In mid-2023, my editor Leo, arguably correctly, urged me to eliminate a long section on terror management theory and what I called “nihility salience” from the book that was becoming “Lifehouse.”

Nihility salience is a guess about why the end of the world seems to weigh so much more heavily on us than even the thought of our own individual extinction: that it’s while we all understand on some level that we have to die, we tacitly count on the persistence of a civilization beyond our death to carry our works and the meaning we endow them with past that point. And it’s the prospect that it might involve an irrevocable writing down to zero of the value of everything to which we set our hand in life that most threatens us about the apocalypse.

Apocalypse means no armature of collective meaning-making will survive to carry the memory of our deeds, our name or our being down to the future. It will be as if we never were. I think that’s why people find the thought so unbearable.

Sometimes I wonder, though, how the book would have landed had I overruled Leo and insisted on finding a place for that material in the book. Because it seems to me that folks might find a theory of nihility salience helpful in moments like the one we’re in now.
@adamgreenfield a bit of a shame... Collapse is now "in" and while I never heard of nihility salience (bit of a mouthful), TMT was useful to learn about.

@douginamug @adamgreenfield have you come across "collapsonomics"?

I had many interesting conversations with these guys, around 2010.

I've no idea what they're up to now!

https://collapsonomics.org/

The Institute for Collapsonomics