The fallacy of dualities
Fair. Not fair. Reality. Not reality.
Someone challenged me yesterday to consider the double slit experiment and the principles of quantum physics. Later I was listening to a Ted Talk about quantum biology. The person who challenged me to think about the double slit experiment also challenged me to think about the nature of the concept of time and the nature of the concept of reality. We are, I think, blessed to live in an age where quantum physics and biology constantly stretch our brain to think of a universe which has more possibilities that the tiny boxes in which many of us learned to think. Yet, it seems we continue to get frustrated because of our lack of ability to push situations, people and things into those tiny boxes.
For example, later in the day I was talking to another friend about the concept of fair and how we can come to terms with the fact that life, from our limited human perspective, does not seem fair. Often it seems as if we are asked to either passively accept that which is “obviously” not fair or to keep butting our head against a steel wall fruitlessly attempting to control situations or people over which we have no control.
It would seem that we humans do much better if we can divide people, things and events into either A or B. Either something is good or bad; right or wrong; fair or unfair; one color or another color. It does not often seem to occur to us that approaching life as if people, things, and events were either A or B limits us. What if people, things and events are both A and B? It seems as if we spend a lot of time arguing about or attempting to prove that we live in an “either or” world. Certainly, if we consider the arguments of Aristotle and others about the law of non-contradiction it would seem obvious that something cannot be both A and not-A at the same time. Yet, there are those who would argue that the law of non-contradiction is a metaphysical and not a logical principle. If we assume, for a moment, that this is true, then we can avoid some of the more esoteric or complicated arguments and just discuss an approach to life which allows us to both take a stand for what seems “right” or “fair” to us and to trust that it is safe to not get attached to a believe that it is our job to ensure that a situation has a just or fair outcome.
From my limited perspective, the sense of peace is shattered when I get attached to the idea that it is my job to control other people, places or things over which I have no control. If, for example, person X decides to engage in action B, I cannot stop him or her from engaging in that behavior. The only options are:
To request that my boss, the city government, my partner, a friend, my neighbor or my colleague behave in a way which I think is fair.
To accept responsibility for deciding for allowing that the other persons does or does not do can determine my happiness and peace of mind.
To obsess about, plot a response to, or otherwise totally commit my time and energy to attempting to right this perceived wrong so as to make this situation fair.
To do whatever I need to do to try to assume a position of power over the person who has committed this wrong or caused this unfair situation.
To demand that the God of my understanding listen to me and correct this situation.
To hire an attorney who will use any means necessary (including all my money) to attempt to right this wrong no matter how this action affects my family and my own health.
To clearly alert the appropriate officials of the nature of this wrong. I do not have any control over what they do or do not do with this information short term. If the person responsible is an elected official I might launch a campaign to support someone else the next time an election is held.
To take pride in the fact that I have not violated my core values. My core values says that winning means I have to stand for what seems right or fair while treating myself and others with loving respect.. In other words, I can redefine the concept of winning.
Winning now becomes holding on to my values - to being a person of whom I am proud. This thus allows me to “win” no matter what anyone does or does not do. Using this concept of winning still allows me to stand tall and speak up for what I perceive to be fair or just. It does not require that I force an individual or company to right the perceived wrong. It does not require that I be treated fairly. It frees me from the attachment to winning the argument or the battle. It allows me to know that I am blessed to have the power to treat myself and others with love instead of allowing anger or other negative emotions to set up a barrier between us.
As with quantum physics, it is easy to forget that we live in a system. How we behave affects others just as how they behave affects us. Thus, just as putting an observer (even a camera) behind the double slit screen changes the outcome of the experiment (one can go to you tube for some excellent demonstrations of what happens when an observer is added), how I respond to an action I perceive as unfair affects everyone around me including the person I think committed the unfair act. Their reaction to my reaction then affects me and everyone else. We can imagine the energy particles bouncing off of each there and then back to each other. Obviously if I am angry that is the energy which is bouncing around. If I am strong and loving that energy is also bouncing around..
Written March 31, 2016
Fair. Not fair. Reality. Not reality.
Someone challenged me yesterday to consider the double slit experiment and the principles of quantum physics. Later I was listening to a Ted Talk about quantum biology. The person who challenged me to think about the double slit experiment also challenged me to think about the nature of the concept of time and the nature of the concept of reality. We are, I think, blessed to live in an age where quantum physics and biology constantly stretch our brain to think of a universe which has more possibilities that the tiny boxes in which many of us learned to think. Yet, it seems we continue to get frustrated because of our lack of ability to push situations, people and things into those tiny boxes.
For example, later in the day I was talking to another friend about the concept of fair and how we can come to terms with the fact that life, from our limited human perspective, does not seem fair. Often it seems as if we are asked to either passively accept that which is “obviously” not fair or to keep butting our head against a steel wall fruitlessly attempting to control situations or people over which we have no control.
It would seem that we humans do much better if we can divide people, things and events into either A or B. Either something is good or bad; right or wrong; fair or unfair; one color or another color. It does not often seem to occur to us that approaching life as if people, things, and events were either A or B limits us. What if people, things and events are both A and B? It seems as if we spend a lot of time arguing about or attempting to prove that we live in an “either or” world. Certainly, if we consider the arguments of Aristotle and others about the law of non-contradiction it would seem obvious that something cannot be both A and not-A at the same time. Yet, there are those who would argue that the law of non-contradiction is a metaphysical and not a logical principle. If we assume, for a moment, that this is true, then we can avoid some of the more esoteric or complicated arguments and just discuss an approach to life which allows us to both take a stand for what seems “right” or “fair” to us and to trust that it is safe to not get attached to a believe that it is our job to ensure that a situation has a just or fair outcome.
From my limited perspective, the sense of peace is shattered when I get attached to the idea that it is my job to control other people, places or things over which I have no control. If, for example, person X decides to engage in action B, I cannot stop him or her from engaging in that behavior. The only options are:
To request that my boss, the city government, my partner, a friend, my neighbor or my colleague behave in a way which I think is fair.
To accept responsibility for deciding for allowing that the other persons does or does not do can determine my happiness and peace of mind.
To obsess about, plot a response to, or otherwise totally commit my time and energy to attempting to right this perceived wrong so as to make this situation fair.
To do whatever I need to do to try to assume a position of power over the person who has committed this wrong or caused this unfair situation.
To demand that the God of my understanding listen to me and correct this situation.
To hire an attorney who will use any means necessary (including all my money) to attempt to right this wrong no matter how this action affects my family and my own health.
To clearly alert the appropriate officials of the nature of this wrong. I do not have any control over what they do or do not do with this information short term. If the person responsible is an elected official I might launch a campaign to support someone else the next time an election is held.
To take pride in the fact that I have not violated my core values. My core values says that winning means I have to stand for what seems right or fair while treating myself and others with loving respect.. In other words, I can redefine the concept of winning.
Winning now becomes holding on to my values - to being a person of whom I am proud. This thus allows me to “win” no matter what anyone does or does not do. Using this concept of winning still allows me to stand tall and speak up for what I perceive to be fair or just. It does not require that I force an individual or company to right the perceived wrong. It does not require that I be treated fairly. It frees me from the attachment to winning the argument or the battle. It allows me to know that I am blessed to have the power to treat myself and others with love instead of allowing anger or other negative emotions to set up a barrier between us.
As with quantum physics, it is easy to forget that we live in a system. How we behave affects others just as how they behave affects us. Thus, just as putting an observer (even a camera) behind the double slit screen changes the outcome of the experiment (one can go to you tube for some excellent demonstrations of what happens when an observer is added), how I respond to an action I perceive as unfair affects everyone around me including the person I think committed the unfair act. Their reaction to my reaction then affects me and everyone else. We can imagine the energy particles bouncing off of each there and then back to each other. Obviously if I am angry that is the energy which is bouncing around. If I am strong and loving that energy is also bouncing around..
Written March 31, 2016
RSS Feed