Can anyone resolve the duality paradox?

[enchanted]

The duality paradox I'm referring to relates to Leo's video on "all dualities must collapse".

We see dualities everywhere: child vs adult, night vs day, dead v alive, outside v inside, stage blue v stage orange. Leo, philosophers, and sociologists correctly point out that there is obviously no exact moment or day a child turns into an adult. Similarily this is true with every other duality.

The paradox is that a rational person can't deny that both children and adults exist but a rational person also can't say when a childhood ends and adulthood begins. 

So if one thing never officially turns into another, how can a rational person even say that thing exist? How do we resolve this paradox? 

Edited July 20 by enchanted

[DianaFr]

But is that really a paradox? I personally have no problem distinguishing between childhood and adulthood (no discrepancies for me there) and I also don't have a problem acknowledging that we are children and adults at the same time, within the same body. Also you say there is not an exact day or moment that something turns into something else. But how is it useful to apply this principle to natural phenomena? Sometimes you could indeed detect on/off, yes/no type of situations but more frequently there are stages and transitions and many steps in between the extremes. Why is that a paradox to you? 

[enchanted]

3 hours ago, DianaFr said:

But is that really a paradox? I personally have no problem distinguishing between childhood and adulthood (no discrepancies for me there) and I also don't have a problem acknowledging that we are children and adults at the same time, within the same body. Also you say there is not an exact day or moment that something turns into something else. But how is it useful to apply this principle to natural phenomena? Sometimes you could indeed detect on/off, yes/no type of situations but more frequently there are stages and transitions and many steps in between the extremes. Why is that a paradox to you? 

Thanks for your response. I am under the impression that this is a well known paradox to many academics and spiritual people. 

As you say you can be a child and adult (or stage blue and stage orange)  at the same time especially since adult is defined as "not being a child" for example. That's a paradox isn't it? 

Edited July 21 by enchanted

[Oppositionless]

It's interesting because the definition of child and adult changes as you age.

I guess to answer the question of what is and is not a child is "would it be appropriate to have a romantic relationship with this person?"

To me an 18 year old is far too young and still a child, but to a 50 year old I'm a kid (24)

the thing about duality is that it is entirely relativistic, and that's why it isn't ultimately real. People from California don't swim in the ocean without a wetsuit. People vacationing from Canada do.

Edited July 21 by Oppositionless

[Davino]

On 21/7/2024 at 0:15 AM, enchanted said:

So if one thing never officially turns into another, how can a rational person even say that thing exist? How do we resolve this paradox? 

Because we have to say there are many where there is only One

Once all distinctions are seen as imaginary but useful, then one transcends and includes this paradox

[Paradoxed]

On 7/20/2024 at 6:15 PM, enchanted said:

How do we resolve this paradox? 

Why do you need to resolve paradox?

[DocWatts]

Dualities are only paradoxical if you presuppose that they are objective features of Reality - rather than anthropomorphized schemas that are created and sustained by our minds, for the purposes of making predictive generalizations.

Taking everyday dualisms too literally is a good case study of mistaking the map for the territory.

[ICURBlessings]

Thanks 'enchanted' for hitting the nail on the head by asking this question.

I have been under the impression that the non-duality ideology is mistakenly understood almost universally.

Practitioners (if you can call them that?!)of non-duality seem to believe that once a basic self-realization of the non-dualistic conscious-stance - means that that they have attained the goal of non-duality.

When you say "We see dualities everywhere: child vs adult, night vs day, dead v alive, outside v inside, stage blue v stage orange." you are referring to PERCEPTION.

Duality is fundamental to PERCEPTION because to perceive we must contrast between "what is" and "what is-not". To see a chair you must know exactly everything that is not the chair. It is like this for everything.

We collectively believe PERCEPTION is the product of the central nervous system, which is part of the physical body, which is in turn part of the physical World. That belief is exactly the same type of assumption as we once held the strong belief that the Earth was a center around which the Sun revolved. It sure seemed that the Sun revolves around the Earth, but it certainly not true or factual.

If you study NDE (Near Death Experiences), and OBE (Out of Body Experiences), clearly there is evidence that PERCEPTION occurs without the physical body, and without the brain. PERCEPTION is a MENTAL Process operating on the fundamental framework which is the ability to Contrast. For this ability to operate Duality must be established at a fundamental level below the field of perception.

All of Physicality, only exist within the field of PERCEPTION. The physical Universe, the Cosmos only exist within the field of PERCEPTION. Not the other way around. Even when the body dies the experience of PERCEPTION continues - UNINTERUPTED.

The ultimate state of Non-Duality is entirely beyond PERCEPTION. One word that points to that State is "The Absolute". When practicing non-duality principles successfully it certainly does not translate to founding ourselves completely reunited with the Absolute. When we successfully experience being one, possibly through a self-inquiry process perhaps - This Realization is what I believe only the first step on the journey leading to the Absolute. Of course mentioning " a journey" - would say a non-dualist practitioner - is to think 'dualistically' as a journey must be about going "somewhere" that is defined as not-here!

As long as one is having physical experiences of any kind, one is PERCEIVING - as long as one is PERCEIVING, one is maintaining a fundamental dualistic framework below one's conscious threshold.

All this being said -  it remains that this basic Self-Realization of One-Self Being everything and at-one with everything, is extremely important and valuable. It is just not the end of the journey towards the Absolute and the Total Non-Dualistic  state of Consciousness.

[Leo Gura]

The solution to this issue is easy:

It is to realize that the ontological nature of reality is that it is consciousness, which is fluid and relative, not a collection of static material objects.

The key mistake of rationalism is assuming that reality is made up out of crisp discreet parts and objects. It is not.

There really is no such thing as a "child" or an "adult". These are convenient fictions that humans invented to help themselves navigate and survive. These things have no objective ontology at bottom.

[Bjorn K Holmstrom]

10 hours ago, ICURBlessings said:

...

We collectively believe PERCEPTION is the product of the central nervous system, which is part of the physical body, which is in turn part of the physical World. That belief is exactly the same type of assumption as we once held the strong belief that the Earth was a center around which the Sun revolved. It sure seemed that the Sun revolves around the Earth, but it certainly not true or factual.

...

Just want to point out that there is no "true" view of the Earth revolving around the sun, it depends on where you set your fix-point and orientation in space. One can easily set up the case where the Sun does revolve around the Earth.

Edited August 8 by Bjorn K Holmstrom

[Nilsi]

It’s obvious that reality is not a black-and-white affair. Fixed dualistic categories, like man/woman, are just useful fictions. However, I strongly disagree with the idealist notion that everything is ultimately all white (Spirit, Mind, The Good, etc.), so to speak.

I claim that reality is actually all grey, i.e. utterly indeterminate. This applies to concepts like reality being a “Mind.” You can become conscious of that idea, but I argue that this “unity” is part of a larger “multiplicity” - not the other way around.

[Leo Gura]

Everything revolves around God, which is you.

[ICURBlessings]

8 hours ago, Bjorn K Holmstrom said:

Just want to point out that there is no "true" view of the Earth revolving around the sun, it depends on where you set your fix-point and orientation in space. One can easily set up the case where the Sun does revolve around the Earth.

Earth is said to revolve around the Sun as an expression of Gravitational Forces being applied by a body of greater mass upon another body of a lesser mass. I am aware that ultimately Spacetime and Gravity are part of an illusory experiences - However - in my opinion - within our experience of the physical world - Gravity is a Force at play representing a more fundamental role than the mere view of a fix-point.

[Nilsi]

5 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Everything revolves around God, which is you.

Quite the nothing-burger.

The question is that of identity, and to call a table „God“ is just as stupid as claiming it represents some abstract idea of a „Table.“

A particular table is completely and uniquely itself - it exists independently and inexplainably, by and for itself; it is completely anonymous and its difference precedes any kind of identity.

[Keryo Koffa]

On 8/8/2024 at 4:45 AM, Leo Gura said:

key mistake of rationalism

On 8/8/2024 at 0:37 PM, nuwu said:

b-but relative continuums are as imaginary as discrete provisionally tangible singularities

 

 

When nuwu

keeps trying

to reconcile

Leo's ontology

 

 

 I caused nuwu to evolve their profile picture...
Take that for a relative continuum!

Edited August 9 by Keryo Koffa

[DocWatts]

On 8/8/2024 at 1:59 PM, Keryo Koffa said:

 

 

When nuwu

keeps trying

to reconcile

Leo's ontology

😂😂😂

Best use of a meme I've seen on the Forum in some time. Kudos.

[Keryo Koffa]

On 8/10/2024 at 11:35 AM, nuwu said:

I do not have an ontology to reconcile. Truth does not necessarily exist in abstract space.

 

 

Eurekah, Aletheosupra!

The Transcendental Truth!

On 8/10/2024 at 11:35 AM, nuwu said:

The infinitely dense continuum inherently slices into infinite singularities of holographic self-similar characteristics where discrete sheaf-forming information unfolds, while the topological continuum of sheaves emerges from harmonious layers of singularities, recursively, from infinite meta-angles.

Are you implying a (too much text) Implica recursivmetamorphic fractemergent holohedral Fluxiverse?

On 8/10/2024 at 11:35 AM, nuwu said:

The universe is inside a black hole = Black hole is inside the universe

☯

On 8/10/2024 at 11:35 AM, nuwu said:

Illusory motion may be autodual

On 6/6/2024 at 9:27 PM, Keryo Koffa said:

The ground is flat, flatness, a perspectival distortion, euclidian visualization, imagination, fractal geometry. concepts, words, perceptions, ideas, absolutes, experiences, consciousness, being, projection, recursion, loop, fractal, spiral, meta awareness. What is the ground? A thing, a form, a wave stretched and misunderstood, but separated, absolutized, inverted, made its own thing, an absolute concept, a singularity, a lack, a being, creativity, a newly acquired lens of perception and interpretation, universe reinterpretation, holistic expansion, foundation for creation, fractalization, reality manipulation. But what is it really? Zoom in, matter, more matter, even more matter, waves, energy, forms, fractals, dust, light, waves, emptiness, fullness, nothingness, everythingness, a mirror, self-reflection? What self, everything is a self, there is no self, everything is everything is nothing, but not nothing, because its something, but that something is always a reflection of something else, but that something else is its own reflection, how can that be, two mirrors mirroring each other to infinity, but what's the substance being mirrored, how does form arise from formlessness, or does it? form is form and formlessness is a form, everything is form, non-duality, the aether, the fifth platonic solid, the ground of being, universal frequency, the eternal substrate. The form is the form and is not the form but everything is form and beyond form there is more form, but is it the same form? The fractal nature of existence and meta-cognition, expanding in all directions from where? no where? No! Everywhere! Every point a singularity mirroring every other singularity in existence and separated by psychic awareness, the aether, the ground of connection, invention, a new realization! Two waves overlapping, double slit, wave particle duality, a form of perception, projection, new visualization, self-reflection, intention creation, ever flowing imagination! Observer dependent? What's an observer? Consciousness, what part of it? Every part of it but what is awareness when its lacking? Particle when observed, wave when not? But is it itself not an observer, isn't everything consciousness? Yes, but what is it when it doesn't observe itself, nothing and everything unless someone wants it to be something, The light reflects you, there is no light, there is you, you are the light, there is no you, there is light, there's both you and light and there is neither and that's consciousness for you.

On 8/10/2024 at 11:35 AM, nuwu said:

1. original message was not suggesting existence of concrete divisions, but hypothetical meta duality of holographic self-creation

I love Meta(psycho)morphodynamics! Might be a little tangential, but I'm also reminded of:

On 8/10/2024 at 11:35 AM, nuwu said:

2. projection of abstraction onto infinity defers imagination. groundlessness of tautology is recursively transitive, therefor specification of layers of imagination is tangential to pointer-based theories, as incompleteness is constant

All Stange Loops must eventually be transcended! For Freedom and Meta! (Sadhguru Seal of Approval)

On 8/10/2024 at 11:35 AM, nuwu said:

3. free flowing ontological search of non-redundant information is necessary for open-ended and respectful communications, regardless of truth value or reputation signals. i am predominantly non-verbal and get gaslit|belittled all the time for randomly exploring original ideas outside consensus or expected layer of meanings in symbolic maps | implicit context, nevertheless projection of attachments is irrelevant to me

I empathize with and adore your unique Self, I just came here to bring you a Gift!

 

On 8/10/2024 at 11:35 AM, nuwu said:

4. non-recursive memes are not real meme

[Keryo Koffa]

On 8/10/2024 at 1:16 PM, DocWatts said:

😂😂😂 Best use of a meme I've seen on the Forum in some time. Kudos.

[Reciprocality]

Reality are dualities, all you can do is reject them, but they will always precede your rejection and even be the reason it is possible to reject them in the first place

 

there are three kinds of duality 

 

the first is the duality in each continuum of extension, such as motion

 

then there is the duality of the presence and absence of a thing

 

thirdly there is the duality of an identity (x) and the generalisation of the absence of all particular identities (non-x).

 

the two former kinds becomes the same upon reflection but are always distinct in perception, the third kind arises from the recognition of how you can only achieve the absence of a thing through motion and only achieve motion through the absence of a thing, since the two are in fact identical there must arise something outside them that is aware that they appear different, thus the time-less, extension-less and motionless duality of identity and non-identity arises.

Then all sorts of dualities can take form, from reflection upon the presence and absence of co-inciding items of perceptions be it colour, temptations or emotions, and just like that does our innate nature become our personality, our existence.

Edited Tuesday at 02:44 PM by Reciprocality

[Reciprocality]

Take every duality in your mind, they reflect something that is dual prior to the mind, not in a discrete way, but in a continuous way.

The more acute your memory the more you partake in that continuum as opposed to their chopped up counterpart, allowing you to imagine things that people for whom those dualities are the very means to achieve their personal goals are incapable of.

Edited Tuesday at 01:53 AM by Reciprocality