Paradigm Myth

ByDan March 21, 2026March 21, 2026 March 21, 2026

We’ll define a paradigm myth as:

A paradigm myth is a set of implicit, unexamined assumptions that coordinate behavior and create value within a given environment, but become maladaptive when underlying conditions fundamentally change.

A paradigm myth has four properties:

1. Invisibility: It feels like reality, not a belief.
2. Coordination Power: It aligns large groups toward shared action.
3. Embedded Incentives: Careers, institutions, identities depend on it.
4. Terminal Fragility: It fails suddenly when underlying conditions shift.

In this brief article I’ll argue that human beings at the time of this writing (March 2026) have a paradigm myth problem.

We are anchored in a worldview that not only no longer really serves us, but will actively lead to the failure of our greater goal. Our paradigmatic frame must expand beyond anthropocentrism to cosmism, beyond a focus on the human (torch) and more to a focus of the greater process-of-life (flame).

We can make this tangible through a few quick examples:

Kodak

If you worked at Kodak corporation in 1989, you’d be working at a Fortune 18 company that had been growing for a century on the back of dominance / proliferation / innovations in film photography. It would behoove you – and your colleagues – to believe: “No matter what, film will always exist as the primary medium of photography, and the basis of of the value that Kodak brings to the world.”

But, of course, that myth didn’t serve Kodak during the transition to digital photography, and the company fell into insignificance by adhering too long to a myth that once served it.

It went like this:

• The film forever paradigm myth was formed from experience (film photography really did become very popular for a long time).
• It became unquestioned.
• Mostly, that unquestioned-ness was useful, and was incentivized to be adhered to (imagine being the person in the Kodak board room in the 1990s who said “Guys, it might be the case that within one generation, we’ll go from 99% of all photos being on film to under 1% of photos being on film – we should consider how to transform proactively“? They’d laugh you out of the room as a wack job – and a heretic).
• But then the myth was unsuited to a new reality, and adherence to it was the very opposite of adaptive for the greater purpose at hand (in this case: The survival of Kodak, the value Kodak could bring to the world and to its shareholders, and the further development of photography as a powerful technology).

Homo Sapiens

As a human living in the 21st century, you’re part of the species that has dominated the planet so thoroughly as to have defined an epoch (Anthropocene). It seems like it behooves you – and your fellow hominids – to believe: “No matter what, homo sapiens sapiens is the main locus of moral value and volition until the heat death of the universe.”

But already, we’re seeing dozens of countervailing evidence against the idea of the eternal hominid kingdom:

• Human beings will increasingly have relationships with AI, and live mostly in immersive AI worlds rather than the “real” one.
• AI will appear to have traits very much like life, and questions of AI consciousness and moral patienthood will become more and more prevalent and important in technical and policy discourse.
• Cognitive enhancements will become viable, permitting some humans to have vastly more cognitive ability, memory, than unaugmented humans.
• The entire economy may be run by vastly more capable, fast, and proactive AI systems – buffering humans out of any position of relevance not just in the muck-work, but in the strategy, vision, and creative roles.

The certainty of the “human form” remaining static will evaporate, humanity (like the rest of life) will be seen clearly as part of a greater emergent process – dismantling the entire foundation of our current paradigm myth.

It will go down like this:

• The homo-sapien-as-main-character paradigm myth was formed from experience (film photography really did become very popular for a long time).
• It has become unquestioned.
• Mostly, that unquestioned-ness was useful, and was incentivized to be adhered to (imagine being the guy in 2026 saying “Guys, it might be the case that within one generation, we’ll go from an entirely human-led world order to a scenario where new forms of emergent life emerge and evolve so quickly as to buffer un-augmented homo sapiens out of existence – we should consider how to transform proactively”? They’d laugh you out of the room as a wack job – and a heretic. In this case I know this from experience).
• But the myth is unsuited to our new reality, and adherence to it was the very opposite of adaptive for the greater purpose at hand (in this case: The survival of earth-life, and the persistence of those most precious things about humanity and human civilization into the next emergent forms of life in the cosmos).

Our Paradigm Must Shift as Our Conditions Shift

A paradigm myth:

• Is not consciously held as a belief – it’s the background assumption that makes belief possible.
• Is adaptive in one era (it coordinates action, reduces uncertainty, aligns incentives).
• Becomes maladaptive at phase transition boundaries (new substrates of value emerge).
• Persists because questioning it dissolves coherence and identity.

In other words: It is true enough to build a world, until it prevents you from surviving the next one.

Kodak could have asked:

• What makes film photography special? What do we value about it that we want to survive, even if its form doesn’t stay the same?

But instead they asked:

• How can we make sure that film photography survives forever, and remains our biggest cash cow indefinitely?

Humanity must ask:

• What makes humanity / human civilization special? What do we value about it that we want to preserve or expand, even if its form doesn’t stay the same forever?

And we must avoid asking:

• How can we make sure that humanity-as-it-is survives forever, remaining the pinnacle of moral value and volition until the heat death of the universe?

Meiji Japan saw the price of stagnation (the West’s domination of India and China via technological and scientific development), and they decided to boldly adapt – keeping as much of their values as possible, but adjusting them into a new, faster, more complex international state-of-nature.

The fate of man the same fate as all other temporary forms: Attenuation or transformation.

For this reason, we must collaborate to discern what a positive transformation for life itself might be – and how we can contribute to and move towards this positive future.

We must have the courage that Kodak executives lacked – and that Meiji Japan’s exemplified.

We must have the courage to create a better, more robust paradigm myth.

…

Note: This article is remarkably short because I didn’t have much time to write it, but I hope the point made its way through regardless. This idea of the paradigm myth was originally created in preparation for our first Worthy Successor NYC event (see tweet below), which happened during the week of the UN General Assembly in September of 2025. The ideas from my keynote (not recorded) from this event became the essay How to Care About the Future.