Duality (Part 2)

(First part begins here.)

So the last time I talked here I was referring to how the two seemingly contradictory maxims of what absence can do to a person with regards to the remembrance and camaraderie are both completely wrong due to the grayness in which the ``hard rules'' of the world apply to. That was, of course, made at a moment that was rather late at night (4am in the morning) and with the general realisation at that point in time that the people that I once knew from the past are just going to stay there where I last left them---in the past. It is not so much as a piece demanding strong scrutiny, but more of a piece that highlights the duality of reality that we sometimes fail to appreciate.

In many of life's happenings, we find that there are many instances where we ask ourselves if something that had happened to us was indeed ``bad'' and worry greatly about what might happen to us after that, i.e. the consequences of it all. Of course it is true that we will always have to deal with the consequences of our actions (it is only the privileged few that can get away from everything), but what occurs after that is something that is worth thinking about separately and away from the rather myopic perspective of mere cause and effect. The fallacy of it all is to assume that the single outcome of a single effect will be the only factor that will affect our affect and effect---what I mean is that we are always assuming that the one outcome that occurred will be the deciding factor that will change our moods and to change the series of consequences that we might have to deal with. The truth is often more complicated than it seems; while it sounds more rational to identify the root cause of a particular outcome, upon further thought, the conclusion that is drawn is often a little more different---the discovered ``root'' cause is mostly the straw that broke the camel's back. There is often an accumulation of factors that started off small and fairly insignificant, before snowballing into a monstrosity that one has to eventually fend off (and declare to be the root cause of it all). The astute person will often try to correct for all these small issues in the hope of averting certain disaster, or at least, certain predictable disaster.

Predictability. We assume in many cases that things are predictable, to a certain degree. Drop a ball from a height off the ground, and you expect the ball to fall downards to the ground. The very essence that defines science is based on the notion of falsifiability and predictability, or at least, the notion that we can tell with some level of confidence what an outcome might be given the starting conditions (or part thereof). Predictability is at times reassuring, but its dual is also true, namely that predictability can also be a very boring affair. Perhaps being a little unpredictable can lead to something that is more meaningful, for if you already knew the output of a computer program, would you still want to run the program? Put in another way, if you can fully predict your life, would you still want to live your life out then?

Why all these jumping about, one might ask. And I reply, why not? I'm attempting to demonstrate the duality of reality that permeates, and to suggest that perhaps by paying attention to its existence that we can finally learn the true meaning of happiness, which ought to be seen as the life path of the most moderate belief that one can summon. Only then will the dicta of common sense appeal most strongly to that of the rational mind.