Why do comprehensive systems of meaning—religious and secular alike—recurrently emerge across social contexts? Existing theories explain religion and ideology in terms of integration, legitimacy, or justification, yet they often leave under-theorized the structural conditions under which such systems become necessary. This paper develops a structural account grounded in the intersection of collective dependence and reflexive subjectivity. Human actors are constitutively dependent on asymmetrical collective orders for survival, recognition, and normative orientation. At the same time, metacognitive reflexivity internalizes evaluative authority: actors must be able to regard their own positioning as justified. The coexistence of these conditions generates what I term the self–group interest gap—the reflective visibility of potential misalignment between collective positioning and self-justification. This gap produces recurrent evaluative instability that cannot be resolved through strategic coordination alone. I argue that comprehensive meaning systems arise as structurally necessary responses, providing overarching justificatory horizons that stabilize actors’ relations to sacrifice, privilege, hierarchy, and contingency. Religion and modern secular ideologies are analyzed as historically differentiated solutions to the same structural tension. The paper contributes to social theory by integrating action theory and justification theory within a unified account of the emergence and persistence of meaning.