Skip to main content

Duality and reality

there is a battle between emotions and rationality. i face it very frequently. and it is root cause of almost all confused decisions. i hardly miss people, but when i miss someone, my rational mind tells me that i never actually experience that person, but it is something in me which is coherent with that person's presence has given me feeling of interaction with that person. but my emotions say, every bit of that person's presence contributes to the interaction and since that person is absent, there is no possibility of interaction, even if it is totally inside me.
duality is reality. why i always feel that reality should i have an unique interpretation. no need for such! why i think that I can always fit my experience in logical framework? Godel says in his famous first theorem of incompleteness (statement made simpler) that a system can be complete or consistent. i feel a connection with interpretations of reality. understanding of reality can either be complete or consistent. if i try to put all my experiences under logic then i surely have a phenomenon which is dual in nature and if i avoid duality then there are some experiences which will not be fitted in logic. trade-off!
the decision making skill might be to choose between consistency or completeness. in most of the situations it is more towards consistency since we hardly need to consider whole canvas of reality to make decisions (since reality away from us has decreasing impact on our decision). but for systems which are supposed to be holistic, this trade-off might be crucial.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Joy

i am alone, somehow at the balance of memories and dreams, some encounters with reality practically, a room for me, a laptop, movie, food, coffee, cigarettes and loneliness to get kick out of everything.... fucking nice life! missing a mate or complete loneliness!!
4 comments
Read more

Why Philosophy

We form beliefs. And, they are useful. They provide us initial set of judgments for any choice. It is human system to reduce uncertainty to set of possible and then most possible alternatives. Somehow, in courses with less creative exercises, like Philosophy or Development Studies, where most of the times bored with life souls put light on issues which are useless for working world, an argument is made about pluralist concerns. They debate about End and Means. They debate about happiness and what gives us that Happiness. They criticize pursuit of wealth. And, to exhibit that they are no less intelligent than wonder working Physicists or Engineers, they create moral dilemmas and prove how unsolvable they are, even by them. So they take this un-solvability of their ‘discipline’ as flag of intellectual victory on enemy which is never there(who will fight with this intellectual samurais, fighting for all mortals who do not understand that all their decisions are ‘monoconcentretic’ while t...
1 comment
Read more

Neither of us were bounded to each other

I live my life through people around me. it is not like fish living in water. i have defined my life not in my own terms, but in the eyes of those who watched me for parts of my life. so whenever i was puzzled about my own self, I searched it through hearts and minds of people of my connection. am i not bounded to them? But then were days when I felt that why I am not defining myself in my own terms. I crashed whatever web of relations and unspoken bonds I had around myself. and then, in my search for myself, I netted one new web, more complex and fragile than what was before. Am I not bounded even then? I never feel that there will be any meaning or any joy which I get living for just myself. I tried such patterns and in the end realized that such eccentric life is not my way. I have my preferences, I like people of my own kind. I avoid those who are not in resonance. but still, I never live just for me, just through me. bind is not about molding decisions for someone els...
1 comment
Read more