What Makes a Person Metamodern: Degrees of Dichotomy
Introducing Dichotomous Logistics
W.D. Wright identifies dichotomous thinking as the main logical system of western civilisation. He also identified another more marginalised logical framing, diunital, both-and. Kant and Nietzsche identified a shift from certainty to probability. Before the discovery of the uncertainty principle, it seemed most of humanities could be answered dichotomously. Kierkegaard identified the roots of this change as a shift away from our preference for dichotomy, either/or, logistics. In fact Kierkegaard’s book was written to remind us one day we would need to go beyond dichotomies.
Dichotomous thinking has many uses. As a tool it is a blade. It has allowed us to dissect, take apart and categorise reality, building anew from the pieces we’ve identified. It would seem, however, that with every new thing we made a new problem came with it. Now at the start of the 21st century we are threatened with the crisis of emergency: mass extinction, climate change, culture war, energy, cost of living, political, health, housing, meaning, and sense-making, crisis’
All of this dissection created a puzzling picture of reality, mainly because reality itself isn’t dichotomous. Existence doesn’t create complexity by means of dichotomy, but by way of diunitality. A thing can only be considered ‘greater than the sum of its parts’ through diunital, both-and merging not dichotomous emerging. In fact many of the common sense observations we’ve taken for granted, about existence via dichotomous understanding are currently being contested.
Diunitality: The Post-Metamodern Mode
So if we were to make a concrete split between what (post-)modernity and metamodernity asks of us I would say: Metamodernity demands diunital, both-and, thinking where as in all previous epochs the dichotomous was dominant. Popular metamodern writer Hanzi names it as one of his 5 measures of whether or not a person is metamodern. I personally suggest that diunital thinking is the key definer, and that the other four of Hanzi’s measures are products of some degree of diunital thinking.
Metamodernism is a culture of logic and associated structures of feeling. The cultural logic is based on diunital, both-and, cognition. The associated sturctures of feeling the product of integrating paradox (such as cognitive dissonance)
Whereas dichotomy often asks questions with yes/no answers, diunitality asks to what extent with. answers coming in terms of context and degree. As such simply observing diunital cognition as a form metamodern practice isn’t enough. We must go further and acknowledge there are degrees to our capacity for diunital thinking that are related to the depths of our dichotomous logic. Fortunately I’ve devised the Model of Emanance to help us make sense of the ways and extents to which we use dichotomous logistics to make sense of the world. Once we can see the many ways we use dichotomous logic we can better be aware of how to use diunital thinking as well.
As we can see there are a minimum of 11 modes of Dichotomous Logistics. It’s worth noting that if there are a minimum of twelve stages of dichotomy then there will also be stages to metamodernity itself. This will be mean that not all forms of metamodern theory and practice are equal. Some will be more complex, impactful and metamodern than others.
To those that are noticing I’m using dichotomous thinking in splitting and hierarchising metamodernity are correct.Please note we aren’t making a choice of ‘either’ using dichotomous logic ‘or’ diunital cognition. We are using both dichotomous and diunital thinking, at the same time, where applicable. So let’s describe these twelve steps of dichotomy. One thing to note before we get going. As you’ll begin to notice, the higher order stages, as always, rely and build upon the stages before them.
The Order of Dichotomous Logistics
The zeroth dichotomy is Existential. (Zeroth is nomenclature this model uses as a reminder for us to explore the negated, the absences). Existential dichotomies ask whether something is or not. Is x real, Is x existent, is it x? If the answer is yes then x is accepted. If the answer is no the idea of x is rejected outright. Existential dichotomies also split up reality into the existent and non-existent.
The first dichotomy is temporal. Temporal dichotomies not only split up events in to discrete chronological order they also split up time itself into distinct past, present future. Oscillation is a form of temporal dichotomy that leads to all the others.
The second order of dichotomy is spatial. A spatial dichotomy results in separation and segregation. This form of dichotomy goes beyond saying a thing is real and its alternative is not real. Spatial dichotomy allows for the existence of a thing and its alternative, as long as they don’t occupy the same space, conceptual or otherwise
The third order of dichotomy, value dichotomy, is based upon depth. This type of dichotomy creates fixed dominance hierarchy by asking (and answering) ‘is this more or less’. By building upon existential and spatial dichotomies these values become relatively fixed and unchanging. A thing either is or isn’t more or less valuable/viable/applicable than a series of alternatives. The thing is then placed in its respective position in the hierarchy.
The fourth order of dichotomy is scale and is a consumptive dichotomy. This is the dichotomy popular in western diabetics. The idea of dialectics is when two ideas are pitted against each other. The loser is deemed incorrect/wrong and therefore of less value. The victor consumes and situates the alternative, as lower in the hierarchical value chain, and effectively worths from the point of view of the victor.
The fifth order of dichotomy is is based upon visibility. Visibility dichotomies occur when the victor of a consumptive dichotomy is spotlit due to its perceived worth at the top of a value chain. The victor is spotlit and the loser falls victim to being occulted. Hidden in the shadows cast by the victor of the consumptive dichotomy.
The sixth order of dichotomy is divisibility dichotomies. Due to visibility dichotomies the spotlit is centred and the occulted is fragmented into the margins in a type of orbit. As with gravitational orbits sometimes the fragmented are pulled into a collision with the centre, and at other times the fragmented is ejected from the central orbit into even deeper shadows.
The seventh order of dichotomy is that of is charge dichotomies. The friction caused by separations, collisions and close orbits results in various charges, which are seen as bad or good. As we can see this stage is a culmination of all the previous stages. Charged dichotomies are the origin point of conflict avoidance, and the cultural silences surrounding conflict. The remaining stages are tools used to manage and subdue conflict.
The eighth and ninth orders of dichotomy are Crude and Subtle respectively. These are forces that come as a result of the previous imbalances caused by differences in Visibility, Divisibility, and the resultant Charged Dichotomies. These forces contribute towards the tenth order of dichotomy,
Homeostatic Dichotomies.
Homeostatic Dichotomies are also known as Holism. Subtle and crude forces aim to maintain the tensions of imbalances set up by the previous dichotomous orders. It is important to note that imbalances are maintained as the dynamics of the interactions are hierarchical and consumptive. with the focus on the central fixed dominant mass which is seen largely as the whole
Here at the tenth order of complexity the model of Emanance repeats. I could say the centred 1 of the 10 is lost in its negation of the fragmented 0. Then again I sense we aren’t swayed by this mystic number work. When Existential Dichotomy is applied to Homeostasis and Holism, there is always an ambiguity in response. We have no scientific basis for an eternal homeostasis, although leading theories suggest the universe itself is.
Holism is often focussed around a spotlit central group or set of ideas, this can lead to the occulting of other ideas or groups so fragmenting supposed holism. To remedy this with Dichotomous Logistics we apply Spacial, Hierarchical, and Consumptive Dichotomies. This leads to dichotomous forms of separated, dominant, and assimilating Homeostasis such as ideas of plurality, diversity, inclusion, assimilation and so on.
