Part
Four - Page One When Zero Equals Infinity (from Chapter 8)
Beautiful Diversity Unifying
the One and the Many
For every north there
is a south, for every up a down, for every forward a backward. For every action, there is an equal and opposite
reaction. Every school kid learns how to pair together opposites such as hot and cold, smooth and rough, short and tall.
On the playground we learn what goes up must come down. And as we grow older there are lessons to be learned about
pleasure and pain, strength and weakness, love and hate. In stranded moments throughout life we contemplate opposites of
good and bad, wrong and right, darkness and light. The philosopher and poet Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote, “Every sweet
has its sour; every evil its good.” But does absolutely everything have an opposite? And if so, and it is also true
what they say, that opposites attract, then what happens when all the opposites meet in the middle?
In between opposites there is
always a middle ground, and yet the middle can be awfully difficult to describe. Between thin and tall there is the
average height. Between heavy and light there is the average weight. We usually have to use neutral words and phrases
such as medium, average, the most common, the norm, to define the middle ground between opposite attributes, because
oddly enough there aren’t special words that identify the middle ground. What word defines the middle between strong
and weak, hot and cold, sharp and dull, hard and soft, or easy and difficult? The middle ground is almost always
nameless and yet we can easily recognize it exists between each opposite.
There
are opposing directions in politics, the left wing and the right wing, but of course the balance between liberal and
conservative is simply called the middle of the road? Why aren’t those ‘middle of the roaders’ allowed a special
name of their own, or a political party of their own, like everyone else? And why aren’t there more of these people.
Where do they hang out? I can’t remember ever meeting any of them. Could it be that when people reach the middle of
the road they just disappear without a trace? Or is it that they just don’t speak up, or don’t have an opinion? Why
are the rest of us so clearly on one side or the other? Why is everyone so polarized into camps, or sides, or groups?
There are left wingers and right wingers in politics, religion, justice, education, and even art.
In
the study of human personality, Carl Jung, and later Isabel Myers and Katherine Briggs identified the four temperaments
that define the essence of each person’s personality. A multiple choice test identifies a person as more thinking or
more feeling, more sensory oriented or more intuitive, more introverted or more extroverted, and finally in the last
divide it tells if a person is more spontaneous, flexible, and free to flow with the ups and downs of life, or it tells
if they are more inclined to be planned, rigid, structured, and organized. The four divides effectively define sixteen
basic personality types. It can be quite surprising to find how accurate one’s own personality and behavior is
described in respect to being one or the other of each of these temperaments. Yet I have wondered, with billions of
people on this planet, isn’t there one person out there who is right in the middle, who isn’t any one type more than
the other. Really there must at least be many thousands, but why hasn’t their personality been identified as the
seventeenth type? What is their personality like? Do they have one? And how come I hear somebody telling these
individuals (if I can call them that) to “take a stand”, “be somebody”, “make your mark!” Why are we
expected to be off center? What is so terrible about being in the middle?
All
opinions, all traits, all characteristics, all forms, have a middle ground, but we don’t name the middle ground
apparently because we think it’s too plain and boring to be given a name. We usually act as if there is nothing in the
middle, as if when two sides blend together they cancel out or disappear. But just because the middle ground is always
less distinct and pronounced than the definitive extremes on either side, why do we go and think the middle ground is a
formless nothing.
This
elusive middle ground between opposites is itself a physical part of reality, although it depends upon how we look at it
as to whether we define it as a combination or a cancellation. It can be seen as inclusive, as the combined sum of
opposite properties, or it can be seen as exclusive; the negation or cancellation of opposite properties. It can be seen
as the potential to be either or it can be seen as a nonexistent neither. It can be seen as everything or it can be seen
as nothing. And since we are each defined by our own
particular imbalances, it often depends on our own temperament as to whether we see the middle ground as the whole, or
as a void.
The
great egos, the loud and obnoxious, the pronounced types, of course see the middle ground as boring, empty, and
repulsive. The practical, the conservative, the sensory oriented skeptic, tends to see the middle ground as irrelevant
because it doesn’t, or it doesn’t seem to, have identifiable qualities. What isn’t physically definitive doesn’t
exist. The classical physicists of the past century, in concert with mathematical logic, have strictly seen the merging
of opposites as a cancellation. Someone with a practical and physical personality prefers to define reality as limited
to physical things and measurable properties. On the other hand, the more intuitive, the progressive, the insightful,
the more spiritual types, tend to sense the middle ground as a whole containing all opposing sides. They tend to
depreciate the physical and see the balance between opposites as a unity, as two sides of the same coin. The middle
ground is seen as a foundation or axis, from which form springs outward. For some, the combination of all opposites
forms a single unified whole, a common oneness. This is the central core of many philosophies and religions in the east.
A
common belief in Hinduism, Taoism, and Buddhism asserts the unity and interrelatedness of all things. In Buddhism the
Dharmakaya is the experience of a timeless unity devoid of all physical characteristics, which is said to be true
reality. The Heart Sutra of Buddhism states “...Form Does not Differ From the Void, And the Void Does Not Differ From
Form. Form is Void and Void is Form...” More toward fullness, Brahman, in Hinduism and for the Yogi is the unchanging
and infinite background of all physical being. It is the sum totality of all. Likewise, in Chinese Taoism the word Tien
or Tao refers to the ultimate sum of all. Everything exists in relation to the Tao and everything is a part of the Tao,
even though the Tao is one thing. Therefore nothing can exist or have meaning apart from the Tao. Out of the Tao comes
the Yin and Yang, the two opposing forces or natures.
Oneness
was also a common message of many great philosophers, including Xenophanes, Heraclitus, Parmenides, Plato, Plotinus, and
Giordano Bruno. Xenophanes appears to have influenced a long line of other philosophers with his belief in an infinite
and eternal Universe that is unable to change. He undoubtedly influenced the development of modern religion as he
described the infinite whole as an omniscient God that sees all, thinks all, and hears all, “one god greatest among
gods and men”. A few years later Heraclitus called the unity of opposites “Logos”. And following Xenophanes, the
logically minded Parmenides described being as innate and without any opposite of non-being, since non-being cannot
exist, and he also argued that being is ultimately timeless and unchanging. In that belief Parmenides treated time,
form, distinction, and all duality, as illusion.
Plato
also considered the visible world to be an illusion, one that produces weakly assumed beliefs in the illusion. In the
allegory of the cave he suggests the world we experience is like the shadows of another much deeper reality. Plotinus,
like the Buddhists saw the great Oneness as beyond all attributes, including even being and non-being. More recently,
the Italian Philosopher Giordano Bruno wrote: “Everywhere is one soul, one spirit of the world, wholly in the whole
and in every part of it, as we find in our lesser world also. This soul...produces all things everywhere; so that for
the generations of some even time is not required...”
In
modern times, Ralph Waldo Emerson in believing that opposite halves inevitably produce a whole writes: POLARITY, or
action and reaction, we meet in every part of nature; in darkness and light; in heat and cold; in the ebb and flow of
waters; in male and female; in the inspiration and expiration of plants and animals; in the undulations of fluid and of
sound; in the centrifugal and centripetal gravity; in electricity, galvanism, and chemical affinity. Super-induce
magnetism at one end of a needle, the opposite magnetism takes place at the other end. If the south attracts, the north
repels. To empty here, you must condense there. An inevitable dualism bisects nature, so that each thing is a half, and
suggests another thing to make it whole; as spirit, matter; man, woman; subjective, objective; in, out; upper, under,
motion, rest; yea, nay.
It
is extremely difficult to contemplatively turn a switch within oneself and suddenly see the world in an entirely
different way. But if we really take a careful look at the way all opposites are bound by a neutral center, and
simultaneously consider the likelihood that beyond our personal experience of time literally everything exists
timelessly, meaning that all the opposites exist simultaneously…and then we try to imagine what the universe would be
like if we could glimpse that whole if only for a brief moment, the vision we would see could be interpreted to
be....continued in book :)
Next
Page: God's Math
This
essay is about 1/4th of Chapter Eight from
the book Everything Forever.
Contents Part
l The Beginning of Timelessness Ch1 Time is Imaginary Ch2
Why the Universe Exists Timelessly Ch3 The Great
Cosmic Boundaries Ch4 Describing the Realm of All Possibilities Ch5 Caught Between Two Kinds of Order Part
II The Governing Dynamics Ch6 Natural Order Ch7 Enfolded Symmetry
Ch8
Beautiful Diversity Ch9 Something from
Nothing? Part III The Comprehensibility Of All Ch10 Infinity Means What? 10.1 A Branching Out of
Many-Worlds 10.2 The Multiverse 10.3 Many Realms 10.4 Absolute Chaos 10.5 Perfection Ch11
Time is a Direction in Space Part IV The Great Cosmic Attractor Ch12
The Shape of All Conceivables Ch13 Everything Moves
Towards Balance Ch14 Equilibrium Ch15 Convergence Ch16 The Big Bloom Part V The Second
Law is Too Simple Ch17 Away from Order toward Order Ch18 Multiple Arrows of Time Ch19 A Matter of
Space Ch20 Built in From the Beginning Part VI Cosmic Psyche Ch21 God’s Math Ch22
Proto and Elea Ch23 Our Basic Natures Ch24 Cosmic Lovers Part VII Spiritual Science Ch25
Becoming Aware Ch26 The White World Ch27 God, Infinity, and Nature As One
This
page last updated Mar 29th, 2007
|