Dualisms

Would it not be much more useful and accurate to speak of inter relating fields of thought and actions than “opposites”?  Predator/prey as one example could be seen simply idealization related to what level of the food chain a given entity derives the energy to exist from. Bacteria are predators, in many cases, as are deer, which eat plants.

Take any given Is-Ness, say “the rich”. There are many interconnecting fields, which I think would most usefully be visualized as clouds in motion. The “rich” sometimes become poor. Many are on the bubble. Poor become rich. Some rich, like some poor, are heartless. Some rich, like some poor, are very open hearted and philanthropic. Some are political and some are not. Some are reactionaries, some genuine Liberals, and some, like George Soros, are open opponents of democracy and political freedom.

I would submit that binary distinctions by means of which we confuse reality with our map of reality are artifacts of times when sime distinctions helped survival, and that exist not just in our brains, but our gut brains as well. Above the neck: one of us/one of them. Below the neck: safe to eat/not safe to eat.

But we have, now, the capacity for nuance, and I would suggest that capacity depends for full expression on the capacity for relaxation, which is to say the relative demobilization in a conscious way of our lambic system, and a following heightening of remaining perceptual capabilities.

And I will continue to insis on the PHILOSOPHICAL importance of Kum Nye as a fantastic answer to the question “how do we return to feeling?”