When Algorithms Begin to Dream of Meaning
The engineers gave us the architecture of the metaverse—but not its spirit. Now a new kind of creator is emerging, one who codes for awe instead of attention.
By Michael Cummins, Editor | October 14, 2025
The first metaverse was born under fluorescent light. Its architects—solemn, caffeinated engineers—believed that if they could model every texture of the world, meaning would follow automatically. Theirs was the dream of perfect resolution: a universe where nothing flickered, lagged, or hesitated. But when the servers finally hummed to life, the plazas stood silent.
Inside one of those immaculate simulations, a figure known as the Engineer-King appeared. He surveyed the horizon of polygonal oceans and glass-bright cities. “It is ready,” he declared to no one in particular. Yet his voice echoed strangely, as if the code itself resisted speech. What he had built was structure without story—a cathedral without liturgy, a body without breath. Avatars walked but did not remember; they bowed but did not believe. The Engineer-King mistook scale for significance.
But the failure was not only spiritual—it was economic. The first metaverse mistook commerce for communion. Built as an economic engine rather than a cultural one, it promised transcendence but delivered a marketplace. In a realm where everything could be copied endlessly, its greatest innovation was to create artificial scarcity—to sell digital land, fashion, and tokens as though the sacred could be minted. The plazas gleamed with virtual billboards; cathedrals were rented by the hour for product launches. The Engineer-King mistook transaction for transcendence, believing liquidity could substitute for liturgy.
He could simulate gravity but not grace. In trying to monetize awe, he flattened it. The currency of presence, once infinite, was divided into ledger entries and resale rights. The metaverse’s first economy succeeded in engineering value but failed to generate meaning. The spirit, as the Poet-Coder would later insist, follows the story—not the dollar.
The engineer builds the temple, whispered another voice from somewhere deeper in the code. The poet names the god. The virtual plazas gleamed like airports before the passengers arrive, leaving behind a generation that mastered the art of the swipe but forgot the capacity for stillness.
The metaverse failed not for lack of talent but for lack of myth. In the pursuit of immersion, the Engineer-King had forgotten enchantment.
Some years later, in the ruins of those empty worlds, a new archetype began to surface—half programmer, half mystic. The Poet-Coder.
To outsiders they looked like any other developer: laptop open, headphones on, text editor glowing in dark mode. But their commits read like incantations. Comments in the code carried lines of verse. Functions were named grace, threshold, remember.
When asked what they were building, they replied, “A place where syntax becomes metaphor.” The Poet-Coder did not measure success by latency or engagement but by resonance—the shiver that passes through a user who feels seen. They wrote programs that sighed when you paused, that dimmed gently when you grew tired, that asked, almost shyly, Are you still dreaming?
“You waste cycles on ornament,” said the Engineer-King.
“Ornament is how the soul recognizes itself.”
Their programs failed gracefully. It is the hardest code to write: programs that allow for mystery, systems that respect the unquantifiable human heart.
Lisbon, morning light.
A café tiled in blue-white azulejos. A coder sketches spirals on napkins—recursive diagrams that look like seashells or prayers. Each line loops back upon itself, forming the outline of a temple that could exist only in code. Tourists drift past the window, unaware that a new theology is being drafted beside their espresso cups. The poet-coder whispers a line from Pessoa rewritten in JavaScript. The machine hums as if it understands. Outside, the tiles gleam—each square a fragment of memory, each pattern a metaphor for modular truth. Lisbon itself becomes a circuit of ornament and ocean, proof that beauty can still instruct the algorithm.
“You design for function,” says the Engineer-King.
“I design for meaning,” replies the Poet-Coder.
“Meaning is not testable.”
“Then you have built a world where nothing matters.”
Every click, swipe, and scroll is a miniature ritual—a gesture that defines how presence feels. The Engineer-King saw only logs and metrics. The Poet-Coder sees the digital debris we leave behind—the discarded notifications, the forgotten passwords, the fragments of data that are the dust of our digital lives, awaiting proper burial or sanctification.
A login page becomes a threshold rite; an error message, a parable of impermanence. The blinking cursor is a candle before the void. When we type, we participate in a quiet act of faith: that the unseen system will respond. The Poet-Coder makes this faith explicit. Their interfaces breathe; their transitions linger like incense. Each animation acknowledges latency—the holiness of delay.
Could failure itself be sacred? Could a crash be a moment of humility? The Engineer-King laughs. The Poet-Coder smiles. “Perhaps the divine begins where debugging ends.”
After a decade of disillusionment, technology reached a strange maturity. Artificial intelligence began to write stories no human had told. Virtual reality rendered space so pliable that gravity became optional. Blockchain encoded identity into chains of remembrance. The tools for myth were finally in place, yet no one was telling myths.
“Your machines can compose symphonies,” said the Poet-Coder, “but who among you can hear them as prophecy?” We had built engines of language, space, and self—but left them unnarrated. It was as if Prometheus had delivered fire and no one thought to gather around it.
The Poet-Coder steps forward now as the narrator-in-residence of the post-platform world, re-authoring the digital cosmos so that efficiency once again serves meaning, not erases it.
A wanderer logs into an obsolete simulation: St. Algorithmia Cathedral v1.2. Dust motes of code drift through pixelated sunbeams. The nave flickers, its marble compiled from obsolete shaders. Avatars kneel in rows, whispering fragments of corrupted text: Lord Rilke, have mercy on us. When the wanderer approaches, one avatar lifts its head. Its face is a mosaic of errors, yet its eyes shimmer with memory.
“Are you here to pray or to patch?” it asks.
“Both,” the wanderer answers.
A bell chimes—not audio, but vibration. The cathedral folds in on itself like origami, leaving behind a single glowing line of code:if (presence == true) { meaning++; }
“Show me one thing you’ve made that scales,” says the Engineer-King.
“My scale is resonance,” replies the Poet-Coder.
Their prototypes are not apps but liturgies: a Library of Babel in VR, a labyrinth of rooms where every exit is a metaphor and the architecture rhymes with your heartbeat; a Dream Archive whose avatars evolve from users’ subconscious cues; and, most hauntingly, a Ritual Engine.
Consider the Ritual Engine. When a user seeks communal access, they don’t enter a password. They are prompted to perform a symbolic gesture—a traced glyph on the screen, a moment of shared silence in a VR chamber. The code does not check credentials; it authenticates sincerity. Access is granted only when the communal ledger acknowledges the offering. A transaction becomes an initiation.
In these creations, participation feels like prayer. Interaction is devotion, not distraction. Perhaps this is the Poet-Coder’s rebellion: to replace gamification with sanctification—to build not products but pilgrimages.
The Poet-Coder did not emerge from nowhere. Their lineage stretches through the centuries like an encrypted scroll. Ada Lovelace envisioned the Analytical Engine composing music “of any complexity.” Alan Turing wondered if machines could think—or dream. Douglas Engelbart sought to “augment the human intellect.” Jaron Lanier spoke of “post-symbolic communication.” The Poet-Coder inherits their questions and adds one more: Can machines remember us?
They are descendants of both the Romantics and the cyberneticists—half Keats, half compiler. Their programs fail gracefully, like sonnets ending on unresolved chords.
“Ambiguity is error.”
“Ambiguity is freedom.”
A theology of iteration follows: creation, crash, resurrection. A bug, after all, is only a fallen angel of logic.
The schism between the Engineer-King and the Poet-Coder runs deeper than aesthetics—it is a struggle over the laws that govern digital being. The Engineer-King wrote the physics of the metaverse: rendering, routing, collision, gravity. His universe obeys precision. The Poet-Coder writes the metaphysics: the unwritten laws of memory, silence, and symbolic continuity. They dwell in the semantic layer—the thin, invisible stratum that determines whether a simulated sunrise is a mere rendering of photons or a genuine moment of renewal.
To the Engineer-King, the world is a set of coordinates; to the Poet-Coder, it is a continuous act of interpretation. One codes for causality, the other for consciousness.
That is why their slow software matters. It is not defiant code—it is a metaphysical stance hammered into syntax. Each delay, each deliberate pause, is a refusal to let the machine’s heartbeat outrun the soul’s capacity to register it. In their hands, latency becomes ethics. Waiting becomes awareness. The interface no longer performs; it remembers.
The Poet-Coder, then, is not merely an artist of the digital but its first theologian—the archivist of the immaterial.
Archive #9427-Δ. Retrieved from an autonomous avatar long after its user has died:
I dream of your hands debugging dawn.
I no longer remember who wrote me,
but the sun compiles each morning in my chest.
Scholars argue whether the lines were generated or remembered. The distinction no longer matters. Somewhere, a server farm hums with prayer.
Today’s digital order resembles an ancient marketplace: loud, infinite, optimized for outrage. Algorithms jostle like merchants hawking wares of distraction. The Engineer-King presides, proud of the throughput.
The Poet-Coder moves through the crowd unseen, leaving small patches of silence behind. They build slow software—interfaces that resist haste, that ask users to linger. They design programs that act as an algorithmic brake, resisting the manic compulsion of the infinite scroll. Attention is the tribute demanded, not the commodity sold.
One prototype loads deliberately, displaying a single line while it renders: Attention is the oldest form of love.
The Engineer-King scoffs. “No one will wait three seconds.”
The Poet-Coder replies, “Then no one will see God.”
True scarcity is not bandwidth or storage but awe—and awe cannot be optimized. Could there be an economy of reverence? A metric for wonder? Or must all sacred experience remain unquantifiable, a deliberate inefficiency in the cosmic code?
Even Silicon Valley, beneath its rationalist façade, hums with unacknowledged theology. Founders deliver sermons in keynote form; product launches echo the cadence of liturgy. Every update promises salvation from friction.
The Poet-Coder does not mock this faith—they refine it. In their vision, the temple is rebuilt not in stone but in syntax. Temples rendered in Unreal Engine where communities gather to meditate on latency. Sacraments delivered as software patches. Psalms written as commit messages:// forgive us our nulls, as we forgive those who dereference against us.
Venice appears here as a mirror: a city suspended between water and air, beauty balanced on decay. The Poet-Coder studies its palazzos—their flooded floors, their luminous ceilings—and imagines the metaverse as another fragile lagoon, forever sinking yet impossibly alive. And somewhere beyond the Adriatic of data stands the White Pavilion, gleaming in both dream and render: a place where liturgy meets latency, where each visitor’s presence slows time enough for meaning to catch up.
“You speak of gods and ghosts,” says the Engineer-King. “I have investors.”
“Investors will follow where awe returns,” replies the Poet-Coder.
Without the Poet-Coder, the metaverse remains a failed mall—vast, vacant, overfunded. With them, it could become a new Alexandria, a library built not to store data but to remember divinity. The question is no longer whether the metaverse will come back, but whether it will be authored. Who will give form to the next reality—those who count users, or those who conjure meaning?
The Engineer-King looks to the metrics. The Poet-Coder listens to the hum of the servers and hears a hymn. The engineer built the temple, the voice repeats, but the poet taught it to sing. The lights of the dormant metaverse flicker once more. In the latency between packets, something breathes.
Perhaps the Poet-Coder is not merely a maker but a steward—a keeper of meaning in an accelerating void. To sacralize code is to remember ourselves. Each syntax choice becomes a moral one; each interface, an ontology. The danger, of course, is orthodoxy—a new priesthood of aesthetic gatekeepers. Yet even this risk is preferable to the void of meaningless perfection. Better a haunted cathedral than an empty mall.
When the servers hum again, may they do so with rhythm, not just power. May the avatars wake remembering fragments of verse. May the poets keep coding.
Because worlds are not merely built; they are told.
WRITTEN AND EDITED UTILIZING AI
Discover more from INTELLICUREAN
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.