The first meta problem is aimed at the ideal of pursuing the "same utopia". The meta-universe is the continuation of social development, which contributes to the "great harmony" society in which "reality and reality merge" and the individual freely defines the relationship. In language, it can be simply said that such a future is "different in the same, and different in the same," but its implementation is not so easy. If the same and the different are difficult to merge, then the opposite of a metacosmic utopia is what Michel Foucault called Heterotopia, a Borges world that weakens language, messes up generic names, and destroys syntax. As some scholars have said, the true meaning of the "yuan" of the "meta-universe" is that in the experience of it, "the alien forces of the future horizon itself" will "shock us", "all the existing familiar things become indescribable, all the stable framework will fall apart"; "It is not a continuation, extension or enhancement of reality, but rather a new beginning, a completely different world, a completely different universe." In this sense, the meta-universe "is the future of the furthest and deepest break from human history and present reality that has ever existed." Although "from the beginning of the meta-universe, humanity will enter into that technology-dominated 'virtual' world with unprecedented depth and breadth," it is not a 'home,' but what Liotard calls a 'depaysement,' an 'unearthly tearing experience from the dust.'" Such a poetically sentimental pessimistic stance is in terms of absolute difference. It seems to indicate that the virtual metaverse will evolve into a new kind of physical space, independent of the current physical world. For only then would the meta-universe be an absolute break: the virtual would become a reality separated from the real.
In such a negative scenario, the future meta-universe does not constitute the present continuity, but some kind of rupture and isolation, an absolute separation from us. Such a "different world" seems indescribable and can only be expressed through a certain aesthetic discourse. From a postmodern point of view, it may be a "heresy" developed from the meta-universe, on the edge of "with the world", resisting integration (Gleichschaltung); As far as the modern era is concerned, it may also be an algorithm-led "dystopia", which is the inevitable outcome of the scientific and technological society, and its "difference" is different from the current world that is still changing. And paradoxically, it is precisely the continuation of the digital society, is the ultimate "same".
But can there really be disconnected isolation? The meta-universe itself is based on the algorithms, machines, programs, operations, and institutions of current society. If isolation is possible, then there must be different material and mathematical relations, and if such conditions exist, it is not what we call a meta-universe. If it cannot be isolated, then the meta-universe is still an extension of this big data society. It will remain a repository of knowledge for human society and will have social properties, such as as a tool for monitoring and regulation. So another meta-question arises: how do you imagine a future that is both continuous and fractured?