What is wrong with duality?

[Unveiled Artist]

I live in a country based on dualism. We see things right and wrong, up and down, left, and right, and stop and go.

I feel seeing the world in a duelist view can be abused; and, when it is not, what is wrong with that view? When it's not used for "power", gain, or inequality, but just a defining how two concepts or ideas are opposed to each other, what is wrong with that?​

I agree with duality only because it defines the nature of one idea as opposed to another. If there is no duality, then everything will either be right or everything would either be wrong.

If both are right and wrong, how do you explain that as equals? How do you explain the concept that both right and wrong are the same field (non-duality) but then say they are opposites from each other (duality)?​

Believing in duality doesn't mean you have to see the world in two teams. It just means that there are two teams even though they are also on one playing field. We acknowledge that there is bad (say delusions) and good (say enlightenment) and then we say they are both on the same playing field (nature of life-rebirth) without describing one view (say dualist) to favor the other side (non-dualist).

Maybe not being a dualist is accepting both dualism and non dualism as equally valid-not only for others but for oneself as well.

Maybe that's a polorism (can't figure the term and spelling) view, I don't know.

This thread idea didn't come from abrahamic thought or Christianized thinking; though, I think many people will answer it from that perspective. If you can take the hierarchical, political, and scriptural point of view and answer from a non-dualistic influence and perspective, that would be cool. It's not wrong to answer it from a dualist perspective.

We all have duality. We all have what we believe is correct and what we believe is not correct. If that is wrong, why do we identify with one faith and not another? Just try to stray from the Christian view unless, of course, you are Christian or follow a worldview that has power (god etc) as a higher influence on society-it does not need to be Christian or abrahamic.

 

[Twilight Hue]

God. I'd hate to see stop and go without fluidity. *grin*

 

[Unveiled Artist]

God. I'd hate to see stop and go without fluidity. *grin*

Kaha. California roll doesn't mean you didn't stop nor doesn't mean you didn't go. Just means you acknowledge you did both and both exists regardless if you stopped completely or not.

Unless I'm misunderstanding your analogy.

 

[ShadowFire]

Hi Carlita there is a saying that every action has a reaction, that you can't have light without darkness, opposites attract, and that power comes from positive and grounding forces for it to work. I have no problems with duality I think it is an interesting concept in our attempt to understand the complexities of life. I think duality is a perfect illustration of trying to understand the philosophical question: is the glass half full or half empty? Our experiences and our interpretations of what we perceive in life is subjective to each individual to try and understand what exactly is right or wrong in our cosmos and within our souls as well.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Sure, our perception is dualistic. The problem with extending duality to God is that there is no evidence. At the level of truth, evidence is for non-duality - we began as a blob of energy at the time of Big Bang. At the moment, we have no evidence for existence of any other thing at that time.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

I live in a country based on dualism. We see things right and wrong, up and down, left, and right, and stop and go.

I feel seeing the world in a duelist view can be abused; and, when it is not, what is wrong with that view? When it's not used for "power", gain, or inequality, but just a defining how two concepts or ideas are opposed to each other, what is wrong with that?​

I agree with duality only because it defines the nature of one idea as opposed to another. If there is no duality, then everything will either be right or everything would either be wrong.

If both are right and wrong, how do you explain that as equals? How do you explain the concept that both right and wrong are the same field (non-duality) but then say they are opposites from each other (duality)?​

Believing in duality doesn't mean you have to see the world in two teams. It just means that there are two teams even though they are also on one playing field. We acknowledge that there is bad (say delusions) and good (say enlightenment) and then we say they are both on the same playing field (nature of life-rebirth) without describing one view (say dualist) to favor the other side (non-dualist).

Maybe not being a dualist is accepting both dualism and non dualism as equally valid-not only for others but for oneself as well.

Maybe that's a polorism (can't figure the term and spelling) view, I don't know.

This thread idea didn't come from abrahamic thought or Christianized thinking; though, I think many people will answer it from that perspective. If you can take the hierarchical, political, and scriptural point of view and answer from a non-dualistic influence and perspective, that would be cool. It's not wrong to answer it from a dualist perspective.

We all have duality. We all have what we believe is correct and what we believe is not correct. If that is wrong, why do we identify with one faith and not another? Just try to stray from the Christian view unless, of course, you are Christian or follow a worldview that has power (god etc) as a higher influence on society-it does not need to be Christian or abrahamic.

Simply put, duality is a bad mental habit. It's intellectually lazy and provides a myopic view of a world built out of false dichotomies.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Simply put, duality is a bad mental habit. It's intellectually lazy and provides a myopic view of a world built out of false dichotomies.

Can you give an example?

Dualism is saying there are (sorry), two directions left and right. Some things in life is naturally dualistic. We can't make a left and right turn at the same time. This is what I mean. What do you mean?

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

Can you give an example?

Dualism is saying there are (sorry), two directions left and right. Some things in life is naturally dualistic. We can't make a left and right turn at the same time. This is what I mean. What do you mean?

If you are focused on turning left or right, it's easy to forget that you can also keep going straight, or make a U turn, or perhaps that there is a little pullout where you might just park for a while and admire the view.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

If you are focused on turning left or right, it's easy to forget that you can also keep going straight, or make a U turn, or perhaps that there is a little pullout where you might just park for a while and admire the view.

That's true, but that's like scribbling a third answer when there are only two written down. People do it here all the time: "I'm the exclusion" or something similar because some don't want to be trapped in a limited thinking of right and wrong which is different than duality. Duality just acknowledges there are two sides/teams on one playing field.

How do you play the game if you believe you are on both teams at the same time?

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

There are no teams. Or, there are many teams. Maybe there are, indeed, two. But that is never my assumption

 

[Unveiled Artist]

There are no teams. Or, there are many teams. Maybe there are, indeed, two. But that is never my assumption

It's an example of duality. If you have fifty teams on one football field, how you play ball.

Not talking about the playing field. We have many things in reality Just talking about individual things we try to not dualized but their very nature is dualistic; and, that's not bad. I don't know why it's seen that way, honestly.

 

[crossfire]

The only problem I have with duality is what I call "the illusion of duality," or "delusion of subjective duality" whereby one subjectively distorts one perception via clinging to the duality of subjective like and dislike (attraction/aversion) and creates delusion around it. (Notice how these correspond to the three poisons of Buddhism?) Not only does this particular duality distort your perception by "cherry picking" reality, it also leads to real psychological problems by repressing what is aversive (what you don't like about yourself) into the unconscious mind (Jungian Shadow) instead of examining the problem and consciously resolving it. Therefore, clinging to a conceptual "nondualism" in all things by rejecting anything dualistic is actually an example of this harmful subjective attraction/aversion duality that creates illusion/delusion, and your mind can be overcome by this aversion, by this attachment, or by this delusion, and cause you to do harmful things. (See the Kalama Sutta)

Other cases of duality, for comparative purposes, I am totally ambivalent about. Let them be what they are.

 

[NadiaMoon]

I have dealt with many pagans and wiccans who are very much based on the whole duality God/Goddess Masculine/Feminine. I still find it quite annoying. Its not necessarily "Wrong" but when they try to say you are wrong if you don't follow by "Duality" concepts, it's pretty irritating

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

It's an example of duality. If you have fifty teams on one football field, how you play ball.

Not talking about the playing field. We have many things in reality Just talking about individual things we try to not dualized but their very nature is dualistic; and, that's not bad. I don't know why it's seen that way, honestly.

Life isn't football. In real life, in real situations, there are rarely, if ever, only two teams on the field.

Dualism is born in the mind. Culturally, we are taught to think in terms of dualism, but it's a mind space thing; and one that I believe leads to lazy thinking based on false suppositions.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Carlita said: "Dualism is saying there are (sorry), two directions left and right. Some things in life is naturally dualistic. We can't make a left and right turn at the same time. This is what I mean. What do you mean?"

The basic premise in Hindu non-dual thought (Advaita) is that there are two levels of reality. What we perceive through our senses (Vyavaharika - pragmatic) and the real truth (Parmarthika - Absolute). When you observe through your senses (minus discrimination) you will see only duality and multiplicity. But use 'Viveka' (discrimination), think (what the universe started with) and you will see non-duality only. The perceived is only a mirage, 'maya'.

 

[whirlingmerc]

Evil is not the dual of good, rather a corruption of the good.

 

[Aštra’el]

^
Let us imagine that the above image is humanity's collective subjective universe. Some people only allow themselves to see the white and the black, and attempt to perceive everything in between as either belonging to the white or belonging to the black. Their subjective universe then becomes this:

 

[buddhist]

Dualism is the nature of samsara - like a pendulum which incessantly goes back and forth between two extremes. Nothing is inherently wrong with dualism, if you embrace samsara. Nothing is inherently wrong with samsara, it's just what it is.

Transcending dualism is nibbana, when the pendulum is finally at rest.

 

[atanu]

I live in a country based on dualism. We see things right and wrong, up and down, left, and right, and stop and go.

I feel seeing the world in a duelist view can be abused; and, when it is not, what is wrong with that view? When it's not used for "power", gain, or inequality, but just a defining how two concepts or ideas are opposed to each other, what is wrong with that?​

I agree with duality only because it defines the nature of one idea as opposed to another. If there is no duality, then everything will either be right or everything would either be wrong.

If both are right and wrong, how do you explain that as equals? How do you explain the concept that both right and wrong are the same field (non-duality) but then say they are opposites from each other (duality)?​

Believing in duality doesn't mean you have to see the world in two teams. It just means that there are two teams even though they are also on one playing field. We acknowledge that there is bad (say delusions) and good (say enlightenment) and then we say they are both on the same playing field (nature of life-rebirth) without describing one view (say dualist) to favor the other side (non-dualist).

Maybe not being a dualist is accepting both dualism and non dualism as equally valid-not only for others but for oneself as well.

Maybe that's a polorism (can't figure the term and spelling) view, I don't know.

This thread idea didn't come from abrahamic thought or Christianized thinking; though, I think many people will answer it from that perspective. If you can take the hierarchical, political, and scriptural point of view and answer from a non-dualistic influence and perspective, that would be cool. It's not wrong to answer it from a dualist perspective.

We all have duality. We all have what we believe is correct and what we believe is not correct. If that is wrong, why do we identify with one faith and not another? Just try to stray from the Christian view unless, of course, you are Christian or follow a worldview that has power (god etc) as a higher influence on society-it does not need to be Christian or abrahamic.

Duality is a product of the non dual. Realising that is of immense value.

But, I agree to the OP, since most who oppose duality do it from within duality. They thrive because of duality.

 

[whirlingmerc]

^
Let us imagine that the above image is humanity's collective subjective universe. Some people only allow themselves to see the white and the black, and attempt to perceive everything in between as either belonging to the white or belonging to the black. Their subjective universe then becomes this:

I didn't it find vary satisfying that Darth Vader was born to 'bring balance' to the force after 1000 years of peace under the Jedi

I find complementarianism more satisfying. A husband and wife complements each others strengths and weaknesses, different roles at times but equal value and worth Together the male and female perspectives reach better decisions than one view alone.