Why do human societies generate comprehensive systems of meaning such as religion, ideology, and moral worldviews? Existing theories often explain these systems in terms of social integration, legitimacy, or cultural construction, but they rarely address the structural conditions under which meaning becomes necessary. This paper develops a structural account of the origin of meaning based on two transformations that characterize human social life. First, technological mediation and cooperative coordination destabilize hierarchies based purely on physical force. Second, metacognitive reflexivity internalizes evaluative authority, enabling actors to assess whether their own position within a collective order is justified. When these conditions intersect with persistent dependence on asymmetrical collective structures, a tension emerges that I term the self–group interest gap—the reflective visibility of potential misalignment between the actor’s evaluative standpoint and collective positioning. This gap generates evaluative instability, as actors cannot indefinitely inhabit positions experienced as unjustifiable. I argue that comprehensive systems of meaning arise as structural responses to this instability, providing evaluative frameworks that render hierarchy, sacrifice, and inequality intelligible and defensible.
Ray Naito (Thu,) studied this question.