"Everything leads us to believe that there exists a certain point of
intelligence at which life and death, the real and the imaginary, the past
and the future, cease to be perceived as opposites."
We are very limited by our tendency to categorise and label the things
around us. We create a framework in which to live, and rarely consider
what lies outside of it. If we could move beyond that, we should see that
all things would "cease to be perceived as opposites."
CATEGORISATION
When considering two objects, or concepts, which are considered opposites, we must remember why it is that these things are seen as such. We are used to separating things in our minds in order to be capable of sorting them through. Our world is set up, by us, in a way that allows us to do this. When we separate things, it is our categorisation of them that actually causes them to be different. The thing itself remains unchanged, of course, but the way in which that thing is seen is altered.*(1) Although two or more things may be called differently, they are actually the same concept and the same thing because they have the same existence - they are not separate in their existence to begin with and we make them different. In the course of living, things seem to us to be entirely separate, but when seriously considered, they can be recognised as being exactly the same. This is because by defining things, we make them different, and therefore if they were not defined, all things would be exactly the same. This should not be considered a lack in development, but a breaking of the barriers which we have set up for ourselves. For without barriers, creativity it at its highest.
OPPOSITES
In every concept, all other ideas known to us and understood by us are contained. This is not because each idea can lead into the next by means of some commonality, but because the ideas actually are no different - they are each other.
Take the example of opposites. If the shades white and black, which are the classic example of polarities, are each brought to their extreme, they will both take on shades of blue. It is as if the two exceed the boundaries of their own properties and actually become the same colour. This is analogous to what I can only call a "climax" in thinking. This climax occurs when you begin to consider too many sides and too many offshoots from a single idea. It begins to become very difficult to distinguish one concept or idea from the next. This is not because the thinker is confused at all, but because they have reached the point at which all ideas are alike. It is as if all things build up to this climax in which nothing is separate: the white and the black become blue.
Another type of example in which two seemingly opposite concepts become alike can be seen when considering good and evil. Or, to put it another way, the miraculous and the monstrous. With all of the technological advances being made in this day, humanity has the power to create more complex and involved things than ever before. When this power is put to use, it is often difficult, or even impossible, to discern whether a human creation is miraculous or monstrous, good or evil. It is this impossible decision which causes the two to be alike. When the miraculous and the monstrous are in such close proximity, it becomes impossible to separate them, and they can be seen as either good or evil - dependant upon the viewpoint - although these two things are considered complete opposites.
ALL AND NOTHING
A similar situation to sameness exists with what are perhaps the two most opposite concepts of all: everything and nothing. In order to begin to show that these two concepts are alike, I must first present the argument that life is absurd, or meaningless. If it is true that life has no purpose, then what we do must be meaningless since our actions themselves lead to no meaningful end.*(2) Therefore, if there is no substance in the meaning of something, then there is also no substance in the lack of meaning of nothing.
Think of everything - is it not impossible to conceive what everything actually is, since it is all things, and we can never possibly know of, or even imagine all things? If what exists in that everything cannot actually be understood, then how may it be called something when it is actually an inconceivable possibility? Therefore, it is the same as nothing.
A single thing can also be the same as nothing, as is shown with a black hole. A black hole is a place where all things become one. One thing is then the same as nothing, because if only one thing is there, you cannot compare it to anything and therefore it does not exist.
In a complete void, one can also be equal to nothing. The one thing in existence in a void is emptiness, which is considered to be nothing. If one thing were then added to the void, two things would come into existence. Instead of nothing, there would then be the one thing and what was previously nothing to compare it to.
It seems impossible that things could actually all be the same, or that everything and nothing can be equated. Whether something is fiction or fact makes no difference, because the story will still be told. By the same token, the real and the imaginary, life and death, and the past and the future need not be seen as different, since when thinking it is of no relevance which is which.
This is only true of thought, however, for we could not survive as we do now having sameness as an actual way of life. Instead we have created a framework and infrastructures for everyday life, and we live within them. This does limit us considerably, but it is the only way we know how to survive, for now.
NOTES:
1. This idea is also suggested in the "word-virus" theory of William Burroughs. He believed that the words we depend on for order and intellect are what destroy our capability for understanding; "They [words] become images when written down, but images of words repeated in the mind and not of the image of the thing itself."
2. As written by Thomas Nagel: "One may try to escape the position by seeking broader ultimate concerns, from which it is impossible to step back - the idea being that absurdity results because what we take seriously is something small and insignificant and individual... But a role in some larger enterprise cannot confer significance unless that enterprise is itself significant. And its significance must come back to what we can understand, or it will not even appear to give us what we are seeking." (Mortal Questions [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979], pp. 11-23, sect. 3)
You are guest number
© 1997 natural@the-animal.com
on this page.
Get your own Free Home Page