The interest in analysis is always fascinating. While trying to convince my colleague about the fallacy of dualism, he explained his understanding of dualism with regards to the philosphical approach that he learnt when he was back in varsity. What alarmed me about this conversation was that much of my thinking is always about a duality principle. What is right, and what is not right is wrong.
We could go on all day to discuss about grey areas, but that is not the point of this blog entry.
Growing from a Buddhist background helped me see duality of the human nature, sort of the yin and yang, every action has an opposite and equal reaction. I think I have reached a newer level in understanding this duality nature.
While seeing through the lens of duality is an excellent way to analyse and figure stuff out, its main limitation is that of practical applicability. Life does not function in duality. Life is a mash up of experiences, everything influencing everything else. How do you separate one from the other? Truth is that I cannot.
So is duality wrong? I do not think so either. Duality is probably a good means to re-examine patterns and help in sorting out meshed ideas. Duality is a good tool in other words. However, like every concept used to describe and create understanding of life, it is only a tool, and should not go beyond description. Life is the vast richness of experiences.
Oh dear, did I just use another concept to describe life and make it a personal philosophy?