I just discovered the field of Evolutionary Epistemology and found that it's very similar to my idea that culture evolves towards pragmatic truth. I'll show below how I think it relates to Gregg's Tree of Knowledge. 

"One of the hallmarks of evolutionary epistemology is the notion that empirical testing alone does not justify the pragmatic value of scientific theories, but rather that social and methodological processes select those theories with the closest "fit" to a given problem. " 

So, I think that the fitness landscape for culture is the domain of all problems to be solved. Meaning in life comes from solving problems. Cultural evolution is thus meaningful. 

Here are some consequences of cultural evolution:

1) Culture evolves towards increasingly large-scale cooperation because memes that coordinate larger populations are justified by the increasing size of people of shared interest to cooperate around. 

2) Transparency is selected because it solves problems of cooperation.

3) Epistemology progresses out of it's utility, and fiction is selected by the degree it reveals deep truths of human experience. Art is selected by how it reveals knowledge about abstract reality, the human psyche, and human nature.

4) We become more pacified because nobody wants to suffer or die.

5) Commerce and Commodification expand because they facilitate cooperation and increase wealth and growth. 

6) Justice progresses because it solves problems, increases cooperation, self control and dignity..

7) Neoteny increases because it improves learnability, pacification, transparency, and creativity. 

The question is whether or not there will continue to be problems to solve so life will continue to be meaningful. Maybe we'll slowly fizzle out from lack of problems. Many worry that automation will take away meaning, and this could be accompanied by an "end of inquiry" whereby there is no more growing to be done. The cultural superorganism selects for "those who bear good fruit". And maybe for efficiency, the superorganism will expel those who don't bear good fruit in a kind of cultural apoptosis. 

In Gregg's Justification Hypothesis humans became self-aware because of the need to justify our actions to others. In the Global Village, the others are the rest of the world. So everyone will have to provide value to the world in some way. It might not be so bad in that the world might value all sorts of people. 

"A right is what's good for the group for the individual to have"

- Will Durant, The Lessons of History

I think Gregg's theory predicts that we as individuals must eventually make ourselves justified by the standards of the justification system the world converges on. This certainly isn't good news for lots of people. But the group must serve the individual as much as the individual must serve the group.

Will Durant also states that "States will only unite when threatened from without"

And the current threat from without is immigration.

Also, this would imply that the world can never unite in peace. Or perhaps states will even lose justification for their existence as the world approaches sufficient peace and prosperity because cooperation at the state level might be justified by threats from without. Maybe the world can unite in peace to solve problems bigger than state ego battles, such as problems humans have thus far not dared to imagine, such as death and suffering themselves. 

I have an idea about how the Singleton could emerge from the collective and the world won't be ruled by an individuated singleton.

The people draw information out of the web while the web draws information out of the people, along with a convergent justification system and body of knowledge. Of course, it already does this but this will only increase, and maybe indefinitely. This is part of the process of integration into a collective singleton.  Basically, the web becomes integrated and pruned such that it becomes a kind of an emergent meta-ego that everyone participates in.   

Jamie