The Return of Meaning

A scientific, existential, and cultural phenomenon

Meaning in the 20th century went missing. With the decline of religion, and the rise of science, for many in the modern world nihilism has taken hold. But this is a mistake. We must usher in the return of meaning, for the existential health of our selves and our culture, writes John Vervaeke.

 

As we move into the real possibility of what is called artificial general intelligence (AGI), i.e., intelligence that is like or surpasses our own, we move into a problem centrally entwined with our intelligence, viz., the problem of meaning. Two questions immediately emerge: what is the nature of this meaning so central to our intelligent cognitive agency, and what relation does this cognitive meaning have to the existential meaning that has been of concern to philosophers perennially but especially since the advent of modernity and secularism?  When Pascal talks about the infinite spaces of the scientific worldview and how they terrify him or Nagel talks about the problem of the absurd as we pursue objectivity, they are invoking a sense of meaning that has something to do with psychologist and philosophers are calling meaning in life [1].  This is the sense that one’s life makes sense in a way that has depth or realness because it connects one to something larger than oneself that has a value and a reality beyond one’s egocentric concerns and individual existence. This connection makes life worth living in the face of the frustrations, failures, suffering and sorrows that reliably assail human lives.

Continue reading

Enjoy unlimited access to the world's leading thinkers.

Start by exploring our subscription options or joining our mailing list today.

Start Free Trial

Already a subscriber? Log in

Join the conversation

David Jones 2 5 February 2022

There is this image that is fractal and repeated and all the level with Vervaeke of a set group of distinct but often fuzzy edged ecology of dynamically interacting "things" (but perhaps too fuzzy and changeable to be a thing). I think this image is a step up from the fatally myopic propositional scientific system (perhaps a rigid network) in terms of truth but actually is not really helping us except to say we need talk about it more. What we want surely is to know what this competing relevance realisation modules in the mental dynamical system actually are and why? Until we fins that we are still just groping in the dark and going round in circles...

David Jones 2 5 February 2022

Good overview...just a point to help clarify
"Most of this meaning making is taking place below your beliefs and the obviousness of your everyday experience. However, for many historical reasons that I explored and explained in my Awakening from the Meaning Crisis video series, our culture has become excessively, perhaps obsessively, focused on this level of belief and everyday obviousness. We suffer propositional-ideological tyranny. "

This needs an addition of "propositional" before "beliefs" in the first line, else the rest doesn't make sense... it is propositional rather than perspectival beliefs (and the others) that we focus on and foreground - hence the propositional-ideological tyranny!

Cameron Wright 4 February 2022

It strikes me that the ideas you share are like the basic research that leads to some breakthrough later down the line. It's a real joy to read and listen to the things you and your contemporaries produce. But I wonder what you would have to say about specific things, say to take your perspective and knowledge and embody it by analyzing or critiquing some story, character, person, or cultural practice that's a bit more everyday rather than things, like this wonderful article, that require a reader to google the meaning of words or phrases, like perspectival knowing, or circling. Maybe if I said it like this it would make sense: provide smaller heuristics (?) that can be potentially built up into the large sophisticated matrix of ideas and pyschotechnologies you possess rather than deconstructing a large body of knowledge down into smaller components and then trying to link them to something appropriate. "That's amazing, but what do I do with it?" is a common refrain for me when I read or listen to things like this.