EP53 Hanzi Freinacht on the Nordic Ideology

Hanzi Freinacht talks to Jim about his book, Nordic Ideology; code, depth, complexity, cultural changeability, attractor points, game change, protopia, and much more…


Hanzi Freinacht, political philosopher, historian, sociologist, & author talks with Jim about effective value memes, cultural code, what it means to have high depth, dynamics of cognitive complexity, the changeability of culture & systems, social engineering, compulsion vs seduction, prioritizing subjective states, cultural attractor points & bad attractors, game acceptance vs denial & how they impact game change, relative utopias, a brief overview of Hanzi’s six types of politics, and more.

Episode Transcript

Mentions & Recommendations

Hanzi Freinacht is a political philosopher, historian & sociologist, author of The Listening SocietyNordic Ideology, and the upcoming book The 6 Hidden Patterns of World History. As a writer, Hanzi combines in-depth knowledge of several sciences and disciplines and offers maps of our time and the human condition with his characteristically accessible, poetic and humorous writing style – challenging the reader’s perspective of herself and the world. He epitomizes much of the metamodern philosophy and can be considered a personification of this strand of thought.

One thought on “EP53 Hanzi Freinacht on the Nordic Ideology

  1. The more often I listen, the less I am convinced that this second interview and his second book is really going to take us further. While the first interview was great, especially in his general definition of meta modern and post modern, and the way they necessarily evolve, this interview seems to sink into words and concepts without “spirit” (cant find a better word right now). Having 23 levels of intellectual abstract thinking sounds interesting for one who is measuring these…but do we really want to “measure”? Jean Gebser offers so much room for realisations in just naming 5. The offered ways to further evolve society are all verbal, and not even covering the role of the “symbolic” layer in the way Lacan told us. I find the great enthusiasm for the book really remarkable..probably I am missing something. What?

Comments are closed.