How to make sense of polarities?
Left or right, capitalism or socialism, man or woman.
“I would like to ask a philosopher about polarities, left or right, capitalism or socialism, man or woman. To make sense of that duality.”
Making sense of that duality is simple for a natural philosopher. Someone who followed the rules of nature, the observable universe and the one we don’t see.
In the universe, nothing is dual. Everything simply is, and exists. The universe has nothing to choose from. There are no choices. So, that marked duality that we perceive is not natural. Those dualities are manufactured by human beings.
So, if they are created, but we perceive them as dominating or irritating, why are they created?
Someone benefits if you reflect on a fictitious dilemma. In most situations the doubt benefits the two parties establishing the doubt.
A simple example, soda drinks. How many times have you been asked: Coke or Pepsi? While you, as an intelligent human being, only drink water.
The question shifts from: “what do you want to drink?” to the competition between two rivals. They both benefit from each other. One option uses the other to make itself stronger.
They use their joint efforts to become better known, and in doing so, set themselves apart from the competition. By generating debate between the two brands, they benefit because they are on everyone’s lips.
Your brain activity shifts from what do I really want?, to a simple and predetermined answer. Thinking between the two options is easier, requires less expenditure of brain energy, and is more satisfying when you get what you think you want.
Another example is football (soccer) or any sport where the fans are influential. For example, in Argentina, you have two clubs that are the most famous. Boca Juniors and River Plate.
As a result of the enmity they had from the start, they became the most famous and largest band together. The neighbors acclaimed one or the other. The rivalry led them to want to stand out, and in the culture one or the other is chosen.
Half the country stops when these two teams play in a so-called “classic”. Many more people watch it on television. It has a supposedly special character, but in the end, the points that can be earned are the same as any other game.
There are fans who watch the rival club’s games, cheering for their rival’s rival. They do not realize that this generates revenue for their rival through the number of spectators watching. Due to this, both teams grow, and the gap with the other teams remains.
Something similar happens with politics: right-wing or left-wing. It is impossible to be more dual. The problem is that the right is well-defined in its ideals, and the left is also well-defined in its ideals. As a result, when discussing the problems facing a society, solutions are sought within predetermined frameworks.
And when you are asked to vote, you choose one or another pre-established framework that promises to solve the problems. But basically all they do is maintain that dual structure with its differences.
It’s really a preset framework with two fixed choices, which each represent the interests of one group over the interests of the other group.
By definition, neither group is able to come up with a strategy that will help everyone and thus solve all the problems. Basically, the political system is designed to maintain the political system, not to provide solutions that benefit the entire group or members of society.
A duality is a way of conditioning you to think one way or the other.
The conditioning is subtle and few realize it. No matter which option you choose, the most critical thing is that you do not think about what you really want, or desire, or what is convenient for you.
The next time you are presented with a duality, understand that it is a method of conditioning your thinking to make a preset decision.
What should I really drink? What is the real solution to all of society’s problems?
