"This means that great ideas can be uncovered by digging into the biggest heaps of bullshit around. You can follow the trail of buzzwords, scammers, and naive idealists back to genuine sources of insight."
Postmodernism is perhaps the greatest example of this. But, of course, this is challenging for metamodernists because (as Cussens alludes to)...diminishing postmodernism seems like a pretty necessary part of having 'metamodernism'.
I would say well...a necessary part of having 'metamodernism' in the first place. But now that you have it.........
As I've mentioned in the Frame piece, this piece is largely a padded-out version of what the more intellectual NLPers would call the Meta Model - distort, delete, generalise. In many ways, I think metamodernism, as practised, has a lot in common with NLP at its more abstract. This is both good and bad IMO. I'll be writing about this shortly....hopefully today actually.
A related question here; what are the ethical responsibilities involved in knowing you are going to be misunderstood? This is probably most clearly exemplified by the notion of 'stochastic terrorism' - if you literally know you're very likely to be misunderstood and you know that this will likely have terrible consequences....is the dismissal of any responsibility (note, not necessarily legal responsibility) really tenable? I think a lot of liminals would really, really want to say yes to that. But I don't think denial aligns with how any of us really cognitively handle causation.
"This means that great ideas can be uncovered by digging into the biggest heaps of bullshit around. You can follow the trail of buzzwords, scammers, and naive idealists back to genuine sources of insight."
Postmodernism is perhaps the greatest example of this. But, of course, this is challenging for metamodernists because (as Cussens alludes to)...diminishing postmodernism seems like a pretty necessary part of having 'metamodernism'.
I would say well...a necessary part of having 'metamodernism' in the first place. But now that you have it.........
As I've mentioned in the Frame piece, this piece is largely a padded-out version of what the more intellectual NLPers would call the Meta Model - distort, delete, generalise. In many ways, I think metamodernism, as practised, has a lot in common with NLP at its more abstract. This is both good and bad IMO. I'll be writing about this shortly....hopefully today actually.
A related question here; what are the ethical responsibilities involved in knowing you are going to be misunderstood? This is probably most clearly exemplified by the notion of 'stochastic terrorism' - if you literally know you're very likely to be misunderstood and you know that this will likely have terrible consequences....is the dismissal of any responsibility (note, not necessarily legal responsibility) really tenable? I think a lot of liminals would really, really want to say yes to that. But I don't think denial aligns with how any of us really cognitively handle causation.