{"id":126,"date":"2013-10-21T23:05:51","date_gmt":"2013-10-21T17:05:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/enoughsenough\/?p=126"},"modified":"2013-10-21T23:05:51","modified_gmt":"2013-10-21T17:05:51","slug":"sure-we-can-avoid-conflict-by-transcending-opposites-we-just-cant-care-about-outcomes-at-the-same-time","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/enoughsenough\/2013\/10\/21\/sure-we-can-avoid-conflict-by-transcending-opposites-we-just-cant-care-about-outcomes-at-the-same-time\/","title":{"rendered":"Sure we can avoid conflict by transcending opposites. We just can’t care about outcomes at the same time."},"content":{"rendered":"

\"url-9\"<\/a>I\u2019ve been trying to get various UU ministers to engage on the issue of embracing contradictions.\u00a0 I\u2019ve cited Aristotle\u2019s Law of Non-Contradiction to show that, if we embrace contradictions, we can prove any claim (the Explosion problem).\u00a0 We have a new intern at our church who sent me this article.\u00a0 It\u2019s the first real attempt I\u2019ve seen from a UU minister to articulate and defend the Buddhist and Jain logic of embracing contradictions.<\/p>\n

http:\/\/www.beyondwilber.ca\/healing-thinking\/both-and-logic.html<\/p>\n

The article notes the motivation for doing so:<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\u201cSuch transcendence is profoundly healing since it transcends the thinking mind and language.\u201d<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The worry here is that we can be selfish in our desire for healing.\u00a0 It is good to want healing, calm, quiet, etc but not at any cost.\u00a0 Peace that requires us to look the other way at injustice or suffering is not the peace I want.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\u201cThe so-called law of contradiction is still widely taken for granted: A cannot be both A and not-A.\u201d<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Aristotle said that we must accept the Law of Non-Contradiction if any of our claims are to have any meaning.\u00a0 He didn\u2019t provide a proof, he only noted that we MUST accept it on pain of irrationality and meaningless.\u00a0 The Explosion problem was noticed later:<\/p>\n

http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Principle_of_explosion<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\u201cThus, in physics, it was taken for granted that light cannot be both a wave and particle (not-wave) phenomenon.\u201d<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

No.\u00a0 Quantum phenomena have been seized on by Eastern thinkers as proof that the LON doesn\u2019t hold in nature, but this is a mistake.\u00a0 Nature does not even have the concepts of \u2018Wave\u2019 and \u2018particle\u2019.\u00a0 It simply is, and our theories speak about nature in their various domains.\u00a0 There is no contradiction in saying that photons manifest as waves and particles depending on the experimental setup.\u00a0 This is a red herring.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

>the Buddha first taught that the world is real. He next taught that it is unreal. To the more astute students, he taught that it is both real and not real. And to those who were furthest along the path, he taught that the world is neither real nor not real.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Aristotle\u2019s insight applies here.\u00a0 If the word \u2018real\u2019 is to have any meaning, we can\u2019t change its definition midway through a sentence.\u00a0 This is equivocation.\u00a0 It can be very hard to detect, and is a common trick in liberal theology, especially concerning the word \u2018God\u2019.\u00a0 If we care about our beliefs, we have to use one given meaning for a given word at a time.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

So, yes, transcendental resolutions of contradictions are available to us, but they have a cost.\u00a0 Let\u2019s take a real example, mumps.\u00a0 We could say, \u201cMumps are bad\u201d as a way to push for vaccinations of our kids.\u00a0 Jain logic would have us say:<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

1.\u00a0 \u201cin some ways it is”2.<\/em>\u00a0<\/em>“in some ways it is not”\u00a03.<\/strong><\/em>\u00a0<\/em><\/strong>“in some ways it is and it is not” 4. “in some ways it is and it is indescribable” 5. “in some ways it is not and it is indescribable” 6. “in some ways it is, it is not and it is indescribable” 7. “in some ways it is indescribable”<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

This form of seven-valued logic avoids dogmatism, antagonism, and conflict.\u201d<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

If you come to a CDC meeting on Capitol Hill armed with Jain logic, you will be unable to argue for a particular outcome.\u00a0 If avoiding dogmatism, antagonism and conflict is your goal, then Jain logic is for you.\u00a0 If saving kids\u2019 lives is your highest value, then you should bring Aristotelian logic.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Here\u2019s the crux of the matter as I understand it:<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

As soon as I value something, like keeping my kid alive, I have left Jain logic behind.\u00a0\u00a0 Sure, raw nature can live that way, where there is no value attached to whether my kid lives or dies, but I can\u2019t, or won\u2019t.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

So, it may be that kids, their bodies and the mumps pathogen ACTUALLY live according to Jain logic.\u00a0 I\u2019d say that was true a million years ago, in our natural, brutal state.\u00a0 But ONCE WE ACQUIRED VALUES, we left that world.\u00a0 Today, I live in a world where there are better and worse ways to treat my kids, women, gays and the various races.\u00a0 I have grown up.\u00a0 The comforting mist of transcendental logic is no longer available to me, except as a philosophical inquiry.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\u201cWhat has been cut apart by divisive Aristotelian either\/or logic can be reunited by both\/and logic.\u201d\u00a0 Yes, but at a cost, one that is fatal to our values.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\u201cReaching beyond the thinking mind is healing in a profound way. It removes the agitation of the thinking mind and delivers us into the calmness of infinite wisdom.\u201d\u00a0 Yes, but calmness and removing agitation are not my highest values.\u00a0 Because I have certain values, I willingly give up my serenity and oppose their opposites.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

<photo id=”1″ \/><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

I\u2019ve been trying to get various UU ministers to engage on the issue of embracing contradictions.\u00a0 I\u2019ve cited Aristotle\u2019s Law of Non-Contradiction to show that, if we embrace contradictions, we can prove any claim (the Explosion problem).\u00a0 We have a new intern at our church who sent me this article.\u00a0 It\u2019s the first real attempt […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":32,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-126","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/enoughsenough\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/126","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/enoughsenough\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/enoughsenough\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/enoughsenough\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/32"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/enoughsenough\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=126"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/enoughsenough\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/126\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/enoughsenough\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=126"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/enoughsenough\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=126"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/enoughsenough\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=126"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}