Thinking Metacrisis

First Some Basic Concepts...

Complex Systems

Complex systems are comprised of many autonomous parts or subsystems and are defined by the interactions and relationships between those parts. The Earth is an example of a complex system. The component parts are often themselves complex systems of a smaller scale (e.g. ecosystems) and the system they are part of is itself part of a bigger system (e.g. galaxy). Thus complex systems can be seen as a nested hierarchy – like Russian dolls. Complex systems exhibit recursive, multi-directional, non- linear causality which can give rise to new emergent properties of the system as a whole that cannot be attributed to the characteristics of its constituent parts. Thus the system as a whole is always more than the sum of its parts.

Earth System

Earth System thinking transcends disciplinary boundaries to treat the Earth as an integrated complex dynamic whole. Human societies are entangled, dependent parts of the Earth System. This holistic view of the Earth’s dynamic systemic interactions and “feedbacks”, through material, energy and cultural fluxes between its sub-systems'—e.g. atmosphere, hydrosphere, cryosphere, geosphere, pedosphere, lithosphere, biosphere, magnetosphere, and sociosphere—offers a deeper understanding of our planet’s evolutionary trajectory.

Systemic Attractors

In physics an attractor refers to a set of numerical values describing a condition or behaviour that a dynamic system tends to evolve towards. The concept of attractor is relevant to various areas of inquiry from the global economy to climate modelling and, of course, the Earth System. The term is often used as a metaphor for emerging cultural phenomena within complex socio-cultural systems indicating possible evolutionary directions of the system.

Metacrisis

The term meta-crisis (or sometimes polycrisis) refers to the multiplicity of intertwined existential risks threatening the viability of many species, including homo sapiens, and perhaps even life on Earth. It denotes a single phenomenon that encompasses a multitude of interconnected and mutually amplifying crises – ecological degradation, cultural disintegration, institutional paralysis and failure, economic and financial breakdown, geopolitical confrontation and war, exponential economic and technological growth, extreme concentration of wealth and power, etc. The metacrisis is all of these things and it’s not reducible to any one or two of them. That’s why it’s a metacrisis.

Three Attractors

Daniel Schmachtenberger* has suggested that the emergence of two “attractors” can be observed in current socio-economic-political responses to planetary crises. In my understanding he uses the concept of “attractor” not in its strictly mathematical meaning but as a metaphor for emergent field phenomena that could condition the evolution of the Earth System.

Daniel’s first attractor represents the existing global condition of fragmented and incoherent decision- making by nation states, elites and institutions that control powerful technologies, resources and politics and thus the ability to make critical but typically self-serving and frequently ignorant or amoral choices. These entities include nations, corporations, and ultra-wealthy individuals. The forces at play within this attractor are inherently incapable of timely, proportional and co-ordinated action and could well amplify the risks of the metacrisis.

His second attractor refers to highly centralised decision-making in the hands of powerful top down structures. While in principle these power verticals can respond more quickly and efficiently to threats like planetary warming by mobilising vast social and material resources, they are vulnerable to corruption and the abuse of power. Their rise threatens the creation of totalitarian dystopias, a process already well advanced in authoritarian nation states like Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, etc, and through the spread of surveillance capitalism across globalised markets. The development and diffusion of advanced surveillance technologies by nations like Israel aids the expansion of these power centres.

The third attractor in Daniel Schmachtenberger’s account is a notional balance between these two models which aims to avoid human-induced catastrophes, make collective decisions rapidly and coherently, and focus on collective well-being and social hyper-agency. He suggests priority needs to be given to developing this third attractor through popular mobilisation, experimentation and adaptation.

Another Possible “Third Attractor”

In my view Schmachtenberger’s third attractor, while desirable, seems politically implausible. I believe an emergent “third attractor” is already observable in the global cultural space. It is forming around the notion of regeneration and takes the form of proactive initiatives to regenerate or restore both biophysical and cultural ecologies. These initiatives take many forms from ecosystem regeneration, to regenerative agriculture, to regenerative urban design and biophilic technologies. They are often bioregionally based and linked by trans-local colearning networks that diffuse and amplify innovation. This is the context within which I believe we must locate our processes of sense-making, inquiry and action in the metacrisis.

...................

* Daniel Schmachtenberger is a social philosopher and founding member of The Consilience Project, aimed at improving public sensemaking and dialogue. https://civilizationemerging.com/media/the-psychological-drivers-of-the-metacrisis/

Some Core Assumptions

In my view there are several core assumptions that help us to make sense of the metacrisis. They include:

Uncertainty We live in times of whole Earth systemic disruption and existential risk beyond anything in our evolutionary experience, the trajectories of which we cannot predict.

Complexity No linear analysis can help us understand or respond to the situation we face as a species. It is not a “problem” for which we must find a “solution”. Single cause prescriptions (like reducing carbon emissions) are likely to result in unforeseen knock-on effects which could exacerbate other aspects of the metacrisis.

Systemic Breakdown Across the Earth System we see evidence of the overshoot of biophysical planetary boundaries and resulting systemic breakdown. This takes many forms from extreme weather events, institutional failure across governance, education, healthcare, etc, famine and pandemics, accelerating war preparations, extreme power imbalances undermining democratic legitimacy, increasing civil disorder, species extinctions, mass human migration.....

Deep Time Most public discussion of global emergencies is framed in terms of remedial action that can be taken now or in the near future with the hope of short term outcomes. But our passage into the Anthropocene means the consequences of human induced Earth System disruption will continue to unfold over centuries or even millennia. In other words, we must learn to think in geologic time. Thus regenerative strategies must be conceived over generations and assume continuing, possibly accelerating, systemic change. In the words of Yuwaalaraay/Gamilaraay woman Frances Peters-Little: All things will outlast us, the land will change, and survive ... Yes, the land will be different. But new things will come of it.

Adaptation Whatever responses we propose must include well integrated to enhance our collective ability to adapt quickly and effectively to continuously changing circumstances. All our regenerative strategies must be optimised for learning.

Diversity The adaptive capacity of human systems has a direct relationship to the diversity of the participants. Bringing together people who don’t usually communicate or agree should be a key component of our work. Cultural “tribalism” is a form of self-harm. (The law of requisite variety: the ability of any system to adapt or learn is a function of the degree to which its internal structures replicate the diversity of its external environment.)

Distributed Leadership The capacity to make strategic choices must be distributed as widely as possible within the project, organisation, community or network. This should be coupled with effective ways of reaching “good enough” agreement.

Sense-Making A significant aspect of the current social malaise is a widespread feeling of meaninglessness. (In a recent sociological survey in the UK 80% of respondents said they felt their lives had no purpose.) This suggests that regenerative community processes need to incorporate sense-making components like Bohemian Dialogue to transcend demoralisation and build solidarity and the capability to deal with intergenerational trauma.

“A human being is part of a whole, called by us the ‘Universe’ —a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts, and feelings, as something separated from the rest—a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circles of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty.” Albert Einstein

Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing,?there is a field.

I’ll meet you there.

When the soul lies down in that grass,? the world is too full to talk about.? Ideas, language, even the phrase ‘each other’? doesn’t make any sense.

Rumi

This is a draft.

Your ideas and suggestions will be gratefully received.