Duality: An Intellectual Need
Comparison, the Base of Duality
Before introducing the bulk of this idea, I would like to open by giving a brief description of the nature of comparison. Comparison can be seen as the process by which an items or concepts value is compared to another. Value itself is subject to context which is in most cases reinforced by both sociological and psychological factors that inform the individual or individuals conducting the comparison. In order for value to be determined or comparisons to be made prior, information must be known in order for the comparison to be correctly made otherwise the subjects of the comparison may both be considered equals due to ignorance or completely unrelatable.
The importance of comparison can be seen in human adaptation. An everyday example is the evaluation of eating standards. When hungry, you may want to eat the closest thing to you. What if, for example, that was a sandwich salvaged from a dumpster. You would compare your need for food to the estimated risk of eating out of a dumpster. If you have the means to wait and find a cleaner food source, you most likely will favor forgoing the trash sandwich for something later. What if you make the comparison and decide that the risk of eating the sandwich when compared to the likely hood of finding another meal is very low. This example illustrates how we navigate our world through comparison. Another shorter example would be choosing to take a job less enjoyable because living without an income source is less enjoyable than a disliked job. Our world revolves around comparison.
How We Navigate Our World Using Comparisons
Understanding comparison is integral to moving forward. The purpose of this theory is to highlight the importance of duality and how it can be considered an intellectual law. Lately there have been a lot of headlines and commentaries centered on how the elimination of hate in whatever form must happen. I believe that it is impossible to do so because the complete elimination of hate is also the complete elimination of good. This is in accordance with the biggest point my theory seeks to make: the understanding or awareness of anything perceived whether material or immaterial, provides proof of its existence and nonexistence. Thus, nothing can exist without its non-existence being perceived as well. Therefore, good exists because the non-existence of good can be seen as evil and vice versa. Subjective good is often defined by being compared to what is subjectively bad.
Above is the base concept of the theory. A simple example can be seen in light and dark. While light can be felt, the true nature of light may be missed by someone who is blind. Therefore, visually there is no difference between light and dark within their visual world. Theirs is a world of darkness for which darkness that is left undefined by light and vice versa. Furthermore, because light has not been compared to dark, the very concept of light and dark as we know it does not exist in their world. Because there is no duality to be perceived, there is no comparison making the absence of light a constant. This constant prevents the blind individual from being able to fathom a world of color and light.
This process of comparison supports the need for duality to be perceived. Duality exists for any concept or thought by representing the counter under understanding of anything that is perceived. It is by navigating duality through comparison that we are able decide positive from negative or good from bad. This is wholly based on perceptions that are informed through feedback from the world we are immersed in. In the context of societal issues, duality plays a large role.
If Duality Is Not Permitted, Than Comparison Can Not Exist
Duality is required for any societal thought or ideal to be understood. Improvements made throughout societal history have been through the comparison of competing ideologies noticed through their dualistic existence. Take the induction of the people's senate in Rome versus the previous structure of government. This change was established through the comparison of having representation versus not having representation within the Roman government. We still need an understanding of duality in today's world in order to deal with much more complex issues labeled hate or bigotry. This leads me to my second point, we need hate speech and why it will never truly be eliminated.
Hate speech has become a title that labels ideas or thoughts deemed volatile or destructive and are thus to be removed from societies perception. The issue here is that it is logically impossible to eliminate ideas or topics that are considered hate speech due to the existence of their counterpoints. While the suppression of topics deemed hate speech is very possible, their existence will remain due to the mechanics of duality I previously mentioned. What is more important for society rather than the concept of duality itself is understanding what the purpose duality serves and how we have and continue to use our rudimentary perception of duality to advance across differing societal cultures to this day.
From The Perception of Duality In Societal Issues, To Successful Understanding Through Freedom Of Comparison
Duality is required for the freedom of comparison. In order to illustrate this point, I will use a well-known method employed by those that wish to compare their ideas and garner support the debate method. Let us assume that a fictional debate was to occur. Both debating parties held opposing viewpoints to one another. Their purpose is to present their arguments before the public and allow them to decide on which argument is sound and be supported.
It is here that the role of the audience is of particular importance. The audience will examine all the information presented by both sides and critically compare one side to the alternative. By doing so the audience is examining the duality of the subject of discussion. What appears to be missed with regard to debates of today is the overall purpose of a debate, especially those of a political nature, is for the audiences to decide which idea or side of the concept should be supported for its proposed benefits. The debaters should be focused on informing the audience of all the important aspects of their side of the topic in an effort to provide the listeners with enough information to make a positive or negative assessment. The most important take away here is that if one side is suppressed or barred from presenting information or refuses to share information, then the audience is more likely to make an incorrect assessment.
It is for this reason that I believe such labels as hate speech are incredibly dangerous to our society today. Regardless of the reasoning for why something should be labeled hate speech and removed or shunned, the concept breaks down a system that we have naturally used as both individuals and in society for centuries. All concepts and ideas must be free for comparison in order for true freedom of speech to actually exist. Freedom of comparison is an imperative element to freedom of speech because it is a natural part of our rational process as human beings. This does not mean that all ideas are equal or even equivalent, however it does mean that without understanding a subject’s duality, we are unable to seek out the subject’s improvement or alternative. Before discarding or suppressing concepts due to their label as hate speech, remember that it is through the freedom of comparison and the recognition of duality that we are even able to determine our values and drives. To have free thought is to be free to compare all thought as we experience them. Suppressing specific thought forms prevents the freedom to compare such thoughts there by also eliminating freedom of thought.
“It is better to debate a question without settling it than to settle a question without debating it.” - Joseph Joubert 1724-1854
© 2017 Tylor