Duality: Can We Do Without It?

The current logical method of thinking uses categories to define a subject in ever-increasing limitations until the individual is uncovered. Not unsimilar to a gigantic game of Guess who.

Is it big or small? Dark or light? Loud or quiet? Complicated or simple? The problem with divisional categorisation is that it ask questions that require an invariable comparison.

How do we define our invariable? A man of 7ft has a different opinion on height compared to that of a 5ft woman in the same respect that an ant has a varied opinion on size compared to a microbe.

Derrida spoke of a nurtured opinion on polarisation. That our perceptions of difference are altered by the culture and society. One is inclined to agree with an added idea of physical and perhaps genetic differences can shape perception. A man of ‘average’ height is both tall and small when perceived by the 7ft man and 5ft woman. There exists duality.

Similarly, circumstance alters perception. At the top of the Eiffel tower and looking down at the tourists below, upon being asked to point out the tall people from the small what are you to say? Is it your distance that prevents you? Your circumstance? Or is it your ‘height’ which now allows you to perceive every person below as small? Circumstantial perception is as important as nurtured and natured perception.

Taking into account natural perception (perception defined by physical attributes) nurtured perception (perception defined by upbringing and mental sculpture by societal exposure) and circumstantial perception (perception defined by current situation, physical, mental, etc) where do we find truth?

When perception is defined by nature, nurture and circumstance, where is the neutral invariable where we can base truth?

One thought on “Duality: Can We Do Without It?

  1. Duality exists, yin and yang, male and female. Each has their own unique properties, but all belong to the same coin, just different sides.

    Aristotle was one of those who started the obsession with categories; though the same Aristotle made one important point of the Golden Mean, which is there are two extremes, and the better option is to go down the middle between them.

    The question is why do we need to concern ourselves with categories? An object exists, but all the qualities of that object are unique to that object will not be found in the same combination in another object. Categories may be pointless.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s