Three Podcasts

One painful, one informative, one special

Although my primary interest is shifting to feminism and the voices of women, I am not turning my back on metamodernism. But I have a finite amount of time and I am careful with what I allow to capture my attention. Today I am riffing on three recent podcasts by Brendan Graham Dempsey.

90. Modern vs. Postmodern (vs. Metamodern) Philosophy w/ Stephen Hicks

Philosopher and professor Dr. Stephen Hicks returns for a discussion about integrating critiques of the modern project and the Enlightenment ideals on which it is based. Are postmodern challenges already contained within modern philosophy or do they represent a dialectical shift beyond it in some meaningful way? Is postmodernism defined by its skepticism or by the nature of the problems it poses? Is the modern narrative of Progress undermined by the reality of the global metacrisis or can modernity self-correct? A spirited discussion exploring these questions from a modern (Hicks) vs. metamodern (Dempsey) perspective.

I was reminded by something I said in An Open Letter to Nate Hagens.

Nate, I noticed something in your conversation with Sam Harris. You asked a lot of questions and he had a lot of answers. You learned a lot from him. But Harris had no questions for you. He learned nothing from you.

Brendan, I noticed something in your conversation with Dr. Stephen Hicks. You asked a lot of questions and he had a lot of answers. You learned a lot from him. But Hicks had no questions for you. He learned nothing from you and learned nothing about metamodernism. At times it was painful to listen to and I admired your patience.

At 45:35 Modern Progress and the Metacrisis, Dempsey frames the metacrisis and asks a question.

Dempsey: So, yeah, what are your thoughts about that?

Hicks: (bold emphasis mine)

One of the things that is a feature of the modern world is doing all sorts of things that are very new. And just the newness of doing things means that one makes a lot of mistakes. And one in doing new things sometimes is appropriately taking old ways of doing things and getting rid of them.

And sometimes in one’s haste to do new things, one underappreciates the old ways of doing things. And so one is more destructive than one should. And one has to then try the new experiment, realize that the old way had something to it, and then go back and incorporate and so on.

So all of that, I would say, is part of the learning curve of being in a society committed to newness to innovation to the idea that we should be experimental. And so yes, I would expect that the modern way of doing things is often going to be messy.

To me, Hicks sounded like a True Believer in Modernity with no understanding of the metacrisis as something with the potential to collapse civilization. He showed no curiousity for more deeply understanding Dempsey’s perspective. To dismiss the problems of Modernity as messey is astounding. I am grateful for Dempsey and what he is attempting to do with his various discussions. Personally, I am not interested in discussions with True Believers, be they True Believers in Modernity or Christianity or Rationality or Science, or Metamodernism.

However, I am a True Believer that it is all just stories all the way down.

Metamodern Mission (w/ Rufus Pollock)

Rufus Pollock of Life Itself explains what Life Itself is about before we dive into a deep and rich conversation about the heart of this new movement we're a part of that's dedicated to a different orientation to value and meaning. What is distinctly core and emergent about this new approach and way of seeing the world? Rufus speaks eloquently about this, articulating the spirit of a Second Renaissance with beauty and emotion.

I have been following Rufus Pollock and Life Itself for several years, part of the SPACE I have been exploring. This podcast was informative and pleasant to listen to. As with many projects in the SPACE, I am a cheerleader for this work.

89. Complexifying Identity w/ God'swill Osa

God’swill Osa joins me to talk about his doctoral work exploring identity-formation and group consciousness, specifically in the American political context. We discuss the idea of political group consciousness and the significance of individuation and self-awareness for moving beyond the simplistic binaries of culture war acrimony. How does the current system hijack identity concerns for political gain and what healthier, more adaptive ways of thinking about identity are possible?

The content of this podcast is interesting and important. However, it is special to me because God’swill is my friend. We are both members of the private online group Wisdom Exchange. He is one of a group of several young men at WE who inspire me and give me hope for humanity’s future. When I think back to myself at his age, one word comes to mind, cringe.