Quote:
|
Originally Posted by kramus
I think a key part of our perception and understanding is rooted in our physical structure. We are a duality in that we have a front and back side. And we are a mirror in our bilateral symmetry. This would run our world view on such a basic level that it probably takes some pretty sophisticated mental exercise to step aside from that and see things in another way. I would be interested in hearing about these alternate world views, the exercise or dicipline it takes to truly experience them, and what it communicates to the mainstream understandings we usually use to deal with life.
|
I think part of that would be understanding that there truly is no duality. Between black and white lies grey. Between day and night lie dusk and dawn. There is something between your backside and frontside. There are neutrons that have no charge to go along with electrons and protons. The binary digit system for computers is not natural. It is a creation. Therefore it suffers only the duality we impose upon it. There is a middle ground between male and female. There is hermaphroditic and androgynous (both at varying levels). What is the opposite of a mountain? A valley? Well, then there are the plains. And hills. And dips. Lots of middle ground to play in. Even if there IS a distinct opposite, those "dualities" are almost never the only options on the field.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by genuinegirly
systems are just man's way of interpreting the world, an attempt to place things in some semblance of order. Many times we find our systems to be inaccurate or inadequate. Definitions change as the centuries of knowledge build.
Opposition is one of these human interpretations of reality. A wall does not choose to be the opposite of a door any more than a dog chooses to be the opposite of a cat. These are definitions that we give them out of convenience. It helps us to put our world into context by giving such classifications.
Opposites are not so much an ultimate reality as our interpretation. "To every action there is an equal or opposite reaction" is just a fancy way of saying that all things are reliant upon one another. Movement does not happen by mistake. Good is not always good, bad is not always bad. There are few to no absolutes, situation dictates all definitions that human minds place upon the world.
As the knowledge we have of the world increases, we find fewer contradictions and more coorelations. Thinking along the lines of how we interact is much more effective than thinking of how all things oppose.
|
This applies to the above from another angle. How can black and white be opposites when they are, in fact, both colors? Dogs and cats? Both animals. For something to be coined as an opposite, it must have some similarity. Doesn't this, then, negate the effective of true dualism?