Read the full paper

Watch the webinar

Modern humanity doesn’t simply make use of technology; we perceive the world in its image, and invest it with sacred authority to guide our choices. Now we’re approaching a precipice, with tech galloping ahead of our capacity to use it wisely. A new essay explores the foundations of these dysfunctional tendencies within the modern cultural paradigm, and considers the shifts in worldview and inner capacity that might support a future society to choose more wisely the forces we unleash.

This is the fifth paper in the Second Renaissance series; authored by Rufus Pollock, Rosie Bell and Sylvie Barbier (Life Itself Sensemaking Studio).

Read the full paper

Summary

As far back as we can trace homo sapiens, we find evidence that technology has been part of human existence. But the speed and scale at which it shapes our lives today is unprecedented. Once a helpful servant, tech has become a dysfunctional master; a cultural ideology in its own right. It’s no longer an exaggeration to suggest that modern technology is a god - commanding faith, reverence and moral authority, and eclipsing human values in our collective choices. A residual faith in human reason sustains the illusion of freedom, while the tools we invite into our lives distort our attention, behaviour and relationship with each other and the world.

The acceleration of AI brings this pattern into sharp focus; fuelled by a race-to-the-bottom dynamic where competition overwhelms collective restraint.

Our collective action problems are rooted in a worldview of separateness - but there are other ways to see ourselves. The paradigm shift we need is intimated in the Buddhist concept of interbeing. The understanding that nothing exists in isolation contains, by extension, a simple truth: nobody wins a competition that ends in shared destruction.

A future society that survives its own technologies will understand that freedom depends not only upon choice, but the capacity to choose wisely - grounded in a fuller account of human nature, and our radical interdependency.

Join the webinar roundtable

Join us on Wednesday 18th March, 4:30-6pm GMT for a live roundtable discussion with the paper authors and invited experts in AI and social transformation: Michael Garfield (Humans on the Loop podcast), Xavier Snelgrove (Orbital Studies Magazine), and Jenny Stefanotti (Denizen).

Register for the webinar

Watch the webinar recording

This roundtable will open a timely conversation:

• ​Has technology become a kind of modern “god”?

• ​How do modern assumptions — individualism, rationalism, materialism, and the myth of progress — shape our relationship with AI?

• ​What might it mean to shift from out-of-control technological acceleration towards collective restraint?

• ​Can a worldview grounded in interbeing — the recognition of radical interdependence — support wiser choices about the forces we unleash?

​Rather than focusing only on governance, the discussion will examine the cultural paradigm shaping our technological era — and the inner capacities needed to navigate it well.

​Join us as we ask not only what AI can do — but who we must become to live well with it.

Join, John Vervaeke, Thomas Hübl and Rebecca Henderson at the Second Renaissance Online: Transformation in a Time of Metacrisis. They invite us to explore how wisdom, science, and community action can meet the complexity of our moment with depth, discernment, and heart.

Register now

Newly Confirmed Keynote Speakers

We are thrilled to share our confirmed keynotes and panelists for this three-day online gathering of dialogue, practice, and inquiry with visionary thinkers and facilitators shaping the global conversation on transformation, meaning, and renewal.

John Vervaeke

Professor, Cognitive Science and Psychology, University of Toronto

John Vervaeke, PhD, is an award-winning professor at the University of Toronto, specializing in psychology, cognitive science, and Buddhist psychology. He is Director of the Cognitive Science program and leads the Consciousness and Wisdom Studies Laboratory. Vervaeke’s teaching and research emphasize insight, consciousness, intelligence, rationality, mindfulness, and the 4E model of cognition. He is widely recognized for his acclaimed YouTube series “Awakening from the Meaning Crisis,” “After Socrates,” and authorship of “Zombies in Western Culture.”

Thomas Hübl

Founder, Academy of Inner Science

Thomas Hübl, PhD, is a renowned teacher, author, and international facilitator known for integrating wisdom traditions with science to address personal and collective trauma. He has taught over 100,000 people worldwide and authored Attuned and Healing Collective Trauma. Hübl developed the Collective Trauma Integration Process and has led programs fostering healing and dialogue around historical wounds, notably those following the Holocaust. He is a visiting scholar at Harvard’s Wyss Institute and co-founded The Pocket Project, an NGO dedicated to global trauma integration. Hübl holds a PhD focused on collective trauma healing.

Thomas Hübl and John Vervaeke join our previously confirmed speaker:

Rebecca Henderson

Professor, Harvard Business School

Rebecca Henderson is a research fellow at the National Bureau of Economic Research and a fellow of both the British Academy and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. She also has more than twenty-five years of major public board experience. Rebecca’s research explores the degree to which the private sector can play a major role in building a more sustainable economy. She is an author of a number of publications, including Reimagining Capitalism in a World on Fire. Rebecca is currently researching how inner capacities lead to climate action in education, business, and politics.

The Invitation

How do we live—wisely—at the end of an old world and the beginning of another?
How can we grow the capacities our time demands: emotional resilience, relational maturity, intellectual discernment, and collective presence—and apply it to transform our systems and support cultural flourishing?

Across three days, we’ll explore:

• The inner foundations of societal resilience and wisdom-based action

• The role of trauma and healing in the renewal of culture and systems

• The emergence of a Second Renaissance—integrating science, art, and spirituality

• How AI, metamodernity, and education shape the new architectures of meaning

• Practices of embodiment, co-creation, and collective intelligence

  

Featured Voices and Panels

Across the three days we also welcome 8 panels across a variety of topics including education, health, spirituality, climate, youth, art, community and AI, led by:

• Sylvie Barbier (Life Itself)

• Kam Bellamy (Springboard Foundation)

• Aterah Nusrat (Osher Center for Integrative Health - Harvard)

• Rufus Pollock (Life Itself)

• Jadzia Tedeschi (Climate Majority Project)

• James Baker (Intentional Society)

• Liam Kavanagh (Climate Majority Project)

Panelists to date include Schuyler Brown, Cheryl Hsu, Amanda Zamparo, Christine Vatovec, David Victorson and Bruce Barrett, with more to be added soon.

The Details

🗓️ December 5–7, 2025 5pm - 9pm CET | 8am - 12pm PT | 11am - 3pm EST

🌐 Online

🐧Early Bird Tickets until 7th November - only 25 remaining

🔗 Register Now - https://www.2rcon.org/events/second-renaissance-online-conference

🤫 Use discount code WISDOM25 for a further 25% off all tickets

The Unconference

The Second Renaissance invites you to participate in the emergence of a wiser, more resilient world through participant-submitted unconference workshops.

View current submissions here

What is an Unconference?

An unconference is a co-created format, using a lightly structured approach. Once registered you can start to propose your own sessions—dialogues, workshops, embodied practices, or experiments in shared inquiry. Whether you want to lead or simply participate, the Unconference is designed to support peer-to-peer exchange, deep listening, and creative emergence across the 3 days.

Join us for a one of a kind conference where connection and sharing underpins a programme designed to weave the metacrisis, wisdom, art, science, and community practice into new shared forms of response and renewal.

https://www.2rcon.org

Register now

Read the paper

Authored by Rufus Pollock, Boaz Feldman and Rosie Bell (Life Itself Sensemaking Studio). Developed through ongoing consultation with practitioners of inner-outer change and the broader Developmental Spaces community, we are also very grateful for financial support from LIONE and Life Itself.

Summary

Inner foundations of outer crises

Today’s interconnected crises stem from the foundations of globalised culture: the reality assumptions, values, and perspectives that shape societies. Evidence is mounting that modern civilisation is breaking down in ways that can’t simply be repaired. Renewal is needed at a foundational level – a profound shift in deep-seated, collective worldview. Ways of being and seeing that we are hardly able to imagine from a modern cultural frame.

The missing infrastructure of inner growth

In other words, if we’re serious about system transformation, we must also be serious about inner transformation. However, modern materialist culture largely treats the inner world as irrelevant - leaving us with very few robust, trusted, research-based institutions dedicated to large-scale inner growth for the common good. The potential for human flourishing and renewal is vast; but our inherited maps are fragmented. We need scaleable, integrated approaches to inner transformation – sustained by dedicated communities that can weave new cultural stories together.

In response to this need, we offer the idea of Developmental Spaces: dedicated, growth-oriented spaces that nurture multi-domain inner development and act as cultural incubators for a new paradigm.

Integrating domains of inner growth

Building on synthesis supplied by Integral Theory, we sketch several interdependent domains of inner growth: Waking Up (spiritual awareness), Cognitive Development (complexity of thought), Growing Up (worldview shifts), Cleaning Up (trauma healing and shadow integration), and Showing Up (ethical action and engagement). Together, the maps and practices within these domains can equip individuals and communities with the qualities needed to become resilient amid breakdown, and flourish into new cultural shapes.

Sustaining collective intention

For this kind of growth to take root, dedicated spaces are essential. Continuity, trust, and collective purpose require sustained practice, and safe community environments that support vulnerability and experimentation. Within these “islands of coherence,” transformative ways of being, thinking and acting can seed future ways of life.

Transformation at scale

This early step aims to help build an evidence-based movement for Developmental Spaces, provided widely enough to serve large segments of populations. The ultimate ambition is a replicable, scalable model with potential to influence the deepest orientation of societies towards a regenerative future - a ‘Second Renaissance’.

Read the full paper

Join us for the online launch event: Wednesday 5 November

On Wednesday 5 November, 5-6:30pm CET, we are offering a free webinar to present the Developmental Spaces white paper. ​

The event will feature: welcome & introductions; a presentation by the paper co-authors; comments by invited guests; discussion in breakout rooms; plenary discussion and Q&A. All interested in the field of inner development and inner-led social change are warmly welcome.

The following field experts will be speaking: Kam Bellamy (Springboard Foundation for Whole Person Learning); Marc Santolini (Learning Planet Institute); and Tomas Björkman (Ekskäret Foundation).

We look forward to seeing you there.

Register for the webinar

Watch the event recording

11 Nov 2025 update: For those of you who missed the event, here’s the recording of the presentation and guest speakers…

Across three days online in December, we’ll bring together leading thinkers, practitioners, and community-builders to explore pathways for resilience, renewal, and societal transformation towards a Second Renaissance. Together, we will examine how wisdom, creativity, and collective action can respond to the interwoven crises of our time — social polarization, ecological breakdown, inequality, and loss of meaning— fostering a wisdom-based community of practice where insight, connection, and engaged action come together to create meaningful impact..

Keep reading for full event details and tickets, what we will learn, who should attend, provisional schedule, confirmed speakers and panelists, unconference information and where to register your interest.

Event Details - Snapshot Overview

Date: 5-7 December, 2025

Time: 5pm - 9pm CET | 8am - 12pm PT | 11am - 3pm EST

Where: Online

What: 3 days: 2-day conference, and 1 day unconference structure

Who: Academics, researchers, practitioners, facilitators, artists, community-builders, and activists seeking to develop resilience, integrate wisdom into action, and contribute to meaningful community and societal transformation

Website: www.2rcon.org/

Confirmed: Prof. Rebecca Henderson — author of Reimagining Capitalism in a World on Fire, Kam Bellamy — Springboard, Peter Limberg of the Stoa, and Liam Kavanagh — Co-founder of Climate Majority Project

Tickets: Register today with 70% off Super-Early Bird rates - only 25 tickets available

70% Off - Register Now

A Wisdom-Based Community of Practice for Engaged Action

We live in a time of accelerating crisis and possibility: social polarization, ecological breakdown, inequality, and a crisis of meaning and connection. These are not separate problems, but interwoven symptoms of a deeper shift in our shared values, beliefs, and stories.

The creation of a weller, wiser world offers the opportunity to respond to the metacrisis with a regenerative vision: not only reform, but of a deep renewal of consciousness, culture, and collective purpose. Drawing from wisdom traditions, science, art, and activism, the Second Renaissance provides a space for integrating inner cultivation, relational resilience, and practical action.

The Second Renaissance Online conference brings together inquiry and imagination: How can we meet technological disruption with wisdom? How do arts and education nurture resilience and renewal? How do spirituality, health, youth movements, and climate action interweave into a larger story of transformation? How do communities support our values development?

After the success of our in-person Human Transformation in a Time of Metacrisis conference at Harvard University (May 2025), we’re excited to continue this global conversation with the Second Renaissance Online Conference — creating a leading edge conference of thought-leaders accessible wherever you are in the world.

Keynotes and Panelists

We’re excited to announce our first confirmed keynote speaker — Prof. Rebecca Henderson (Harvard Business School) — Author of Reimagining Capitalism in a World on Fire.

Rebecca Henderson is a research fellow at the National Bureau of Economic Research and a fellow of both the British Academy and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. She also has more than twenty-five years of major public board experience. Rebecca’s research explores the degree to which the private sector can play a major role in building a more sustainable economy. She is an author of a number of publications, including Reimagining Capitalism in a World on Fire. Rebecca is currently researching how inner capacities lead to climate action in education, in business and politics.

More keynote speakers will be announced soon.

Our confirmed panel facilitators include:

• Peter Limberg (The Stoa)

• Sylvie Barbier (Life Itself)

• Jadzia Tedeschi (Climate Majority Project)

• Rufus Pollock (Life Itself)

• Kam Bellamy (Springboard Foundation)

• Liam Kavanagh (Climate Majority Project)

Panels will open up cross-disciplinary explorations of areas related to AI and technology, arts and creativity, education and learning futures, health and wellbeing, youth and next generations, climate, spirituality and wisdom traditions, and the metacrisis and metamodernity. Each theme is explored in its relation to the whole, weaving together the systemic, cultural, communal, and personal.

Unconference (Day 3)

The final day is a participant-driven unconference, where the structure and agenda are shaped by attendee submissions to foster open discussions, collaboration, knowledge sharing, and workshops. This creates space for embodiment, co-creation, idea generation and collective action at the intersection of inner work and systemic change.

Why attend

This event opens inquiry into wisdom-based approaches to transformation, community, and resilience, offering a unique opportunity to:

• Connect to likeminded individuals in a global hub for those leading transformation in a time of metacrisis

• Continue the action and thought-leadership inspired by the Harvard conference

• Engage with changemakers across disciplines and continents

• Experience beyond ideas — with embodied practices, workshops, and network formations designed to integrate and transform thought into lived change

Who should attend?

• Anyone seeking to develop resilience, integrate wisdom into action, and contribute to meaningful community and societal transformation

• Academics, researchers and lifelong students passionate about personal and relational development and societal transformation

• Practitioners and facilitators looking to integrate a lens for societal transformation and a community of civic actors to further apply it

• Artists looking to meet like-minded peers for which artistic creation meets impact in the world

• Community-builders and activists seeking deeper personal and systemic strategies through resilience and wisdom

Provisional Online Conference Schedule

Daily on Friday 5th - Sunday 7th December 2025

5pm Introduction & Community groups*

5:30pm Keynote & Q&A

7pm Panel sessions & Q&A

8:30pm Community groups* & Closing

*You will be invited to join a community group which will meet at the beginning and end of each conference day to discuss questions, surprises and insights.​

Ticket Prices

We are excited to offer 25 Super-Early Bird tickets - available now.

• Super-Early Bird - £29 (Only 25 tickets available at this rate!)

• Standard - £99

• Reduced fee (students, unemployed & over 65) - £49

70% Off - Register Now

Meet the Conference Organising Team

Boaz B. Feldman – Director: Clinical psychologist, researcher, ex-Buddhist monk, and founder of NeuroSystemics.

Rufus Pollock – Strategic Co-Lead: Entrepreneur, activist, and author with a long-term Zen practice, founder of Life Itself and Open Knowledge Foundation.

Lauren Wigmore – Communications & Co-Organizer: Facilitator, embodiment practitioner, and communications strategist supporting conscious start-ups and developmental initiatives.

With the support of Harvard Alumni for Education, NeuroSystemics, and Life Itself

We look forward to welcoming you online on December 5–7 2025 to connect, learn, and co-create with leading thinkers, practitioners and community members. Register now to secure your spot at 70% off and be part of the movement for a wiser, more resilient world.

Have a question? Reach out to us at: boaz@lifeitself.org

70% Off - Register Now

Find Out More and Register

Join Zak Stein, Rebecca Henderson, Sylvie Barbier, Daniel Thorson, Brendan Graham Dempsey, and Bonnitta Roy - key thinkers across the metacrisis, Second Renaissance, integral, and liminal web scenes - for a two-day gathering on education, human development, and systems change.

Unconference Announcement

On the Day 2 Unconference, Zak Stein and colleagues from the Civilization Research Institute will lead a dedicated deep dive - a rare opportunity to engage with their latest thinking in an open, participatory format.

In addition, we’re welcoming Isabela Granic (McMaster University), Kam Bellamy (Springboard Foundation for Whole Person Education), and Brendan Graham Dempsey (Metamodern Spirituality Podcast), who will also be hosting Unconference workshops across topics including developmental design for youth, artificial intelligence in education, collective healing, and metamodern spirituality.

What is an Unconference?

Day 2 (May 3) is a co-created format, using a lightly structured approach. Once registered you can start to propose your own sessions—dialogues, workshops, embodied practices, or experiments in shared inquiry. Whether you want to lead or simply participate, the Unconference is designed to support peer-to-peer exchange, deep listening, and creative emergence.

Conference Day: Theory, Practice & Inner Development

Day 1 (May 2) is the more structured day, featuring keynotes, panels, and facilitated workshops with some of the most thoughtful voices in education, systems change, and the metacrisis.

Speakers and panelists include:

Zak Stein – Metamodern philosopher of education & developmental theorist

Jon Kabat-Zinn – Founder of MBSR & pioneer of contemplative medicine

Rebecca Henderson – Author of Reimagining Capitalism, systems innovator

Tyler VanderWeele – Director, Human Flourishing Program at Harvard

Daniel Thorson – Ex-Monastic, Podcaster, Coach Principle at the Basin Collective

Isabela Granic – Developmental psychologist reimagining youth flourishing

Bonnitta Roy – Post-formal thinker & architect of collective insight practices

Sylvie Barbier - Co-founder of Life Itself and ritual artist

This gathering is for educators, practitioners, and thinkers ready to move into lived response.

For the full list of speakers and to register now → https://www.sfwhgse.com/

What will we learn?

This event will delve into the essential inner human qualities and capacities that fuel profound transformation in education for flourishing. Esteemed speakers will share their insights on how personal development and psychological growth can lead to positive system-change action in both education organizations and culture at large.

• What is the metacrisis and the paradigm shift towards ‘inner’ system-change skills?

• What inner capacities are essential to potentiate our activism and system-change efforts in education?

• How do we develop qualities of “being” in education?

• How does this look on the ground in education and our communities? Exploring a number of approaches, including the arts, academic research, contemplative and justice-centered approaches.

• What are the practical implications of a flourishing approach to education at an individual, community and systemic level?

Lead Organisers

Led by the Harvard School Founders of the World, and supported by Life Itself, and the Second Renaissance initiative.

🎟️ Spots are limited and tickets close on 27th April. You are encouraged to register today.

Tickets include both days and food on Conference day 1.

Register now & explore the full lineup → https://www.sfwhgse.com/

Join our Dedicated Facebook Group

We have set up a Facebook Group to support the themes, topics and wider discussions related to the conference, led by Brendan Graham Dempsey. You can join the group here. The group is open to all whether you are able to attend or not.

Listen to Sylvie Barbier share more ahead of the conference here:

In an era of accelerating change and entangled crises, organisations are being asked to make sense of an increasingly complex and unpredictable world, while regular approaches to analysis and decision-making fail us. We need altogether different ways of looking, tools for understanding, and routes to skilful agency.

The Life Itself Sensemaking Studio is a new multidisciplinary consultancy dedicated to rigorous, inner-outer approaches to collective intelligence. We work with foundations, institutions, and forward-thinking enterprises to map complexity, surface insight, and cultivate the capacities for systems transformation.

On Wednesday 21st May, we’re pleased to invite you to an interactive ‘Find Out More’ session—a chance to meet our team, experience our methodologies, and explore how sensemaking can support your work.

Event Details

📅 Date & Time: 21st May, 5pm
📍 Location: Online
⏳ Duration: 1 hour 30 minutes
🔗 Register here: https://lu.ma/zai8f5d1

Register now

Why Attend?

This event is for anyone seeking effective, collaborative ways to understand and engage with a rapidly shifting landscape. Come along, meet the team and and explore multisystemic thinking, and the inner capacities necessary for wiser action in the face of uncertainty.

• Gain a deeper understanding of the metacrisis and the need for organisations to adopt new sensemaking paradigms

• Learn about our unique methodologies, combining cognitive science, embodiment practices, arts, AI-enhanced narrative analysis and systems thinking

• Discover how mapping perspectives can uncover deeper collective insights

• Engage in a facilitated dialogue on the future of intelligence, leadership, and transformation in complex systems

• Explore opportunities for collaboration, research, and pilot engagements

Register Now

Sensemaking is not a luxury—it is a necessity. We hope you’ll join us in this crucial conversation.

🔗 Register now

For enquiries, please contact studio@lifeitself.org

View our website: https://studio.lifeitself.org/

Keep reading for full event details and tickets, what we will learn, who should attend, provisional schedule, confirmed speakers and panelists, unconference information and where to register your interest. All information matches the official website.

Event details

What: A call-to-action one-day conference exploring the metacrisis through the intersection of education, systems change, and inner development
When: Friday, May 2nd, 2025 (with the possibility of a 2nd day Unconference on May 3rd)
Where: Harvard University, Boston, United States
Who: Co-organized with the School Founders of the World, a Student-Run Club at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, co-led by Boaz Feldman (Harvard Research Scholar, Life Itself Research Fellow and Deliberately Developmental Spaces practitioner), Rudy Santoyo and Cecilia Zhou (Harvard Graduate School of Education Masters Candidates), and supported by Life Itself, the Second Renaissance and Harvard Alumni for Education.
Register interest here: https://www.sfwhgse.com/events/education-for-flourishing-conference/form
Conference Website: https://www.sfwhgse.com

Read more

We face a metacrisis: a set of profound, escalating and interconnected crises - social polarization, ecological breakdown, growing inequality, and a meaning crisis - whose source lie in core views and values at the roots of our civilization. It demands an integrated vision of transformation in education systems: K-12, higher education and adult development. Pioneers across academia, activism and organizing, politics, technology, and religion recognize that solutions require not just systemic change but also cultivating inner change through a Second Renaissance of wisdom-based societal transformation. This event unites educational thought leaders and change-makers to spark cross-disciplinary dialogue and collaboration to support the paradigm shift towards a better, wiser world.

In the past four decades, a number of wisdom traditions have been increasingly examined and evidenced with scientific rigor. These offer powerful insights, practices and springboards upon which we can engage in radically embodied actions for meaningful system change.

The Second Renaissance is a global movement towards rigorous enquiry and deliberate action for inner growth and cultural evolution in the service of social transformation - creating a radically wiser, weller world. The term Second Renaissance originated from the works of Francisco Varela, the well-known Chilean neuroscientist and co-founder of Mind and Life. It is an imperfect term to convey a new integration of Western scientific approaches with Eastern Wisdom traditions.

Human flourishing is a state of optimal well-being where one’s potential develops across all aspects of life, including physical, mental, social, spiritual and civic, characterized by a sense of purpose, meaning, positive relationships, and personal fulfillment. This conference explores the intersection of this multi-dimensional development in education, for the benefit of positive system change in the way we think and act in education.

What will we learn?

This event will delve into the essential inner human qualities and capacities that fuel profound transformation in education for flourishing. Our esteemed speakers will share their insights on how personal development and psychological growth can lead to positive system-change action in both education organizations and culture at large.

• What is the metacrisis and the paradigm shift towards ‘inner’ system-change skills?

• What inner capacities are essential to potentiate our activism and system-change efforts in education?

• How do we develop qualities of “being” in education?

• How does this look on the ground in education and our communities? We will explore a number of approaches, including the arts, academic research, contemplative and justice-centered approaches.

• What are the practical implications of a flourishing approach to education at an individual, community and systemic level?

  Register interest here

Who Should Attend?

• Academics, researchers and students passionate about educational transformation, and its impact on creating systems change in education

• Educators and facilitators looking to integrate inner development and applied learning

• Change-makers and activists seeking deeper personal and systemic strategies for change in education

Confirmed Speakers

• Prof. Rebecca Henderson
  Academic Thought Leader, John and Natty McArthur University Professor, Harvard Business School
  Rebecca Henderson is a research fellow at the National Bureau of Economic Research and a fellow of both the British Academy and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. She also has more than twenty-five years of major public board experience. Rebecca’s research explores the degree to which the private sector can play a major role in building a more sustainable economy. She is an author of a number of publications, including Reimagining Capitalism in a World on Fire. Rebecca is currently researching how inner capacities lead to climate action in education, in business and politics.

• Prof. Jon Kabat-Zinn
  Author, Professor & Mindfulness Pioneer, Founder of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR)
  For decades, Jon Kabat-Zinn has been an exponent of bringing the ancient Buddhist meditation practice known as mindfulness (in its most universal articulations as both a formal meditative discipline and as a way of being) into the mainstream of medicine, health care, science, and beyond — not merely for individuals, but as an effective way to heal and transform the world.

• Prof. Tyler J. VanderWeele
  John L. Loeb and Frances Lehman Loeb Professor of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health
  Tyler J. VanderWeele, Ph.D., is the Director of the Human Flourishing Program and Co-Director of the Initiative on Health, Religion and Spirituality at Harvard University. His methodological research is focused on theory and methods for distinguishing between association and causation in the biomedical and social sciences and, more recently, on psychosocial measurement theory. He has published over four hundred papers in peer-reviewed journals, including on the science of happiness and flourishing, and authored four books.

• Dr. Zachary Stein

  Writer, Educator, Futurist

  Working to bring a greater sense of sanity and justice to education. Dr. Zachary Stein was trained at the interface of philosophy, psychology, and education, and now works in fields related to the mitigation of global catastrophic risk. A widely sought-after and award-winning speaker, Zachary is a leading authority on the future of education and contemporary issues in human development. Dr. Stein is the author of several books and many peer-reviewed papers.

Panelists & Workshop Leaders

• Dr. Gretchen Brion-Maisels
  Whole-Person Educator & Researcher, Senior Lecturer, Harvard Graduate School of Education
  Gretchen’s work focuses on youth-adult partnerships that support both individual and collective development, particularly using participatory action research in schools.

• Dr. Bernard Franklin

  Managing Director, Uncornered

  Bernard is an educator and thought leader and has contributed significantly to higher education, men's leadership, and trauma-informed initiatives, serving on numerous influential boards.

• Mrs. Sherry Li
  Assistant Professor, Berklee School of Music
  An award-winning producer, songwriter, and entrepreneur, Sherry’s music has been featured by top global brands, she teaches music and also works with small groups of Berklee students with Socratic inquiry and other wisdom-based methods.

• Dr. Linda Nathan
  Educator, Author & Artist, Adjunct Lecturer, Harvard Graduate School of Education
  Linda’s work centers on designing democratic, racially just educational spaces that prioritize creativity and community development.

• Prof. Isabela Granic

  Researcher, Teacher, Facilitator, and Author

  Researcher, teacher, and designer working across sectors to help build immersive developmental spaces for flourishing combining off- and online experiential learning. After almost 20 years as a developmental psychology professor, she left full-time academia to accelerate and amplify the real-world impact of her scientific work. She's building a comprehensive world-readiness program co-designed with emerging adults so they can thrive in a world in flux.

• Mrs. Sylvie Barbier

  Ritual Artist for Systems Change, Co-Founder of Life Itself

  Marrying the artistic, political and spiritual, her work synthesizes Eastern and Western philosophies and aesthetics, using Koans as a bridge for the mind into the spiritual realm, for a radically wiser, weller world.

Provisional Agenda

9:30am–1:00pm
Welcome & Introduction
Keynote Speakers with Q&A
Presentations & Panel Discussions

1:00pm–2:00pm
Networking Lunch (Food is included)

2:00pm–6:00pm
Workshops (4 Tracks)
Plenary Feedback & Panel Discussions
Flourishing Concert

Ticket Prices

Includes breakfast, lunch, and refreshments.

• HGSE Students: Free

• Non-HGSE Harvard Students: $15

• Reduced Fee (Non-Harvard students, unemployed, above 65 years old): $29

• Standard Fee: $79

Register interest for when tickets are released below:

Register interest here

Meet the organising team

• Boaz Feldman
  Conference Co-Lead & Co-Founder, School Founders of the World

  Boaz, a researcher and clinical psychologist, ordained as a Buddhist monk in Thailand, completed over 7 years of silent meditation retreats, led numerous war-zone humanitarian missions, and presented at over 30 international conferences. At Harvard University, he is a Research Scholar (at HGSE), an Education Ambassador (at HCCRC), and the European Director for the Harvard Alumni for Education.
  

• Rudolfo Santoyo
  Conference Co-Lead & Co-Founder, School Founders of the World
  Rodolfo “Rudy” Santoyo is an educator, innovator, and learning design strategist focused on bilingual education and technology for human flourishing. With experience in teaching, AI-driven school systems, and democratic school design, he envisions a future where immersive tech and culturally responsive pedagogy empower students. Rudy is currently pursuing his master’s at Harvard, refining his vision for transformative education.

• Cecilia Zhou
  Conference Co-Lead & Co-Founder, School Founders of the World

  Cecilia Zhou is a results-driven education entrepreneur with experience in school expansion, revenue growth, and strategic scholarship acquisition. She is the partner of ICTUS Audio Inc. post-production studio and its subsidiary, ICTUS Music Academy. She has also led nonprofit initiatives, including building libraries, managing summer trips and organizing career mentorship for rural underprivileged students.

The event is further supported by Life Itself and the Second Renaissance initiative.

The Second Renaissance initiative is a collective of artists, academics and activists committed to rigorous inquiry, practical action, inner development, and conscious community. Read more here: https://secondrenaissance.net/

Partners

Harvard Alumni for Education and Life Itself

Other information

Unconference Opportunity

There will be an opportunity to register interest to attend an Unconference on Saturday, 3rd May 9:00am-4:00pm.

What is an unconference?

An unconference is a participant-driven event where the structure and agenda are shaped by attendees to foster open discussions, collaboration, and knowledge sharing.

Unconferences are popular in fields like tech, education, and innovation, where collective intelligence and organic discussions drive learning and idea generation.

There are many terms associated with it: metamodern, metacrisis, integral, teal, liminal web, gameB, regenerative and more.

Seeds of a Second Renaissance is a curated, digestible, and accessible newsletter for anyone seeking to learn, participate, or collaborate in these areas — or, more broadly, in inner-led transformation for radically wiser societies.

The first edition will be released in February 2025. Subscribe now below.

Seeds of a Second Renaissance

A curated digest of news and ideas from the emerging "Second Renaissance" ecosystem.

For more about the Second Renaissance, see https://secondrenaissance.net/.

Who is the newsletter for?

Seeds of a Second Renaissance is a newsletter for anyone interested in inner-led transformation for radically wiser societies.

It's for you if you're new to terms such as metacrisis, regenerative, integral, and teal — and you want to discover and explore the emerging "Second Renaissance" ecosystem.

It's also for you if you're familiar with some of these ideas — and you want to deepen your knowledge, connect the dots, and participate more in the ecosystem.

What’s inside?

Inside each issue, you’ll find:

• Summaries of key ideas and practices

• Recommended articles, podcasts, books, and videos

• Events and collaboration opportunities

You can expect topics such as: inner development, systems change, relational practices, contemplative activism, soulcraft, new social paradigms, somatics, consciousness, and cultural evolution...

... and thinkers such as: Joanna Macy, Bayo Akomolafe, Ken Wilber, Donna Haraway, adrienne maree brown, Thich Nhat Hanh, Otto Scharmer, and John Vervaeke…

Where can I read it?

You’ll be able to read the full archive of issues online at news.secondrenaissance.net, or subscribe (below) to receive new issues directly to your email inbox.

The first issue will be released in February 2025.

Seeds of a Second Renaissance

A curated digest of news and ideas from the emerging "Second Renaissance" ecosystem.

Suggest items to include

We welcome suggestions for items to include — events, jobs, articles and resources. Please share your suggestions in the the Events, Offers & Links WhatsApp channel or in the Jobs Board WhatsApp channel.

If you’d like to get more involved, e.g. on the writing or editorial side, send us a message in the Get Involved WhatsApp group introducing yourself and sharing any initial ideas you have! We’ll be happy to chat :)

Join the movement

Help us plant seeds of a Second Renaissance. If you want to join in, you can:

• 💬 Share your thoughts in the Seeds of a Second Renaissance newsletter comments section

• 🎁 Share Seeds of a Second Renaissance with a friend (forward them this post)

• 💸 Become a paid subscriber of the Seeds of a Second Renaissance newsletter

Seeds of a Second Renaissance

A curated digest of news and ideas from the emerging "Second Renaissance" ecosystem.

Watch the launch event here

View the slides here

Original Posting

This live online event is co-hosted by artist and Life Itself co-founder Sylvie Barbier, Peter Limberg from the STOA and Schuyler Brown futurist, facilitator, healer and writer. Participation is free and all are welcome!

We look forward to having you and celebrating a new creative dawn. 🎉 🌅🎉

About the Event

Join us for this celebration of this new artistic movement, discover the vision behind it, and hear from members of this new art collective Sylvie Barbier, Schuyler Brown, Cheryl Hsu, Amanda Zamparo.

• When: Tuesday 28th January 2025, 6pm European CET / 12 noon US Eastern

• Where: Online on Zoom

• Register here for free: now closed as the event has passed

Art of the Second Renaissance

https://secondrenaissance.net/art

Art as a catalyst for transformation.

Art of the Second Renaissance is a new art movement aiming to redefine how art is made and to contribute to the emergence of a Second Renaissance. Its core activities include developing a manifesto, forming a collective, producing an annual magazine, hosting exhibitions, and creating projects that embody the movement’s principles.

The Manifesto

https://secondrenaissance.net/art/manifesto

Seeking an artistic tribe for an emerging cultural paradigm. For all the living beings whose heart burns to see a new world emerge

The manifesto essay marks the beginning of the Second Renaissance Art Collective. It lays out vision and principles, setting the stage for what we hope will be a new artistic tribe and movement. This work comes from a deep place in the heart, and we’re eager to hear how it resonates with others—whether it speaks to them, intrigues them, or even challenges them. We welcome it all.

The Magazine

https://secondrenaissance.net/art/magazine

As part of our work, we have launched an annual magazine. Our first issue of our magazine is on the theme of Impermanence. Across religions there is often the practice of sitting with the impermanent nature of life. From the five remembrance to the memento mori, these contemplation allows us to grow our wisdom and insight of inter-connectedness.

Exhibition

https://secondrenaissance.net/art/exhibition

Each year we curate an exhibition and a magazine to share the artistic embodiment of transformation for a Second Renaissance with the world. Our first exhibition was on the theme of Impermanence and took place in Thénac France in April 2024.

Come to the Launch

We look forward to welcoming you and celebrating a new creative dawn. 🎉 🌅🎉

Wednesday 28th January 2025, 6pm European CET / 12pm US eastern

Register here on luma - now closed as the event has passed

However, we also live in a world, at least in the west, which has a very strong allergy to religion. So much so, that it is often difficult or impossible to talk about religion — at best, we fall back to half-euphemisms like spirituality; at worst we avoid it altogether.

Nevertheless, it seems crucial to look at this topic given its importance. And it is a topic people are starting to talk about, see for example Wilber's Religion of Tomorrow or Vervaeke talking about the religion that is not a religion.

So in this essay we explicitly broach the topic of religion and look at:

• Why care about religion? Why is it important?

• What do we mean by religion?

• What would religions of the future look like? Are there key common principles?

• What kind of concerns would people have and how would they be addressed?

NOTE: this piece was originally published in March 2021 on Life Itself blog

Introduction: Our allergy to religion

We (i.e. secular westerners) have an allergy to religion because:

1. We think of religion as large institutional entities, primarily coming from a mythic-oriented judaeo-christian tradition

2. That type of religion has been on the wrong side of a metaphysical and epistemological argument with science

3. That type of religion was explicitly engaged in oppression and discrimination for a long time and especially during early modernity (e.g. Pope vs Galileo, the Inquisition etc)

4. Today those traditions have either become so watered down as to have little inspirational power, or, have reverted to fundamentalism which seems anti-progress in key ways (from the climate crisis to evolution)

Personally, I have an allergy because my early encounters with religion as a child were in the form of enforced Christianity at school. For me, this associated religion with force – being made to listen and do something every day at school even though I didn't believe it; and with intellectual coercion in being asked to believe in what seemed like blatantly false or unlikely claims like Moses and burning bush, or Jesus walking water.

However, part of the issue here is the definition of religion. It isn't just a relativising platitude to say that "science is a religion". Any paradigmatic way for making sense of the world ("sense-making") will ultimately have strong aspects of supra-rational belief. For example, those who are strong on science tend to assume that it can ultimately answer all questions including ones like "what is consciousness", "what is matter really made of" etc, or to ignore or exclude certain questions as irrelevant because not answerable e.g. "where did the universe come from", "what is the the purpose of life".

Indeed, the scientific approach becomes least attractive when it becomes fundamentalist, when it turns to scientism and reductionism – when awe is reduced to the firing of neurons.

If we accept this point, we see that:

• Most of us who actually do have a religion or quasi-religion even if we don't think we have one

• Having a religion is almost inevitable to any kind of functioning human collective.

Thus, the question to ask is "what kind of religion do we want" rather than "do we want a religion or not".

What is religion and what do they provide?

To build on the previous points, let's look in a bit more detail at what a religion consists of and what they provide. Roughly, religions provide something like the following:

• An ontological and epistemological framework for establishing what exists, its nature and how we discover knowledge about it

• An ethical framework about what we value and how we should behave

• A set of psycho-technologies for practising/discovering those (ie. ontology and ethics) and cultivating wisdom and spiritual growth including a language/ grammar for these things.

• (more implicit) A set of social technologies for organizing groups and society

• A community of practitioners based on these

The root of religion is "religio" which means to bind together. The first two items provide a common belief (sense-making) system whilst the latter one provides an explicit community grounded in these.

The psycho-technologies are often less directly relevant for the religio aspect (and may not be used that much by the majority of participants). However, perhaps could make a strong case that these are important to key participants e.g. leaders where these can ensure higher quality leadership.

What's the problem with religion?

Religions becomes problematic when they become dogmatic and/or fanatic

The key flaw in most religions is that at some point they become dogmatic, righteous, calcified and stuck. Specifically, they make ontological claims, especially metaphysical ones, that aren't subject to revision or evolution and because of that commitment ended up feeling threatened by developments that undermine these (e.g. from science). They then end up as reactionary or irrelevant.

What this suggests is there are possibly (a few) key meta-features that make a religion more "problematic" vs "positive" (non-problematic).

We can immediately identify one such meta-feature from what we just said: closedness/openness. Closed looks like"we have the truth and it doesn't change". Open looks like "we are committed to these ideas but not attached to them, they are subject to revision in the light of experience".

A second meta-feature is whether the religion legitimises the use of force to impose its views on other groups – and not just physical force but e.g. social compulsion. It is this secondary implication which makes "religion" most obviously problematic for many "secular" people. This feature is also connected to the first meta-feature: the more certain and dogmatic one is about one's beliefs the more willing to use force. It is also obviously more directly linked to (negative) impact in the world.

Often, because of our past, religious is directly used as a synonym for dogmatic as in "I'm not going to be religious about my view X". And it is what we mean in the (negative) sense when we say something like "science has become a religion" i.e. it has become dogmatic and narrow-minded.

But it seems clear that not all the religions we call religions today are like this e.g. Zen Buddhism, Taoism, Quakers etc. Moreover, it certainly seems possible that we could have religions that were undogmatic.

Dogmatism, Relativism and Commitment

Some may argue that dogmatism is essential [to a religion], in that the opposite of dogmatism would be a weak relativism e.g. "I personally believe X,Y,Z but you can believe anything you want and what I believe is no more valid than what you believe and vice-versa".

I think this is confusing commitment with attachment. I can be committed to the belief of X,Y,Z and that it is universally true(r) – that is true for you as well as me and true(r) in the sense of being more true than anything else around at the moment.

However, I need not be attached to it: I can be open to the possibility of it being superseded or amended etc. In fact, if it is belief articulated in language, then it is necessarily only an approximation of any "truth" and hence always subject to revision and qualification.

Religions of tomorrow: what would they look like?

So what are key features of any religion of tomorrow aka "religion that is not a religion", a "secular religion", a "teal religion"?

Before coming to any specific suggestion for the form of a religion of tomorrow, let us first ask if there are general features or principles that should be present in any religion of tomorrow?

We can start by asking how we could identify these key features? One answer is derived from the previous section: if we can identify problematic features in existing religions, then we can invert that feature. For example, if dogmatism is problematic then we can hypothesize that anti-dogmatism i.e. "openness" may be important.

We can also identify the positive features of existing religions and select those. For example, most religions do involve clear, strong beliefs about ethics or even the nature of reality. We could term this "positivism" as opposed to relativism. This clarity and commitment of positivism seems important.

Distinguishing commitment from attachment and dogmatism from positivism

Of course, as just discussed, this commitment can become a problematic attachment or dogmatism. However, it seems essential – though not easy – to distinguish commitment from attachment and dogmatism. If not, we risk throwing out the baby with the bathwater ie. discarding commitment to avoid attachment. This would be as limiting as saying: I got hurt in my last relationship so I'm never going on a date again.

And worse follows: we cannot live in the world without some kind of normative commitments (ontological, ethical etc) – we need some assumed views to make sense of reality, to operate in the world, to communicate with others. Thus, trying to live without any commitment to a worldview is, in fact, impossible.

Nevertheless, we can pretend we don't have a worldview – that we don't have a “religion”. But then we end up in a position where we have a worldview but it is hidden from us – and so all the more problematic. It like an analogy of psychological suppression where my resentment to my father is still there shaping my life but utterly hidden from my view.

And this is often what has happened in modernity: we claim we are not religious but in fact we have turned science or technology or marxism into a religion.

To reiterate: in some important sense, we end up committed to a worldview aka “religion” whether we like it or not. Denying this leads to repression not a lack of a religion.

On post-modernism: the ultimate denial of having a worldview (when in fact you do)

A final aside regarding post-modernism. Post-modernism takes the suppression to its logical extreme.

This is something of the trap that post-modernism falls into as it becomes "religious" (in the bad sense of being dogmatic).

It became so obsessed with denying attachment to any particular worldview that it becomes attached and dogmatic about that very worldview (i.e. that no worldview is better than any other worldview). This is the performative contradiction of post-modernism made famous by Habermas (and Wilber).

Post-modernism is an important example because in many ways it appears "anti-religious" in the traditional conception of religion. It shows how it is even possible to be a dogmatic relativist – positions that at first glance seem to be fundamentally in opposition. But dogmatism can end up concealed inside of an anti-dogmatism. As such, it illustrates the trap that secularism can fall into. This is a first point.

And there is a second point beyond the concealed dogmatism. Post-modernism elevates lack of commitment into something desirable. It makes criticism cool and belief (commitment) at best naive and at worst oppressive. But what kind of world – and especially what kind of society – can you create from such a stance? A very weak and dissatisfying one. To be strong individually and collectively we need the strength of commitment. This can be hard to acknowledge because we have become so allergic to strength because it so often become attachment and force.

We need to re-understand strength: we have come to think it means the rigid, brittleness of iron or glass but instead we should think of the flexible strength of bamboo or oak.

Aside: Is there a contradiction in the last two points? If post-modernism is a religion doesn't that mean it provides the benefits you described including commitment. The answer to that is … yes to some extent it is. Post-modernism does create a collective to an extent, think of woke-ism or social justice warriors. But it is a relatively weak collective. Amongst other things, it has an allergy to leadership which makes it, well, hard to lead. It prioritizes deconstruction and criticism over construction and creation etc. All of these make it hard to inspire, build and lead.

General meta-features of the religions of tomorrow

Having got all of that out of the way, here is a list of some of the key general features – or "meta-features" – of religions of tomorrow:

• Openness / Anti-fundamentalist / Evolutionary: claims are the truth or true(r) and they must be constantly examined in the light of your own and others experience and we must continue to evolve them

  • Pragmatic: do what works …

• Positivist (anti-relativist): at the same time any religion would make explicit ontological claims (what is being etc), normative claims (about what is "better") and epistemological claims (what is knowledge). However, at per previous point, these are not absolutes. There is an up but not a top. Truth is a mountain with no top.

• Supra-rational: the most core phenomenological / experiential truths are not describable in language though they may be pointable to.

  • And yet respecting reason and science

  • For this to work and not descend into relativistic individualism (my crystals are as valid as your meditation etc) you need a rigorous system for validating "expertise" (who is the Zen master). To avoid corruption this should be largely decoupled from any social power.

• Explicit: religions should be explicit about being religions and their associated ontological, normative and epistemological claims.

• Commitment to non-violence: an explicit commitment never to use force to enforce their beliefs.

Specific Beliefs of Religions of Tomorrow

Here are examples of some specific beliefs that could be part of a "religion of tomorrow":

• Inner growth/evolution is possible and important. In fact, the growth that matters is not material growth but ontological growth, that is growth in our being and consciousness

• Inner, ontological growth is potentially limitless: growth is possible as an adult and there is no apparent limit to this growth, at least on important dimensions like our worldview.

• Growth is multidimensional encompassing (at least) spiritual, emotional, cultural and worldview dimensions.

• More than matter, more than mind: we have a body, we have a mind. We interact in a world of matter and mind. And yet we are more than body and mind: we know this because there is an awareness of thought, of sensation. We experience and do not simply react to the sunset, the flower, the rain, or an insight. We experience redness and so on. There is seeing even if no "me" that sees. There is hearing even if there is no "me" that hears.

• Interbeing: Forms and processes over essences (non-self etc). We tend to essentialize ourselves and the world. We create "I"s and things. With these things come separation and error. Just ask yourself: if there is an essential "I" when did it begin? Who were you before your parents were born? Strictly, interbeing is this point plus a kind of ethical stance of recognizing, realizing and acting from our awareness of interwoven-ness with the whole universe.

• Signlessness: concepts (in language or in our mind) aren't real, they are only approximate labels for the mystery of manifesting reality. yet we constantly forget this. Good and bad don't exist. Black and White people don't exist. At least, not outside of our language and concepts.

• Immanent transcendence: transcendence is possible. And it is possible in the here and now.

• "We" are of the nature to die: There is no immortal "personal" soul, no permanent essence of our ego-minds. Like any other form, our ego-minds will dissolve. Remember the five remembrances.

Conclusion

It's time to heal our allergy to religion. After all, we have a religion whether we acknowledge it or not – to live and act in the world is to act from some basic commitments to the nature of reality, a sense of the good etc.

What's important is what kind of religions we choose. Here we have set out some key meta-features like openness and non-fanaticism as well as some examples of specific beliefs that may be included.

Ultimately there are going to be religions "religions of tomorrow" plural. They will likely include evolutionary versions of mainstream religions today as well as entirely novel forms (or radical revisions of mainstream versions).

Lastly, as per the appendix below, religions play a key, foundational role in deep social transformation – the transformation needed for a radically wiser, weller world to be possible.

Appendix: Religion and social transformation

Social transformation requires community and deep intention because …

• Real community is essential to personal and social transformation

• Deep Intention is essential to real community (and to social transformation)

Religion provides the bedrock for real community and deep intention

• that which would underpin real community would look and feel like a religion

• that which would ground personal transformation would look and feel like a religion

• that which underpins deep intention would look and feel like a religion

⟹ religion is essential to deep social transformation

What is social transformation? Social transformation is more than social change, it is a "phase shift" in how we operate at multiple levels: economically, socially and culturally.

What is deep intention? Deep intention is intention that is "ontologically grounded", ie. where the intention is connected back to one's deepest beliefs and commitments.

For example, suppose I say my intention is "I want to do good in society" or "I want to help ex-addicts recover". Those purposes are great but not ontologically grounded.

To see this, suppose you were to ask me "why do you want to help ex-addicts recover or do good in society?" Then you get deeper answer. For example, I might say: "Because I believe this is part of serving Christ", or I may say: "This is acting out my Buddha nature and commitment to the Dharma".

Or suppose I say my "my intention is to help find intelligent life on other planets". You ask why and I then say: "Because I think exploration and discovery are fundamental to our nature and finding other life would show we are not alone".

These latter statements are more deeply grounded in my beliefs about the nature of the world and my purpose in it.

In this 13 video series we explore the minds of elders who have been actively contributing to a unique and transformative cultural movement and dedicated to addressing the challenges of the Second Renaissance.

Captured during the Respond network’s Scholarch residency at the Life Itself Praxis Hub in Bergerac,  in summer 2023, this series presents their profound reflections and insights.

A brief note on each leader:

1. Ria Baeck: Facilitator and systems thinker, facilitating transformative dialogues and fostering collective intelligence.

2. Francois Demange (Metsa Nihue): Renowned philosopher and visionary thinker, exploring the intersections of consciousness and societal transformation.

3. Gregg Henriques: Psychologist and author pioneering integrative approaches to psychology, bridging science and spirituality.

4. Nicholas Janni: Leadership coach and embodiment expert, guiding individuals and organizations toward authentic and embodied leadership.

5. Rainer v Leopretching: Philosopher and futurist, shaping narratives on the future of technology, ethics, and humanity.

6. Thomas Steininger: Scholar and practitioner of integral philosophy, exploring the evolution of consciousness and its implications for society.

7. John Vervaeke: Cognitive scientist and Professor delving into the depths of meaning, wisdom, and the nature of human cognition.

[^1]: we had also planned interviews with Elizabeth Debold and Vivian Dittmar which sadly didn’t happen at the last minute due to Covid!

Interviews, recording and editing courtesy of John Oliver @interiortruth

Life itself is currently working on a sensemaking platform that will offer you an interactive way to engage and further explore this video series through the exploration of narrative analysis supported by AI technology. Our Sensemaking Studio will be focusing on projects across research, community and organisational development. We'll be sharing more information soon.

Watch the videos here in our dedicated playlist

John Vervaeke

Thomas Steininger

Gregg Henriques

Ria Baeck

Rainer von Leopretching

Nicholas Janni

Francois Demange (Metsa Nihue)

As ‘optimists’ we’re committed to the idea that it’s not too late to fix things (think ever steeper net zero pathways dependant on direct air capture). As ‘realists’, we’re committed to telling ‘the truth’ of just how bad things are already (think cascading tipping points and trajectories towards Hothouse Earth). Both well-meaning positions are easier to define through their fierce critique of the other. To optimists, the realists are doomers; peddling de-motivating despair and self-fulfilling prophecies, often with unwarranted certainty. If it’s already too late to solve our problems, why try? On this account, ‘accepting’ the likelihood of crossing the 1.5°C red line is a betrayal of those who will feel the impacts most harshly. To realists, optimists are naive solutionists; trapping the public in a dangerous fantasy-land where incremental change will be enough; leaving consumerist ways of life largely intact. Trusting that smart people are out there fixing it all (and will do so just in the nick of time) we remain passive bystanders as our crises escalate beyond intervention. On this account, optimism is itself the betrayal, preventing publics from coming to terms with the level of change necessary to protect those most vulnerable. 

There’s validity in both critiques. Optimists point to convincing psychological evidence around the demotivating effect of bad news. Realists invoke common sense: how can we expect people to support sufficiently radical climate action, with the sacrifices and trade-offs it entails, if they don’t know the true scale of the problem? In fact, almost all of the experts involved value both hope and realism, and consider themselves to appropriately balance the two (and, rest assured, nobody’s opinions are as simple as we’re painting them here.) However, respective strategies and communication frames, based primarily on one value or another, emerge as antagonistic; their opposing energies tending towards paralysis. Citizens seeking a channel for their awakening climate anxiety are caught between two directives - distrust optimism, for fear of complacency, or ignore how bad things already are, for fear of despair. 

Certainly, neither despair nor complacency is any use to us. Conversely however, both acceptance and optimism are functionally necessary. Acceptance of our current circumstances is a precondition of effective action in the reality we actually inhabit, whilst hope that liveable futures are possible remains a precondition of necessary effort to bring them about. Rather than play strategies based on one value off against the other, what’s needed is a middle way, where hope remains paramount -  but what we hope for is allowed to evolve in-line with current realities and the many possible ways things could unfold.

The Messy Middle: adaptive challenges and opportunities for change

Between total, miraculous solutions and total, eco-induced societal collapse lie a wide spectrum of possible middle paths. None is better than addressing the climate crisis 30 years ago at a cost of only 2% of GDP. All are deeply tragic in contrast to a techno-solutionist dream. Without a sudden global epiphany; retooling our economies for the ecological equivalent of a war footing to halve CO2 release in under a decade in line with UN agreements, we won’t avoid loss and disruption at a scale difficult to comprehend from our current position. Many millions, perhaps billions will experience loss of livelihood, loss of home or worse. Meanwhile, current precipitous decline in biodiversity and wild biomass will increasingly tip over into localised ecological collapse, even mass extinction. Nonetheless, the brighter of these pathways still hold promise of a future worth having for a great many across the world - even a much brighter future, long-term. And crucially, to realise those possibilities, every fraction of a degree of warming that can be avoided is going to matter. The scope of our optimistic imagination must therefore remain wide, and we should practise humility about what we can know for sure. 

It’s our collective duty never to discount  the suffering in humanity’s future - especially for those on the front line of climate impacts. But we are likewise duty-bound to consider whether even catastrophic scenarios contain seeds of needful renewal, both in the medium term and at the scale of civilisation. Our ecological crisis is not an accident; at its very root lies a mindset - a way of thinking and perceiving the world that will continue to manifest destructive patterns for humanity and all earthly life, until we are forced to confront it. A Modern illusion of separateness underpins global institutions and industries: economic "externalities" allow for the unseen costs of pollution and exploitation to vanish from our balance sheets and moral considerations. Yet in reality, there are no externalities within our interconnected global ecosystem. As such, experts often refer to the climate crisis as a “crisis of disconnection” - or more particularly, a failure among dominant cultures to perceive connection with the rest of the world, and act accordingly. The same mindset of separateness that has underpinned centuries of colonialism and extraction is at the root of global inequality, social alienation and out-of-control ecological destruction today. What we face, then, are not just technical or material but adaptive challenges, requiring many of us to rethink our approaches to solving problems and develop entirely new mindsets. A desirable future depends on changing not just our actions but our perceptions and values; our widespread way of seeing the world. And collective mindsets can and do change: particularly in the face of crises. 

Humans are poorly evolved to recognise abstract, diffuse and long-term threats like global warming as a call to deep change. As climate impacts become more tangible and immediate however, dominant cultures will be forced to transform in ways previously unimagined. The acute crises and failure of brittle global systems - that many experts think are now likely in just a decade or two without major course correction - may well serve to catalyse a widespread mindset-shift. We would not wish this upon ourselves: acute crisis will mean large-scale loss of life, failing critical infrastructure and fraying social cohesion, with greatly increased risk of cascading collapse and authoritarian capture. As such we must do everything in our power to improve societal resilience. However, such scenarios may also contain opportunities to develop a collective worldview more attuned to reality and accepting of our intimate interdependence, fostering a culture of repair, regeneration and renewal. Such a collective mindset-shift, whenever it becomes possible, stands to transform not only attitudes towards ecology but a raft of co-occurring crises - alienation, inequality, materialism, nihilism - reining in harm in the shorter term and laying a foundation for a radically better future. This is hope of a kind that goes far beyond our lifetimes. A tall order in the age of individualism - and yet conversely the sooner we are able to envisage such a shift, the sooner we’ll escape the solutionist-doomer binary -  and the better chance we’ll have to keep the curve of collapse as shallow as possible.

Three Fields of Action

In hopefully contemplating this broad field of yet-to-be determined futures, we might imagine three interrelated ‘fields of action’ that call for our energy and commitment.

Three Fields of Action Model © 2024 by Jamie Bristow is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

1. Immediate mitigation and adaptation. 

We must avoid the worst impacts of climate change through ambitious collective action to reduce emissions and rein in ecological destruction. Every tonne of CO2, every fraction of a degree of warming counts, and the hotter things get, the more true this becomes. We must also adapt to environmental changes in the short term, with countries at the sharp end of climate impacts receiving support. The vast majority of climate change discourse to date has been concerned with this first field. 

2. Resilience to future shocks

Action can be taken now to prepare for acute crises or even partial collapse of systems in the medium-term, preserving (some of) what’s precious and ensuring that critical infrastructure, communities and social order are sufficiently resilient to withstand significant shocks. 

3. Foundations for future renewal 

Philosophies and practices that can be foundational to a regenerative society may find more fertile ground among post-crisis mindset-shifts. We have an opportunity now to nurture existing wisdom and develop new ideas and approaches, building ‘islands of coherence’ that could seed later civilisational renewal.

Mutually supportive fields

Action in each of these three fields supports the others, and focus on one need not draw energy away from another - rather, many virtuous cycles persist between all three. For example, increased attention to preparation for future shocks is likely to build public awareness and appetite for climate mitigation measures, and vice versa. Investing in community resilience can reduce unsustainable behaviour and foster a mindset shift towards greater appreciation of interconnectedness. Advocacy for paradigmatic transformation can energise the case for deep mitigation and adaptation. Shared efforts to reduce emissions, protect local ecology and build adaptive infrastructure can strengthen bonds of community; in turn supporting social order and preserving life amid crisis. The greater the effort invested now in all three fields, the shallower the decline we are likely to experience and the better likelihood of renewal.

A Call to Action

The complex crises we face demand that we move beyond totalising attitudes to optimism and reality. We must embrace a more nuanced understanding that incorporates a range of adaptive strategies and actions. This model is intended not as a new, fixed framework for the way things are, but a device with which to loosen up our thinking around the challenges ahead. Reality will be infinitely messier, less clearly defined than this picture suggests - but within this mess, while we can’t avoid some degree of loss and suffering, we can direct our energies towards minimising impacts and preparing for a more resilient and beautiful future.

An earlier version of this text was published on June 24th, 2024; updated 12th July 2024 with text intended for publication by DeSmog.

Jamie Bristow is a writer and policy expert linking inner and outer transformation. He is a Research Fellow and Member of Life Itself and leads on public narrative and policy development for the Inner Development Goals.

Rosie Bell is a writer working primarily in public climate narrative and the inner dimension of sustainability, with collaborators such as the Climate Majority Project and Life Itself.

https://secondrenaissance.net/

It’s a distillation of much of our work over the last few years on this emerging area.

Our current civilization is crumbling, leading to a period of crisis and potential rebirth – what we could call a "second renaissance".

There are many names associated with it: metamodern, metacrisis, integral, teal, liminal web, gameB, regenerative and more.

The Second Renaissance project is a simple introduction to this moment of civilization crisis and awakening - and the emerging ecosystem related to it.

In our experience it isn’t easy to get a handle on this emerging space. There can be a bewildering variety of terms and ideas. We’re hoping to make it easier for people, especially those first encountering it, to find out more and go deeper if they want to.

The project contains a simple framing narrative along with introductions to key ideas, as well as a wiki and forum for community contribution and conversation. It aims to provides an accessible entry-point – a gateway – for people to discover and make sense of this emerging moment and field. A bit like a curated art gallery for an emerging area of art.

Read on for more detail about what we’re creating and why, and who is involved in the project.

Who is involved

The project was initiated by Life Itself and currently has the following team of curators and advisors.

Curators

• Rufus Pollock, co-founder Life Itself — Curatorial Lead

• Catherine Tran, Life Itself Research — Research lead

• Danielle Johnson, Limicon — Onboarding Lead and Deputy of Wiki

• James Baker, Intentional Society — Curator and Social Designer

• Lauren Wigmore, Life Itself — Communications

• Simon Grant, Life Itself Senior Research Associate — Wiki Lead

• Sylvie Barbier, co-founder Life Itself — Design and Narrative

Advisors

• Alexander Beiner, co-founder of Rebel Wisdom

• Daniel Thorson, Emerge Podcast

• Isabela Granic, McMaster University and Liminal Learning

• Jamie Bristow, Mindfulness Initiative

• Joe Lightfoot, Collective Blooming

• Naryan Wong, Cultivating Leadership and Limicon

• Oren Slozberg, Commonweal

• Peter Limberg, The Stoa

• Phil Chen, Eon v Labs and Limicon

• Richard Bartlett, The Hum and Microsolidarity

There’s a growing ecosystem but it’s hard to access

There is a growing ecosystem of people who are recognising the need for social change which is:

• Paradigmatic (or metacrisis aware): seeking a transformation of the entire social paradigm at both a structural and “ontological” (worldview and narratives) level, i.e. not just incremental reform of existing systems.

• Inner-led: integrating the need for “inner” change of (individual and collective) worldviews, values, belief systems, and consciousness – as well as “outer” change of economic, political, and technological infrastructures and policies etc. 

However, the ecosystem is still difficult to discover, engage with, and make sense of. For instance, there are many new terms associated with it: metamodern, metacrisis, integral, teal, liminal web, game B, regenerative, and more. It can be hard to understand what they all mean and how they all fit together. There is a lot of information and content out there, comprising many perspectives and approaches. Navigating all of this can be overwhelming and bewildering – including for us too sometimes. 

How can we help people to find a path into or through this emerging ecosystem which supports them to realize meaningful changes in their lives and the world around them?

We don’t think we have all the answers, but we think there’s a lot of wisdom and valuable collective experience in this ecosystem we see emerging – and so we want to use our own experiences to try to support others to discover and engage with this space. 

An accessible gateway to this emerging field with a framing narrative, key themes and curated content

Second Renaissance is a website offering curated content to help people make sense of this time of civilisational crisis and possibility – and take a step forwards on their own path. Sensemaking in support of courageous action. It’s a resource for anyone interested in rigorous inquiry and wise action to find ways through the metacrisis towards civilisational regeneration and rebirth.

The content will include curated resources such as videos, articles, podcasts and more, that help people learn about and make sense of leading-edge ideas, practices, methods, frameworks, approaches, and initiatives. This material will be distributed both via the website and a monthly newsletter. There will also be a wiki and forum for community contribution and conversation.

Our guiding principles are:

• Curated: so that there is a focused and distinct curatorial perspective.

  Note: this doesn’t mean that what we offer is the only, or “right”, or “best” perspective. However, we will try to be as clear and transparent as we can about our curatorial frame and welcome constructive feedback on our approach.

• Accessible: simple, shareable and easy to understand.

• Public: Open to everyone.

What is a “Second Renaissance”?

In part, we hope to clarify this through the process of curating existing content, distilling key ideas, and synthesizing key patterns.

That said, we do have an initial frame with the “Second Renaissance” referring to the idea that we are living in a time in which the possibilities of civilisational collapse and radical renewal exist side by side. We also use it to refer to the growing movement of people who are recognising this and are engaged in catalysing and stewarding a social paradigm shift in their lives and work based on it. 

Join in

Check out the available options and ways to get involved on the project website here: https://secondrenaissance.net/

You can watch our preview webinar of the project here.

Stay up to date with the latest news and developments via the Second Renaissance newsletter.

Second Renaissance

News and updates for the Second Renaissance - this time between worlds. https://secondrenaissance.net/

By Rufus Pollock

This essay summarizes a jointly developed theory of change. Its central thesis is the need to transition to a new cultural and social paradigm. We set out first why a transition is needed. Second that such a transition must be paradigmatic and involve a major shift in both our socioeconomic systems and in our core views and values. Third, that such a transition needs to prioritize being and the inner dimension.

By Tomas Björkman and Rufus Pollock. Tomas Björkman is a social entrepreneur, philosopher and co-initiator of Emerge. Rufus Pollock is co-founder of Life Itself. This piece was cross-posted in Emerge, 27.1.2022.

This piece is a result of a collaborative dialogue between Tomas Björkman (Ekskäret Foundation) and Rufus Pollock (Life Itself). We’d like to thank Theo Cox of Life Itself for his support in editing it.

Introduction

Through our discussions, we noticed our thinking and work has a very similar perspective on the approach to social transformation – one linking the inner and the outer, the personal and the collective. We drafted this mini-essay initially simply to set out concretely our shared views, approach and strategy.

We have chosen to share it more widely for a few reasons. First, we think that others may find the overall summary resonates with them and connects with their thinking and approach – especially the more general context and challenge sections. Second,  we would like to gather feedback and generate discussion around its content and thesis. Third, it could be an illustration for how other people and organizations create deeper alignment – this material was worked out over several sessions spanning several months.

Finally, we emphasize that this is but one of many ways to understand our current context and how to respond to it. We would very much like to hear from others who feel alignment or tension with what we have written. You can reach us via various channels, the best being https://lifeitself.org/contact/.

Summary

Our key theses are:

1. Transition is Needed: there is an urgent need for a transition from where things stand today.

2. Transition is Paradigmatic: The transition involves a paradigmatic shift that includes a profound shift in worldview (views and values).

3. Transition is Inner & Outer:  the transition involves the integration of the inner and the outer – personal/collective growth as well as systemic transformation.

4. Transition prioritizes Being: whilst inner and outer are both needed, inner development has primacy, that is it should be prioritized and takes ultimate priority (also known as the “primacy of being” thesis).

5. Transition requires Engagement (of the right kind): transition can be cultivated but not engineered. There is a middle way between passive disengagement (just letting it unfold) and arrogant engineering. The challenge is therefore to facilitate transition and cultivate emergence, rather than seeking to engineer it. 

Context

Humanity and the planet are at a critical point in history similar to major breakdown/breakthrough points of the past, most recently the transition to modernity in the Enlightenment. We risk civilizational collapse and we also have the possibility of a breakthrough.

This transition cannot be “managed” or “engineered” but it can be facilitated and supported.

In this vein, we have a sense of what the upwards transition would look and feel like:

1. First, it would involve a focus on inner development i.e. the left quadrants in Ken Wilber’s quadrant model.1 This is a thesis we term the “primacy of being.” 2. Second, there would be an increasing capacity to relate to oneself, to others, to society, and to the planet in deeper and richer ways from a space of greater awareness and (inner) freedom.

Coming to where we are in terms of where we are in the trajectory of breakthrough - or collapse - we have the following, very crude, guesstimates:

First, there is a rapidly growing set of people who sense that things are wrong. That something is not working with the current paradigm – even if they might not frame it that way. We conjecture ~20%+ in places like Europe and North America. 

Second, there is a much smaller subset of those who are not cynical or depressed and therefore potentially active. We hypothesize this group to be around ~2% of the population in a leading edge location e.g. Stockholm. 

Third, and finally, within that there is a subset who appreciate the above and are potential pioneers/facilitators of the next stage. This group is currently very small. Our wild speculation is that this is less than one in a thousand (0.1%) in leading edge locations.

We consider these groups roughly to map onto Fisher’s Personal Transition Curve, shown below.

Challenge

First, without an upward transition, there is a high probability of a downward one, i.e. civilizational collapse. This would be a bad outcome in a great many ways2. Thus, we want an upwards transition.

Second, incremental patching of the old system is insufficient. these issues are foundational and go to the root of the existing paradigm at both a socio-economic and, more importantly, at a cultural and ontological level – the level of worldview and being.

Third, simply “stepping back” and disengaging from our current situation is insufficient too. It is essential to have active engagement and support for a transition.

This must not be approached as a "fixing" of a problem, or come from the same arrogant engineering mindset which has led us to crisis in the first place – but it is also insufficient just to "step back and let the evolutionary process unfold".

Instead, we can focus on creating and shaping the conditions for emergence, through a combination of sense-making faculties that allow us both to attune and relate in a new way as well as to be in service to that which is unfolding.

Metaphorically, we are gardeners, facilitators and improvisers rather than engineers or scientists. Moreover, it is an unavoidable reality that we are a key part of the evolutionary process and not apart from. Our choice is not to play a role or not but whether to be conscious or unconscious participants in the process. Being conscious seems not only wiser but also a responsibility. 

Fourth, and finally, these views have not spread much, especially to the mainstream – that is, the views of the need for transition, its paradigmatic nature, and the need for engagement. Whilst there are "pioneers" (early adopters) they are still a tiny minority, un-networked; and lacking a common language.

In short, there is as yet no self-conscious “movement”. So much so, we don’t even know how many there are, and what terminology to use. Moreover, many who are, or could be part of this, don’t yet recognize each other. At a practical level, there is much that is needed, including:

1. Common, concrete principles, manifestos and frameworks

2. Research and practice agendas

3. Resourcing, especially in terms of funders or academic support

4. Knowledge and working examples of how to catalyse transformation in persons and groups, and

5. Mainstream awareness and recognition 

We emphasize that there are, of course, existing initiatives that, for example, seek to map the ecosystem and connect actors and activities or seek to create frameworks for a meta-network. However, most are very early stage and we need to find ways to do so at scale.

Question

This brings us to the key questions we seek to answer:

• Where are we in the process of bifurcation and emergence?

• What hypotheses do we have as to what will facilitate transition/emergence upwards?

• And, finally, based on that, what would be a near-term roadmap of action, e.g. for the next 5 years?

Below we have included the issue tree generated from the above question. The diagram breaks down the sub-questions we have to answer in order to generate an adequate response to the main question.

Thesis

We are at a very early stage in the Berkanatwo loop model with a few scattered people who really feel the necessary direction of change, within a larger set who are starting to sense something. 

One can set out in detail the plausible steps in a transition and the emergence of a new paradigm and where we are within it. Here is sufficient to say that we think pioneer groups are starting to connect and define key terms and framework for a global movement made of small localized communities, globally connected.

Given where we are in this process right now, we think in the nearer term (3-5-10 years) we should focus on connecting these pioneer groups, while starting to cocreate key terms and a framework for a global movement made of these small localized communities which are globally connected.

Right now, a key priority is identifying other parties and aligning core initial activities, e.g. developing a shared language, research agenda, experiments in community building and so on. A start has been made in this ecosystem mapping project.

Over the next 5 years we are going to start discovery and alignment workshops via snowball referrals in the field. Through these and related efforts we hope to identify key stakeholders and potential strategic partners, and map and connect the ecosystem in a way that supports its evolution and impact on wider society

As inner development is so crucial to this transition, a major focus will be on practices and spaces to cultivate and nurture sustained evolution. To this end, we will work with others to develop deliberately developmental programs, spaces and communities.

Relatedly, we will experiment with a broader range of offers as a way of engagement and finding potential pioneers (e.g. inner development goals, personal development workshops).

We will leverage academic methods and wisdom traditions to inform our approach, exploring various schools of thought and using academics’ knowledge of emerging communities of practice. We can also leverage consulting communities and other professional contacts for connections into the business world.

Finally, it will be important to keep our eyes on the horizon and to imagine various longer-term scenarios (e.g. 30y and beyond) and how they would start to show up. We don’t know yet how these efforts will unfold, both direction and speed, and any signs will help us better to direct and adapt our efforts – just as a gardener nurturing a new and unknown shoot will keep their eyes out for any hint as to its ultimate nature so as to support it with the right nutrients and care as well as to notice early signs of disease or ill-health.

The piece reflects Life Itself’s experience with practically creating developmental spaces in the last five years as well as our research, discussions and engagement with many others. We especially acknowledge ongoing discussions with Tomas Bjorkman and colleagues (whose terminology, borrowed from Robert Kegan’s ‘Deliberately Developmental Organisation’, we have unashamedly adopted and built on) as well as with Oren Slozberg at Commonweal.

By Theo Cox and Rufus Pollock

Introduction

In this time of metacrisis, development in individual and collective “being” is a top priority. But how do we achieve this? The short answer is we don’t know – evidence and theory in this area remains limited. Nevertheless, one promising approach is the creation of deliberately developmental spaces. This idea draws inspiration from a diverse set of sources including millenia old monastic traditions, the folk-schools of 19th-century Nordics as well as the varied experiments in intentional living more recently. In this piece we outline the key features of these spaces as well as some principles for their design and operation. 

A note on terminology

In this piece we will regularly talk about “being” both individual and collective. At the individual, personal1 level “being” covers the whole spectrum of our “being in the world” including our cognitive, emotional and spiritual dimensions. It is synonymous with what other authors term consciousness or ego (e.g. Wilber, Graves, Loevinger etc)2. Thus, when we say “development in being” or “growth in being” one can read “development in consciousness” or “growth in consciousness” or “ego development”.

We use ontology and ontological in the sense of being concerned with the nature and development of being. Ontogenesis (the “genesis” of being) when used is to specifically denote the study or process of how being develops, i.e. the factors supporting or blocking it.

Collective being is the “being” of a group of individuals – its “body, mind and spirit”. This is a little vague and it is simplest to see collective being as roughly synonymous with what we term “culture”: the common network of conversations, practices, artifacts and behaviours of a coherent group.3 For the study of culture and its evolution we use the terms culturology and culturogenesis.

In this time of metacrisis, development of individual and collective “being” is a priority

We are in a time of metacrisis and transition. From the climate crisis to the meaning crisis it is clear that the old paradigm is breaking down. Addressing these challenges and transitioning to a new paradigm will involve an ecology of action with work across all sectors: technology, institutions and being both individual and collective (culture).

Whilst work will happen in all areas, we believe there is a priority to work on “being” – the “Primacy of Being”. Put simply: development of our individual and collective being has priority at this time. Our focus in this piece will be on the natural question that follows from this claim: how do we develop being? Hence, here we will not elaborate on the “primacy of being” thesis and those seeking a more detailed exposition can find one on the Life Itself website.

We still have much to learn about how being develops

If ontological development is so important it would be good to know how it happens and what we can do to support and nurture it.

We first need to acknowledge how little we know and how much there is to learn about the nature of ontological development. For example, at the individual level there is still much debate (and limited empirical evidence) on the dimensions and stages of development beyond childhood.4 And on the question of how that development happens (ontogenesis) our research remains at an early stage.5

At the collective level, i.e. culture, it is even more rudimentary: simply defining and “measuring” culture is still in its infancy and our empirical knowledge of how culture develops is barely existent. Nevertheless, significant progress is starting to be made.

Deliberately developmental spaces are one major, viable approach

All that said, we can make some good guesses on what could work based on existing research6 and the examples and experience over the millenia. Examples include monasteries, Bildung schools in the 19th-century Nordic countries7 or intentional communities in more recent times.

There is also our own recent direct experience at Life Itself and we know there are other similarly focused groups in existence, for example the Monastic Academy (which has locations in Vermont, California and Canada) and K9 intentional co-living in Stockholm. We also see relevance for other communities who have interest in new forms of social organization, for example ProtoB communities and those interested in the idea of a "metamodern monastery".

Three key characteristics of deliberately developmental spaces

Drawing on these, we can hypothesize three key characteristics for environments that would consciously support “development of being”:

1. Space. These environments are spaces in both a physical and temporal sense. They are a site for a group to live, work, practice and engage with one another with shared time that can be dedicated to these ends.  

2. Developmental. These environments are explicitly developmental spaces: their practices and activities revolve around fostering the growth of participants “ontologically”, both individually and collectively. As discussed above, ontological development is a shorthand for sustained development in the capacities which enable us to make sense of and engage with the world around us, particularly in how this relates to our own inner states. This can extend to more traditional education but also, and arguably more importantly, the domains often covered by spirituality and personal development such as emotional intelligence, self-knowledge and so on.

3. Deliberate. Development is intentional in that both the creators and participants are consciously orientated towards ontological development. This may not be the exclusive focus (as it is with. traditional monasticism, for example). However, it should be a clear, conscious and central component of their participation.

Putting this together we define  “deliberately developmental spaces” as:

Physically colocated groups together for a sustained period of time with a conscious engagement in multidimensional developmental praxis.

Key principles for the design of these spaces

In addition to these defining characteristics, we hypothesize the following principles which inform the design of these spaces to maximize their transformative potential at both the individual and social level.

Sustained: months rather than weeks

First, the experience should last months rather than weeks. The kind of sustained growth we seek requires extended engagement with practice and the group setting to properly develop. Practices, habits and shifts in worldview take time to fully embed in any context, and we expect the more time that can be spent with the messy interference and countervailing pulls of everyday reality minimized, the more likely this process is to succeed. 

Collective

Second, the spaces will be significantly collective or communal in nature , though not necessarily entirely so. Our relationship to the collective, and what this brings up in us as individuals, is both a significant challenge and one of the greatest stimulants to our inner growth. This is particularly true for the “interbeing” pillar, which we view as vital for any new social paradigm.

This collectivism also engages with the deeply social element of human nature, which causes our experience of the world to be bound up in the web of relationships and interactions we exist in. The more embedded in a given social context we are, the more likely this context is to impact our ways of being. This thread runs all the way from the cognitive science of human mimicry to the contagion of views and values outlined in some strands of social psychology. The implication of this is that, if we are to shift our ways of being, we must engage at the group, rather than the individual level.

Presence and praxis

Next, spaces will prioritize presence, praxis and felt experiences, particularly as they stand in contrast to theory and purely rational awareness. Despite the caricatures of rational agency which abound in our discussions of economics, and in mainstream discourse more broadly, we are creatures whose worlds are shaped by our feelings, and who cognize as much with our bodies as with our brains. From the role of emotion in social movement theory to the epiphanic transcendent potential of psychedelic and spiritual experience, it is that which lies beside or beyond thought which holds the greatest power to transform our ways of being. If we are to bring about these shifts, then we must focus on providing experiences we can feel deeply and strongly enough to have a catalytic effect.

Integral and multidimensional

We also believe that, to be truly transformative, an integral approach must be taken. This means addressing the various elements of human development holistically and interconnectedly, or, to use Wilberian terminology explicitly, a focus on practices which facilitate waking up, cleaning up, growing up and showing up together, rather than a mere focus on any one of these individually.

This means spaces would focus on engagement with (secularly) spiritual practices such as mindfulness and meditation, shadow work via psychotherapeutic or similar practices as well as other activities to develop sensemaking and other important capacities.

Empirical, open-minded and non-dogmatic

An empirical, open-minded and non-dogmatic approach is vital to ensuring that these spaces fulfill their social potential, not to mention are attractive enough to gain the requisite support. Whilst any given spaces will necessarily be informed by different traditions and teachings, one must avoid indoctrination and dogmatism.

Authenticity and critical freedom of thought are important characteristics unto themselves, but also it is notable that a great many teachings around transformation emphasize that it is a journey one must take oneself, and that can only be achieved through coming to realizations or sensual experiences distinct from what one has been told by others. Thus, deliberately developmental spaces must be structured as containers for exploration, capacity building and asking fundamental questions, rather than attempting to give answers..

Accessible and proximate

If the shifts stemming from residencies in deliberately developmental spaces are to translate into social change, then it seems likely that they must apply to some significant proportion of a given population. Thus, such spaces should be accessible and do their best to remain proximate physically and mentally to the mainstream.

This suggests they should be structured in such a way that a broad range of individuals can participate given the realities of their everyday lives. For example, while spaces may require months of engagement it is infeasible to ask the years and decades expected of monastics. Similarly, the opportunity to continue working (where one’s job allows, of course) while spending time in these spaces will greatly open up the potential for broader participation. 

This principle also implies that the practices, language and broader norms of the spaces are not so exclusionary or ‘out there’ that those less familiar with the ideas underpinning these spaces and approaches are unable or unwilling to engage with them.

Sangha and support

The spaces should create “sangha” amongst participants that sustains them both within the space and, even more importantly, outside and after it. Specifically, whilst the space itself is necessarily physically demarcated it should be embedded in a broader network of support ranging from practice centers to job boards that enable participants to sustain and deepen their growth beyond their time in the space.

The time seems ripe for this 

At Life Itself, we have been researching and trialing these kinds of spaces for several years. The definition and principles above draw on that experience and research as well as discussion and engagement with many others who share similar interests or are travelling similar paths such as the monastic academy or intentional communities such as Tamera.

We are now beginning a new phase of prototyping deliberately developmental spaces in the form of Praxis Hubs in Bergerac, France and in Berlin. These will begin with a series of experimental, co-curated residencies where participants can explore a variety of communally-centred practices ranging from sitting meditation and zen food preparation to collective intelligence and contemplative writing workshops.

Not only are we hoping to use these residencies to model and expose people to new ways of living and being together, but also to rigorously evaluate the impacts of the experience on participants’ ways of relating to themselves and the world around them. In this way, we hope to contribute to and begin to build an evidence base around these developmental efforts, and catalyse a dialogue around how we might use such spaces to shift ways of being in support of social transformation.

We also sense that this is a moment ripe for these ideas and models. Social and technological evolution accelerated by COVID has made “working from home” a reality for many. This in turns makes participation in a deliberately developmental space far easier as work can continue whilst participating. The growing visibility of our varied crises creates a steadily growing set of people viscerally aware of the dysfunction of the current system and in search of alternatives. A subset of  these sense the importance of being and are therefore seeking something like these spaces. Finally, there is a growing practical orientation from communities already strongly aligned with the idea of new social paradigms, for example the aforementioned focus on “ProtoBs” within GameB.

Further questions and looking forward

In closing, we are aware that this article only scratches the surface of the issues and avenues for exploration around intentional developmental spaces.

Of particular importance as we move forward from higher level discussions around principles such as this one, are questions of implementation. Of particular interest are:

• What physical form these spaces should take to maximise their developmental potential

• How they might be funded to ensure they're scaleable without collapsing simply into 'luxury' experiences for the privileged

• How we should design experiments and evaluation frameworks which can both rigorously establish the impact of the spaces while being practical for real world use

• How we might marshall the learnings from other spaces and communities and apply them to new contexts

These are all questions we hope to address in our further work.

Finally, we emphasize that we really know so little that there is immense value in research to learn what works and for whom (and when). We would be delighted to hear from any others engaged in similar enquiries, or who might have relevant knowledge, expertise or even simply interest.

Until then, we would like to leave a provocation for all those who view inner transformation as a vital lynchpin to the transition: what do we do about it?

Colophon

This article was cross published as an Emerge Insight Piece in the lead up to the 2021 Emerge Gathering. This version has some slight additions, primarily footnotes and formatting that weren't compatible with Emerge's system.

https://lifeitself.org/2021/07/14/what-is-conscious-coliving

https://lifeitself.org/2022/06/09/embodying-collective-transformation-with-karl-steyaert

By Rufus Pollock and Theo Cox

Life Itself's approach to social change is labelled ‘Pragmatic Utopianism’. It differs from most other organisations seeking to improve society. Here, we outline the core commitments of this approach and in future pieces we will refine and flesh it out in greater detail. Whilst still at an early stage, we hope this provides a solid enough foundation for discussion and critique. 

The Primacy of Being

"Being" here is shorthand for ways of being. Individual "being" is our psychological and cognitive habits and processes, and, more than that, our way of "being in the world", the way we see the world, the way it "occurs" to us.

Collective being is "culture": the habits of individual and collective thought in the group, the stated and unstated beliefs and values, the rituals and practices. These two forms of being of course inter-depend.

A commitment to the primacy of being implies that being has priority over structure or technology. We, of course, acknowledge the importance of technology and institutions. However, in a context of material abundance it is a transformation of being – at the macro cultural level as well as at the personal micro-level – that will really make the difference: that will take us beyond the ceilings intrinsic to these other forms of collective development and into the realms of a truly utopian society (one that is radically weller and wiser than today). 

Note, the claim here is not that a cultural shift is necessary and sufficient on its own. Advances in technology and structure are both possible and beneficial independently of culture. Thus, we are not arguing for a sole focus on being. This is why we term this primacy of being: ontology coexists with technology and culture but has a primacy with regard to them. Advances in technology and structure, whilst useful, are necessarily bounded with regards to the improvements they will bring for human flourishing — if everyone were a millionaire there would still be suffering and dissatisfaction. It is this boundedness that leads us to emphasise being.

An implication of this position is that what we dub ‘techno-solutionist’ or ‘structural-solutionist’ interventions aimed at bringing about radical social change, from space colonisation to blockchain based economics to classical marxism, are all doomed to fail at root for the same reason. While, of course, in the history of utopian social movements there has been a number of failure modes, we hold that had these befallen them or not, all such movements would have been doomed due to the simple fact that they are inadequate in their incorporation of individual being and collective culture when considering levers for, and impediments to, change.

There is a further argument for the primacy of being in the case of collective action problems such as climate change. Here, a focus on being is essential to an effective response. There are in turn two subtly different forms such an argument could take. 

First, one might argue that if we had only devoted a proportion of the resource we have spent on thus far ineffective interventions at reducing our environmental destruction on work focused on changing our cultural relationship with the planet and environment, and in trying to cultivate a sense and mode of being that is more intertwined with the natural world, then we would be in a far better position with regards to the spectre of climate change. In other words, we might be able to muster an adequate response through other means, but it would simply be more efficient if we would (have) focus(ed) on being. Given the impossibility of constructing a relevant counterfactual for comparison, such a claim is of course hard to support evidentially. However given how short we are set to fall from our already over-modest climate targets there remains quite some intuitive plausibility.

The second claim is that, without a focus on being at their centre, any solutions to such collective action problems will not be as effective as they could, or in fact need to be. It is not that different methods (focus on being vs technology and/or structure) are differently efficient at reaching the same threshold of response adequacy, but that this threshold is in fact different. Such a claim also differs from the first argument for the primacy of being in the following manner: while the first argument holds that, even if we did manage a maximally effective technical or structuralist response to such problems, we would fall short of a utopian society as the human flourishing this entails is a matter of being, and cannot be technically or structurally secured. This argument by contrast holds that, irrespective of considerations of flourishing, without a focus on being our responses to these problems will fall short. How would this be so? The answer is that climate change and other such collective action problems have a common root, and that root is in our being. We could imagine that a flurry of investment makes viable carbon capture and storage technology readily available within the next few years, averting the worst of the climate crisis. Nonetheless this solution, while solving the problem at the superficial level, leaves us little better equipped as a collective to deal with future existential risks and collective action problems. We are then resigned to a high-stakes game of whack-a-mole, scrambling to address each such threat as it arises. To draw on a medical analogy without addressing being our responses will continue to simply address symptoms, without curing the disease. In this sense, they will never be as effective as they could be. 

Political Ontology

The commitment to political ontology amounts at its most basic to the claim that ‘being’ and politics and fundamentally intertwined.  There are three interrelated, yet distinct senses in which we view this as being the case.

At the material level it is a simple fact that politics is inescapable in life — politics understood as the modes and structures of collective organisation. This is as true in the monastery as it is in the parliament. A proper response to the problems of collective action and coordination is necessary for any realistic theory of social transformation; all the spiritual insight in the world is insufficient to transform society without a proper theory of political economy. Thus when we discuss ontology this must always be situated firmly in the political context.

At the deeper level, it is not just that both political and ontological thinking must be placed side by side in a vision for social transformation. Instead, it is that ontology and politics cannot be considered independently at all. The two are so fundamentally interlinked that there is no way we can discuss political transformation without in the same breath discussing transformation in being, and similarly cannot begin to advocate for a change in being without as a part of this also advocating for a change in politics.

Our thoughts around how to organise society are, whether we see this or not, underpinned at their root by our conceptions of the good and of the right. Even in cases where political decisions appear more practically motivated, for example voting on the basis of who will be ‘best for the economy’, these are underpinned by implicit ethical commitments. Questions over what constitutes a good life, how the burdens and benefits of cooperation should be divided and so on are all grounded in our conception of ethics. What we deem to be the ‘correct’ answers  to these questions will determine the way we would wish to see the groups we are part of organised.

This ethical perspective is in turn heavily influenced by the nature of our being. 

One only has to look to the history of slavery, or our present day animal farming, to see an illustration of this effect. A conception of ‘who we are’ as intrinsically superior beings in turn leads to an ethics that sees no wrong in the oppression of those deemed lesser. 

This relation of influence, from being to ethics to politics, also runs in the opposite direction. There are feedback loops between the politics we seek to bring about and the nature of our being. A prime illustration of this effect can be seen in the work of Rawls. Rawls was a brilliant and critical thinker. Nevertheless, when crafting A Theory of Justice, Rawls, a straight white man raised and residing in America, devised a conception of the perfectly just society that bore striking resemblance to the pluralist liberal democracy around him. This is no critique of Rawls, it is simply a demonstration that, who Rawls the man was, and his way of being in the world (to borrow Heideggerian parlance), was a product of the society around him. This in turn shaped an ethics and view of politics that has become incredibly influential across the West, cementing a liberal paradigm which will continue to influence the next generation of thinkers once more.

Yet more striking is the growing understanding of the ways in which our surroundings can influence not only the immaterial aspects of our being like our ideas, but the very physical underpinnings of our existence. A higher level of literacy, for example, has been shown to reduce an individual’s ability to recognise faces as the parts of the brain associated with this ability are reprogrammed to better deal with language. The culture we are immersed in, which can very much be understood in terms of our broad definition of politics, affects the physical form of the organ that most determines how we exist in the world.

The final sense in which we view politics and ontology as interrelated is somewhat more nuanced. Being is political also in the sense that the essence of the good life is political. Remember we are using politics in the broadest possible sense here, simply as the organisation of collectives. This position of course has echoes of Rousseau and his conception of ‘civil freedom’ as democtratic self-governance, but deals explicitly with the good life and human flourishing holistically. Utopia and flourishing, on the understanding used here, are definitionally impossible without politics. Each of us having all our needs and preferences satisfied on an individual basis does not amount to a utopia. Instead, and in line with the section below on interdependence, flourishing and utopia rest on our successful interbeing with others. The pursuit of a good life is a shared, not an individual enterprise. Given this intrinsically collective component of flourishing, we cannot detach our understanding of being from how we organise ourselves together.

Wisdom and The Suprarational

The Enlightenment’s privileging of rationalism as a mode of engaging with the world brought with it much welcome progress across all areas of humanity. In doing so, however, it left a legacy that has seen us throw out the proverbial baby with the bathwater when it comes to spirituality, and all modes of cognition that are beyond what rationality can tell us about the world. Whether this is interpreted in line with McGilchrist’s thesis of the left hemisphere cannibalising the right, the interior view of the Wilberian Upper-Left quadrant being rubbished by the advances of modernity and postmodernity or simply humanity losing touch with the more mystical facets of our existence, the conclusion remains the same.

We believe that the insights and practices of wisdom traditions such as Buddhism offer valuable lessons on how to improve our existence both individually and collectively. Not everything that lies outside of the rational is irrational. In fact we believe that the suprarational domain that has long been gestured to by wisdom traditions, and more recently by theories of embodied cognition, alongside both McGilchrist’s divided brain and Wilber’s Integral Theory mentioned above, must form a necessary part of any utopian existence either personal or collective.

Teachings of wisdom traditions play three interrelated roles in our thinking. The first is that true human wellbeing and flourishing, must be based at least in part on practices traditionally resigned to the domain of spirituality. The growing consensus around the benefits of mindfulness meditation provides one illustrative example here. 

The second is that, when attempting to make sense of the world around us, and act on this sensemaking to make decisions, we must supplement our methodological toolkit with approaches extending beyond rationality. It has long been acknowledged that humans are boundedly rational and that, given the vast and ever increasing complexity of our world, the rational processing of many economic and game theoretic models breaks down. The solution to this is not to try and keep improving our rationalistic abilities, but to also draw on processes that are not rational in nature. Examples might include using embodied approaches to engage with information, or adopting epistemologies in our models of the world which do not assume detached rationalism. 

Interdependence and Collectivism 

The third major insight from wisdom traditions which lies at the core of our approach is that of interdependence and collectivism. There is a sense of ‘one-ness’ that sits at the overlap between spiritual and psychedelic experiences, and experiences of ‘the sublime’ in nature. Similarly, understandings of causation in both philosophy and physics gesture to the reality that there is little in the universe that is causally independent of anything, and therefore everything, else. Working to shed the illusion of individualist separatism is at the individual level vitally important not only for improving wellbeing, but also to facilitate effective action around collective action problems.

The other consequence of this commitment is a radically different approach to tackling social problems and understanding human behaviour. In the former domain we overlap with many in the field of complexity theory by arguing that the fact of interdependence means that vertical, segmented responses to issues as discrete phenomena are hampered by their inability to take a holistic view. Again, the overlap here with the work of McGilchrist is clear to see. From medicine to the social sciences, we focus on parts rather than the whole. In doing so we neglect that the former is often more than the sum of the latter, and that we must tailor our solutions accordingly. Similarly, human behaviour and moreover human beings in their totality cannot be considered in a manner that detaches them from their social, cultural and embodied surroundings. Understanding phenomena such as knowledge and cognition require us to acknowledge the reality of our interdependence with the world around us, and to accordingly take an embedded view of human functioning. The abstractions characterising many more traditional models found in the social sciences are at best inadequate and at worst harmful to our pursuits of improving society.

(Radical) Possibility (aka Utopianism)

As the name suggests, Pragmatic Utopianism is by nature unashamedly utopian. We hold a strong belief that a radically transformed world is possible, and that this world is capable of meeting some plausible threshold of utopia in the flourishing it affords every one of its inhabitants. To pursue true utopia need not, on this view, manifest unrealistic idealism or a toxic, dominating hegemonism. 

We lay claim, then, ‘utopianism’ both because of a belief that society is drastically in need of visions of possibility that extend beyond the current limits of our jaded sense of collective realism and because we view the word itself as in need of healing. Through proper, careful usage we hope to recover the meaning of the term and restore to it the hope that has over the years given way to derision and suspicion. 

We sit apart from many others committed to ‘radical’ systemic change as the changes, and therefore world, we would hope to bring about are almost beyond the reaches of our present, socially conditioned imaginations. While ‘Fully Automated Luxury Communism’, for example, would result in a society radically different from the one we have now, it still falls within the bounds of the imaginative Overton window that exists today; we can still very much picture what a world would be like, and how it would resemble our current one. A world of transformed being, on the other hand, is far harder to conceive of. It is for this reason that we view the construction of this narrative, and the invitation of people to explore the possibility it creates, as such important work unto itself.

See Also

• https://lifeitself.org/2015/11/01/manifesto/

• https://lifeitself.org/2017/04/20/logic-of-our-purpose-and-reason-for-our-existence-scqh/

• https://lifeitself.org/2017/05/23/nine-theses/