust form of meaning and purpose and value that does not need to posit miracles, nor even rely on exotic or fringe case phenomena, to speak to our souls. Let’s get there first, updating meaning to our current paradigm, before we already start eagerly trying to push beyond it.
Decadence of the wooing young witch's trinkets faded like dew in the dissolution of dopamine currency, integral of instinct under the fig of time where the wavering wake of Nietzsche comes to center- mechanized to degree of suffering. And may the pleasure of destruction to idolatry sway in the transformative light of dissolution. So much I can learn from your realized journey, knowledge and quest!!!?
This makes out to be a great Unitarian Universalist sermon Brendan! If I could get them interested, would you be willing to speak to my church sometime? They pay a little speakers fee. 😊💓
Thanks! I’d be honored to. No fees necessary. :)
I'm in.
So were going for a iterative recursive processes towards the ultimate truth i cant get behind that
How about Medicine Wheel teaching in North American schools?
I’ve listened to several hours of Brendan’s talks and just finished this one. For me, there’s nothing much to argue with, and I know he likes poetic expression, but somehow putting it all together that way made me more skeptical of his project instead of less. I’m a Joneser from the days of 70’s gurus, too young to be enthralled but old enough to detect a disturbing pattern of rhetoric.
Interesting! Can you name/point to any of the things that made you more skeptical? I wonder, too, how my presentation of this stuff has shifted in the 3 years since I did this talk
@@BrendanGrahamDempsey I didn’t realize it was 3 years old and that matters. That is, I’ve enjoyed your recent talks more that sound a little less “enlightened” in that 70’s way. I’m probably not your ideal audience as they say. In this talk I felt a “pain point/solution” and poetic combination that made me think of the Terrance McKenna types the kids today (30 somethings lol) are enamored with. Long time Vervaeke listener. Resonate with the concept of metamodern.
@@TimStorey-op7tg To my embarassement (I am 42) I have just discovered Terrence Mckenna. I am quite enamored with him so far. So seem to use his name in a pejorative way - could you explain why?
@@EMDEEW Sorry...I replied but didn't know links weren't allowed so I guess it was taken down. As far as T McKenna and similar, they, and others, use what I call Type 2 Pseudoscience to support their message and prescriptions for society/happiness. Type 1 is just junk science or infomercial tricks. Type 2 is when the speaker "establishes" credibility by demonstrating his superior familiarity with science/literature/philosophy, then typically creates an analogy directly related to his proposal in the pain point/solution priming. The demonstration and analogy don't necessarily have anything to do with each other. I found a lot of this in Maria Popova's work (Brain Pickings blog originally), impressive as she is. Going all the way back to the Sophists and the death of Socrates is a good place to start here, then I jump to Ralph Waldo Emerson and the Transcendentalists. At least a few famous philosophers or pseudo-philosophers like Sartre have recommended the use of poetry to "sell" their ideas, which is almost always part of persuasive speech, especially effective with complicated/new subjects. Compel, compel, compel. That's something we can't entirely get away from and don't need to. But when it sounds like someone is selling/rationalizing what we already kinda want in the first place, it's easy to get caught up in their "reasoning" without really grasping alternatives or further ramifications. The only reason I know of T McKenna is because of the psychedelics craze of the last few years, since TM had been a strong proponent in the 70's/80's. I am too in terms of learning more in clinical settings and probably incorporating them into treatment, but a culture of free access doesn't look plausible, and the more meta question is why we're still going down this sex/drugs/rocknroll path after 50+ years of counter indications. I'm guessing it has a lot to do with the environments we've found ourselves in. All kinds of gurus are spontaneously generated in unfulfilling environments. Why are they unfulfilling? What's the real problem as opposed to the rhetorical/psychedelic/sexual/sensual/psychological bandaid? I very much believe in Brendan's metamodern proposal, but when a crowd comes for the information then stays for the music, there's reason to be extra careful.
Three things:
1) You have a viseral reaction to creed and given your path I get it. I think a conversation should happen about the proper role of creeds. My sense is that they are models + common language about perceived reality, but also a process to "move on" from thinking to living in unity. (way more here, but I'll stop)
2) I wrote a short story on such things. I'll probably write another. I'm not a poet but one page allegories are fruitful for processing. In the realm of popular myth makers, Stephanson is my favorite but perhaps to on the nose.
3) I view Christianity as the incorporation and grounding narrative (for me/many). Christianity done well incorporates and synthesizes alongside philosophy and science. Vested in literalism and walled it is brittle. The new narrative should I capsulate the old (and arguably has done so though the ages). Reading Teihard; promising bridge.
This would make Jung's "Red Book" a proto metamodern text.
There is a telos to deconstruction, it isnt an end in itself, that is nihilism.
Always grouping everything pre-modern as traditional doesn't do justice to our magical past.
so metamodern = irony memes and clown world?
Can you walk me through how you came to that conclusion?
@@BrendanGrahamDempsey the digital space is the space of the metamodern, and its most impressionable grassroots creation is basically memes
Internet memes might be thought of as the first publicly created meta-modern art. Yes they have the irony and critical nature of post modernity but also are essentially iconography (traditional). I wouldn't follow any social scientists today who are completely obsessed with memes. I don't think we've ever had a better look into the psyche of the public