According to the view of this author, paradox is the indication of consistency on a higher dimension of analysis, and plain contradiction is impossible.
The liar's Paradox can be restated on a strip of paper wherein on one side is written "The sentence on the other side is true" and on the other side "The sentence on the other side is false." This sets us a situation where if either sentence is true, then it is also false, and if it is false, it is also true. This, however is not a contradiction, but rather a paradox.
It can be resolved by exploring what a "side" is, and investigating the missing factor that the paradox presupposes but does not state: namely, that there is a surface. Assume that it is this strip.
Here is some terminology from Topology. An "orientable surface" is a surface just like a table or a regular peice of paper or a ring which can have an inside and an outside, and up and down - separate sides.
Take the ring, for example. If I bend our paradox bearing strip into a ring it changes nothing about the paradox. It is still in play.
A "non-orientable surface" is a surface such as a moebius strip, which, due to a twist, or chiasm, cannot be said to have separate sides.
So what happens when you form this paradox bearing strip into a moebius band?
The paradox vanishes because there is no longer a sentence on the other side.
Think about this for a moment. What paradoxes in your life would disappear if the surface of your reality were un-oriented?
...
Try this experiment at home.
...
It goes further. Now that we accept that the surface of reality, on some metaphysical level, might be non-orientable, lets look at what bisection does.
Bisection means splitting down the middle. If we bisect our strip, we'd expect to get two strips. If we bisect our ring, we'd expect to get two rings.
An orientable surface can be considered analogous to dualism. Bisection can be considered analogous to analysis. The effect of analysis of this kind on the ring, or strip is to split it into two smaller rings or strips. Just as we'd expect.
A non-orientable surface can be considered analogous to non-dualism. The effect of bisection on the moebius strip, contrary to expectations is to transform it into a lemniscate: the figure of infinity.
We can go further. To keep bisecting our rings, we produce more and more disconnected rings, atomizing them into infinity.
To keep bisecting our lemniscate, we produce more and more lemniscates - but they are linked, like a chain. At no point from here to infinity is the topological mass of the non-orientable surface broken into separate, un-linked pieces. They may be many - but they are ALWAYS one.
And this is the lesson of the Moebius strip - nonduality is equally subject to analysis as duality, but that analysis does not result in an atomized world - rather an infinitely entangled web of being.
Such is Eden. Can you find the way?
Comments