A reasonable society. What decent person wouldn’t want that?
As noble as this sounds, language is often deceptive. What does “reasonable” even mean, and why should we all care? First let’s define “reasonable”. Second, let’s define “society”. Third, let’s explore societal dysfunction. Finally, let’s imagine a path forward.
What Is “Reasonable”?
This word is more distinguished than it seems:
“Reason means different things. In our world, one is becoming predatory, the other disappearing like a hunted animal.
The first is what a calculating machine, otherwise known as a computer, can do. At least it can be made to look as if it does by human beings who put in the rules for linear procedures, give it material to work on and interpret the results.
The second is what gives integration to our world. It sees the big picture and sees that the details are inevitably subordinate to that bigger picture.
The distinction is disguised in English by using the same word for two very different phenomena.
Reason is inclusive, balancing rationality with intuition, emotion and imagination. Emotion is not, as some Enlightenment philosophers thought, necessarily an impediment to reason, but an essential component of it.”
Iain McGilchrist, TMWT
Iain McGilchrist is a psychiatrist, brain researcher, and scholar who studies how our brain makes sense of the world in different ways. He argues that, all too easily, we can become biased around a particular way of seeing and neglect other ways of seeing.
“Reason”, McGilchrist argues, implies balance and integration across all dimensions of human intelligence: rationality, intuition, emotion, and imagination. So, when considering a “reasonable” society, we can imagine one that deeply respects and preserves this balance.
How do we know how “reasonable” we are? We’ll come back to this.
What Is “Society”?
Society represents the moving parts of human civilization, comprised of 4 distinct layers: Individuals (our personal perspectives, values, and mental clarity), culture (shared stories, norms, values), systems (institutions like government, education, science, and business), and technologies. All layers depend-upon and are in feedback loops with other layers:
Individuals create culture, which influences systems, which shapes technology. Additionally, technology influences individuals, which influences culture and systems. Causes and effects run in every direction.
Example 1: Social Media
Social media platforms (technology) were engineered by companies (systems) to maximize engagement and profit (cultural values), which normalized distraction and misinformation (individuals). The dominos keep falling – individuals then vote, consume, and build – further influencing culture, systems, and technology – and reinforcing feedback loops.
In this example, distraction and misinformation are the main problems. We can’t blame technology alone – we must also examine business incentives, government regulations, cultural values. We must further ask whether individuals are equipped understand and defend against manipulation.
Example 2: The Economy
Financial markets (systems) were designed by corporations and governments (systems) to maximize growth and shareholder return (cultural values), which normalized short-term thinking and wealth concentration (individuals).
In this example, inequality and unmet basic needs are the problems. We can’t blame capitalism alone – we must also examine lobbyists, cultural narratives that conflate wealth with virtue, and broken safety nets. We must further ask whether individuals are equipped to recognize how economic incentives shape their own beliefs and behaviors.
Social media and the economy are only two webs of complexity.
Let’s look at societal dysfunction more broadly.
Societal Dysfunction
What are the biggest threats to society?
Major ones include global warming, wealth inequality, disease, nuclear proliferation, tribalism, war, misinformation, crime…. and on and on.
How can anyone wrap their head around this?
While no single person can be an expert on every issue, we can categorize them into two general piles:
One type of dysfunction is physical – things that impact our material wellbeing. Think climate, energy, ecology, wealth, and so on. These problems are interdependent and exacerbate one another. In aggregate, they are called the polycrisis.
Another type of dysfunction is psychological – things that impact our ability to understand and make sense of the world. Think truth (aka epistemology), misinformation, tribalism, attention, and values. These are the problems behind all problems. In aggregate, they are called the metacrisis.
Both kinds of dysfunction affect all layers of society.
Why the “Metacrisis” Is Most Alarming
If the polycrisis is the fire, then the metacrisis is the fire engine, firefighters, the hose, and water needed to extinguish it.
We cannot solve problems if we cannot reason and cooperate. Alleviating metacrisis (epistemology, distraction, tribalism, and values) is key to any kind of comprehensive progress. The metacrisis is a major threat to reason, as it skews and fragments our minds.
Imagining a Reasonable Society
El sueño de la razón produce monstruos.
Francisco Goya
(The sleep of reason produces monsters.)
Given everything above, what does “reasonable society” look like?
In the simplest possible terms, a reasonable society means a critical mass of reasonable individuals, who maintain culture, systems, and technologies aligned with the common good. Metacrisis threats are understood and defended against. Polycrisis threats are triaged and mitigated accordingly.
If this is our target, the modern world feels very off track.
Anecdotally:
- Being “reasonable” – balanced across rationality, emotion, intuition, and imagination – is not popularly understood or embodied value.
- The difference between mental and physical dysfunction (metacrisis vs polycrisis) is not widely understood, making it hard to understand why our sense making is broken.
- People tend to focus on layer-specific solutions. Fix the technology. Fix the systems. Fix the politicians. But often fail to see how all layers, including individuals and culture, are also highly implicated.
Individuals are Foundational
(Being Reasonable)
A critical mass of reasonable individuals is key, full stop.
We can talk endlessly about dysfunction and propose changes to systems and technology. And we must. But if a majority of folks aren’t reasonable, those efforts will be stymied.
Earlier we asked a question:
How do we know how “reasonable” we are?
This is not straightforward.
Understanding who we are, including how reasonable we are, is a rabbit hole that takes curiosity and effort. This project, self-investigation.org, helps people explore that. This is Self-Investigation.
While Self-Investigation does not make someone “reasonable”, it helps uncover different dimensions of ourselves so that they might be brought into balance. Further, Self-Investigation offers some immunity from the metacrisis, in that it shows how we can be distracted, manipulated, and biased by outside forces, so we can defend ourselves.
Being “reasonable” is something each of us needs to grasp, define, and validate for ourselves. There is no master class or authority. At most, like Iain McGilchrist, we can consider the evidence of psychology and neuroscience. We can see how the human mind is inherently biased and skewed and learn how to work against that in ourselves.
Summary
Major takeaways:
- Society is complex an operates on many layers: individual, culture, systems, and technology. We must consider them independently and together.
- Moving towards a “reasonable” society depends on a critical mass of individuals understanding themselves and balancing their worldview.
- Metacrisis dysfunction (truth, tribalism, distraction, values) is particularly problematic, because it influences how we make sense of any dysfunction.
A reasonable society is a long game requiring reform across culture, systems, and technologies. A mind-boggling amount of analysis and cooperation is needed here.
Most immediately, there is one place we act: our own reasonability.
We can compare this to good sleep.
No amount of good sleep cures cancer, fixes inequality, or stops a war. But sleep deprivation impairs judgment, fuels reactivity, and erodes the capacities we need to solve hard problems. The absence of sleep is catastrophic.
In the same way, reasonability will not reform a corrupt institution or reverse climate change. But without it, we are carriers of the metacrisis – spreading tribalism, distraction, and poor reasoning into every system we touch. The absence of reason is catastrophic.
Self-Investigation is a tool to cultivate it.
Self-Investigation is not offered here as a complete societal solution. It is a response to one layer of the stack: the individual capacity for reason – clearer perception, better judgment, and less reactive participation. Again, all layers are crucial.
Finally, to the extent we are personally engaged in culture, systems, and technology reform, we can always keep the full stack in mind – and consider their deep interconnectedness.
More Reading: The Full Stack of Society
This article emphasized the individual layer. Below are 5 projects that explore the fuller stack of society. Each emphasizes a different layer as a primary focus but also considers interconnections with other layers.
SI – (Self-Investigation.org)
https://self-investigation.org
Self-Investigation operates primarily at the individual level – helping people understand themselves as thoroughly and objectively as possible. This in-turn unlocks clearer understanding of culture, systems, and technologies. Clear-seeing and cooperation are a precondition of societal health. Self-Investigation enhances our focus on polycrisis by addressing the metacrisis: It maximally positions us as individuals and communities to see things objectively – to understand and cooperate – accounting for as much bias and distortion as possible.
TGS – The Great Simplification
https://www.thegreatsimplification.com/
The Great Simplification operates primarily at the systems level — examining how energy, ecology, economics, and governance interact as interlocking physical and social systems. Led by Nate Hagens, it maps the biophysical constraints that no institutional arrangement can override. By understanding the hard limits of energy and resources, TGS positions societies to make more realistic decisions across all layers. The Great Simplification enhances focus on polycrisis by revealing its material foundations: It shows how our systems are built on assumptions of perpetual growth that physics and ecology cannot support — and that any durable response must reckon honestly with those constraints.
The New Enlightenment with Ashley
https://www.youtube.com/@thenewenlightenmentwithash8465
The New Enlightenment operates primarily at the systems level – examining how economics, governance, and knowledge systems are shaped by incentive structures that concentrate power and reward short-sighted behavior. Ashley Hodgson, an economics professor, draws a direct parallel to the original Enlightenment: just as the 1600s and 1700s required new systems to escape entrenched power structures, so too does the present moment. The New Enlightenment enhances focus on polycrisis by diagnosing the game-theoretic and institutional dynamics that make collective coordination so difficult: It asks how we redesign the systems governing economics, governance, and the determination of truth itself – so that they stop systematically rewarding destructive behavior.
Life Itself / Second Renaissance
https://lifeitself.org/second-renaissance
The Second Renaissance operates primarily at the culture-to-systems interface – mapping the broader ecosystem of individuals and organizations catalyzing a civilizational paradigm shift. Initiated by Life Itself (Rufus Pollock et al.), it frames our moment as analogous to the collapse and renewal of the medieval period: breakdown as a precondition for deep rebirth. The Second Renaissance enhances focus on polycrisis by treating it as a symptom of an exhausted cultural worldview (or paradigm): It works toward a new paradigm – one rooted in inner development, systemic awareness, and the integration of wisdom with action.
Other Projects / Thinkers
The list above is illustrative but not comprehensive. There are other key thinkers and projects around this space. Daniel Schmactenburger (Consilience Project), Jonathan Rowson (Perspectiva), Jim Rutt (Game B), Zak Stein, and others.