The term sensemaking was first used in organizational studies by Karl E. Weick. Different schools of sensemaking (or sense-making) emerged since the term was introduced: Weick's sensemaking in organizations, Brenda Dervin's Sense-Making Methodology, Gary Klein's The Data-Frame Theory of Sensemaking, and David Snowden's Cyefine Framework. Snowden defines the term as: "How we make sense of the world so we can act in it."
Those associated with the Game B scene started using the term outside academic and business circles, discussing a "war on sensemaking." Rebel Wisdom then popularized the word with its "Sensemaking 101" courses. Since then, the term "sensemaker" has been weaponized in the culture war, used by the "Critique Sphere" - an antiantiwoke tribe surrounding the Decoding the Gurus podcast - dismissively toward people whose thinking they think do not make any sense.
I stopped using the term about two years ago because it was one of those terms that get overused to the point where it means nothing. However, it is still a good term, capturing the simple need to make sense of a world increasingly difficult to make sense of. I also like it because sensemaking requires one's sense of things, not just the use of their mind.
An excellent article by
and called Holographic Media details the new era of the Internet as "community-as-media," where online communities shape the experience of the Internet. They speculated on new phenomena emerging from this, one being sensemakers will supersede influencers:When there’s so much noise and so much scamming, where do we find truth and who can we trust? Overwhelmed by the sheer volume of conflicting information, hot takes, scoldcore, and didactic thinkpieces from the Professional Managerial Class, people increasingly trust only those to whom they’re directly connected—whether personally, or parasocially. And this is why non-institutional figures—Substack writers, artists, podcasters—and their wider communities will continue to fulfill the role of Trusted Sensemakers. Meanwhile, corporations and governments will need to cultivate relationships with these sensemakers in order to gain broader trust—and traction.
When people find their “Trusted Sensemaker,” the key is trust. They usually trust them because they take the other side of an issue of people or institutions they have stopped trusting. A failure mode exists with having only one person to make sense of the world for you, with their seemingly superior sensemaking capacities. It invokes weird online “guru” relationships that the Critique Sphere criticizes.
People become lazy with only one sensemaker to trust, especially if their Trusted Sensemaker is a culture war reply guy, compelled to reply to every viral issue via Twitter, motivated more by receiving attention than making sense. In their piece, Caroline and Lil Internet discuss “platform physics,” how the design of a social media platform “determines a piece of content’s nature and its “natural motion” through a network.”
Twitter is good for getting a pulse on how The Current Thing and The Contra-Current Thing traverse the noosphere, our collective consciousness. It is not a good place to make sense of the world. If your Trusted Sensemaker is too active there, so could sensemaking narcissism—the instrumentalizing of making sense to feel special. Substack and “the dark forests of the internet” - non-indexable places such as Discord, Slack, Telegram, and Zoom calls - are far superior sources for making sense.
Still, it’s good to have a sensemaking Rolodex of people whose sense of the world you trust. B.J. Campbell is one of mine for culture war and “egregore” activities in the noosphere. B.J. consistently puts out original content and is not captured by culture war dynamics. Yet, he is not sensemaking alone; he has developed a community of sharp minds, sensemaking in a dark forest at
.Good sensemaking is a communal activity.
***
One of my hobbies has been sensemaking culture and the philosophies that underlie them. This hobby started at University, where I studied philosophy and cultural anthropology. This discipline combination encouraged me to be fascinated by all the cultures and subcultures existing and their philosophical presuppositions, the “deep code” orientating them.
I created The Stoa, a “transperspectival project,” to explore the noosphere's “living philosophies,” the ones people live with that create cultures. Something interesting happened with The Stoa: it became a scene, especially during 2020 during the lockdowns, with some people calling it “the burning man of the internet.” It was one of those things you had to be at to get a sense of it.
The scene phase of the Stoa ended on its first birthday, with the Maybe the End of The Stoa Party.
Scenes, colloquially understood as communities surrounding music genre and fashion, aka the punk scene, are things that influence culture. As postrationalist Sarah Perry argues in her talk at The Stoa, scenes emerged from shared hobbies; something people do for their own sake.
When the hobby is sensemaking cultures and their philosophies, a curious thing happens: a scene that makes people feel seen emerges; this is the most common feedback from people moving through The Stoa. I am unsure why this is the case. Non-judgmentally sensing the deep code of culture perhaps puts one in touch with something sacred.
A scene may need someone to spark and steward things initially, but the collective has to take over once things get going, or the scene will fade. Musician Brian Eno has a helpful term called “scenius,” which is his term for the genius found in a scene and not in one person.
‘Scenius stands for the intelligence and the intuition of a whole cultural scene. It is the communal form of the concept of the genius.’
- Brian Eno
Austin Kleon, author of Steal Like an Artist, riffs on the scencius concept, distinguishing between “egosystem” versus “ecosystem,” arguing that genius is an egosystem and scenius is an ecosystem.
The platform physics of Twitter seems to encourage an egosystem over ecosystem when people use their real names. An ecosystem emerges when a critical mass uses alt-accounts, with TPOT (“This Part of Twitter”) being a prime example, or when people have conscious or unconscious protocols that mitigate the egosystem drift.
Stumbling into and out of a scene has me wondering if one can be consciously made. Futurist writer Kevin Kelly does not seem to think so: “Although many have tried many times, it is not really possible to command scenius into being.” Is Kevin correct, or is his declaration coming from a lack of imagination due to observing past failures?
Genius is the Roman name for the Greek word daemon; one’s guiding spirit. The Stoic philosophers, who were much more mystical than modern Stoics would like you to believe, were concerned with getting into the right relationship with their daemon, known as “eudaimonia” (good daemon). Their pathway to eudaimonia was being virtuous for its own sake, guided by the mother of all virtue, prudentia, or practical wisdom.
Unlike Kelly, I am optimistic “scenemaking” can become an emerging art form, with a key condition required: a threshold of people within the scene is virtuous through becoming practically wise. Or less foolish. The art of sensemaking is important and still valuable if done in a way that avoids the egosystem. However, what is more valuable is scenemaking, assuming it is possible to intentionally bring a scenius into existence.
While sensemaking helps one make sense of the world, scenemaking will create a world that makes sense to live in.
We have a little scene forming at Less Foolish surrounding a practice that makes one less foolish: Collective Journalling.
We have beautiful practitioners who journal daily:
, Holly McFarland, , , , , John Padalilo, and many more.All my postings on Less Foolish are written at Collective Journaling. On Saturdays, I will start highlighting public postings written there by others. Here is a sample from this week:
- . This lovely letter riffs off last month's final public session at The Stoa. Thank you, Nathan. 🙏
“Coming Out as an Ancestor” by
. An exploration of "ancestral memory" and how to become an elder as preparation for an upcoming pilgrimage in Italy this September.- . A musing on the supplement industry and those drawn to purchasing supplements, with their tendency to view their “body like a machine.”
Collective Journaling is a great way to stay accountable in creating a journaling practice. However, the best part is reading the diverse and philosophically rich shares at the end.
If you’d like to attend, you can read the details below and RSVP behind the paywall.
What is Collective Journalling? It is a communal practice that started in May 2021 during Rebel Wisdom’s Becoming a Live Player course, continued to live on at The Stoa, and will now live with Less Foolish. The sessions happen via Zoom and are 90 mins, with check-ins in the chat at the beginning and an opportunity to connect with fellow journalers in breakout rooms at the end. You do not have to stay the whole time. If you are in an antisocial mood, you do not have to interact with anyone, yet you can still enjoy the coffee shop-esque communal vibe. The session concludes with an optional sharing of a passage in the chat. Most of the time is spent in silence together, individually inquiring about what matters most. A lovely group of people has formed around this practice. The practice occurs on weekdays @ 8 AM ET.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Less Foolish to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.