Is experience inherently dualistic?

Question

If so, then we must always find ourselves oscillating around our own self defined point on the continuum of any dualistic perception. For example, joy is always defined by our perception of nonjoy, and this will be different from other's definition, and may change continuously over our lifetime. (The fulfilment of a desire establishes a new neutral point on the continuum)

This means that the duality cannot be 'tipped' or biased in one direction over the long term and MUST balance itself out. (Experiences of happiness must be balanced by experiences of unhappiness)

And so, it becomes a roller coaster ride oscillation with a variable period between peaks and valleys and a variable magnitude; the period determining how quickly we move between joy and sorrow, and the magnitude determining how dramatic the joy and sorrow.

What we do is try to tip the balance, but all we're actually doing is moving our reference along the continuum, to which we then normalize.

Wadayathink?

Biran:
All perception is dualistic, no matter how complex or 'unified'. Mind's function is dualistic.

Firery:
The problem is dualistic perception as discussed here. The solution is indeed nondualism as taught by all the 'Awakened' masters. Not religion or philosophy.

Michelle:
Yes, I share your experience. In general, it is the goal of humans to tip the duality and create more happiness than unhappiness. I'm saying this isn't possible and so it doesn't happen.

Ross:
You're right, it "just is", but it never ceases being dualistic. That's just what it is.

Answer 1

Very simple.
Embrace them all.

(Hey, that's what Buddha realized after 6 years of suffering!)

That's the only known way (to human) to get out of the roller coaster!

Answer 2

philmeta11, I think you might be over-simplifying the things we cognitively experience. Metaphysically some concepts are suggested to be dualistic but on further examination tend not to be. You mentioned happiness. Does the antonym "unhappiness" represent that emotion as a dualistic event? If so, how does one account for the emotions of melancholy, irritated, or contentment within that context? Rather than oscillating events of highs and lows, perhaps humanity artificially creates dualism ( through the antonym concept) and the reality is far more complicated. Instead of peaks and valleys, perhaps the the spectrum of experience is more like a spectrogram.

Answer 3

I do not think experience is inherently dualistic, because one's first experience has no opposite to be compared against. Experience is self referential, as we can only ever compare our experiences to our previous experiences. That being said, we obviously have a biological predisposition toward reacting to and feeling about some experiences in particular ways. I think that experience may appear to be dualistic because those are the terms by which our language most easily describes our experience. I think if one looks at one's experiences honestly, that person will find most of them to be more complicated than a simple categorization of obviously good or bad (or any other dualistic categorization). Our lives are complex, and often times we ourselves are not sure how we feel about them.

Answer 4

If we view this under the religious microscope, God made a decision to create or manifest. Once doing that, duality came into existence IF you view the two as separate entities.

If we look under a scientific microscope, energy is composed of positives and negatives. Yet the two poles create the whole.

Inherently, everything we know has dual energies.

My question to you would be, 'can you experience dualities at the same moment?' Can you feel sorrow when you see someone suffering yet still feel joy in the knowing that their suffering is temporary and could function as a step in their growth?

As we learn to feel the still within the chaos we realize that duality is but a tool of illusion.

As far as tipping the balance and moving your reference up the continuum, I see your point but I think that as we progress, we experience the opposites in a deeper way. As we know deeper joy we also realize deeper sorrow because our capacities in either direction reach outward proportionately.

I also believe that happiness is more of a surface emotion where joy is lit within and that happiness is often determined by outside influences and often fueled by outer stimulants while joy maintains itself by the inner fire always present if one looks for it.

Answer 5

I think, though scientific in description, you've very accurately described the fundamental basis of the tao - the balance of duality in the universe. In the yin yang symbol, people see black and white and they think good vs. evil, but it's much more involved than that.

The "neutral point on the continuum" is what we should all seek in life. I like how you've also described the inevitable re-balancing when we move too much in one direction away from our "center". But I think most of the time we should "oscillate" near but outside the center - therein lies our humanity.

I also think the more wise one becomes the less one sees duality and more of a true constant.

Answer 6

For most human beings, their experience of life is dualistic because we process the information of our existence in that manner. However, those who take a more holistic approach in understanding their experience will tend toward a more unitive, complex perception. This, of course, has nothing to do with reality, which just is and without definition.

Answer 7

The pleasure/pain duality theme has been tackled by Eastern philosophers within Hinduism and Buddhism ad nauseum. I used to think it was profound but I grew out of it. Yes, I think we are programmed to experience things in terms of contrasts and comparisons. More than philosophy, it I think it has to do with survival instincts, neurobiology, and limitations within ordinary ego consciousness that ultimately have functional purposes, which are to make the world --which is a playground of senses and sense objects "go round."

Duality, contrasts, and attraction/aversion are the epiphenomenon of senses and sense objects and of the I-thou dynamic. Where there is no duality, there is no experience--because who experiences what if the I-thou relationship is not in play? And because we define things in relation to other things, we indeed can only recognize one thing in relation to something else.

Answer 8

Experience is inherently individualistic, yet individuality is dual in nature.
(The One is aware of itself as the Many.)
The examples you give are true to a certain extent, but the nature of duality runs far deeper.

The first perspective states:
you are an individual. You are eternally unique/different. Your individuality is undeniable and indestructible.

The second perspective states:
you are an individual in relation to...
(this is where the nature of duality 'begins')
You are eternally the same as, share an identity with, have something in common with, all that is and all of it's parts.
(You cannot achieve unity without acknowledging that last statement and all that it implies.)

You are eternally different, yet eternally the same.

That being said, I'll address the nature of duality as applied to perception.
Perception IS dual in nature, i.e., inner senses and outer senses, but you speak of perception in terms of opposites... to me, that's the concept of duality misunderstood.
The right hand does not oppose the left hand.
The inner world does not oppose the outer world.
You speak of balancing duality, but I'm saying you are trying to balance opposites to ACHIEVE duality.(reconcile the paradox)

The idea of opposites "..cannot be 'tipped' or biased in one direction over the long term and MUST balance itself out."

Duality is something to be recognized, as individuality is something to be recognized, as non-duality is something to be recognized.
All of these exist simultaneously, and there's no contradiction or opposition.
We are multidimensional.

LOL! Sorry if I got off track or talked your ear off. I think you opened Pandora's box. See what you did?

Answer 9

I am wondering why you state that it is the tipping of the balance that is the goal.

For myself, I am engaged in maintaining and holding my equilibrium. To be the watcher, and let the highs and lows come as they do, but not let my self be defined by them. I am less and less at the effect of the extremes you reference, and more and more in a state of a very sublime and steady joy/peace.
That is my preference. That is what I am normalizing to.

And yet, my feelings also run deep. So it is that I am not run by them, I let them flow through me and bring them out into consciousness. That allows them to dissipate naturally.

As humans, we are always in a reactive state. Our experience has to be self defined, it is all we really have. It is upon the perceiver to adjust their definitions internally. The experience of this can be intellectualized only to a certain point. It must then be realized, cognized, for ones self, in order to understand the difference.

Knowledge is the untested accumulation of information.
Wisdom is the experienced, self realized cognition of said theory.

at least, that's my experience ; )


Edit to Phil: please clarify? I do believe I have successfully Tipped the scales" as it were, my life bears that out, and that the change of perception not only shifts your reaction, it begins an overall shift of the events to come...I love common ground, and what of my experience do we share? (I'm easily confused -bear with me )

Answer 10

Oh, in the eastern philosophy, the very religion branched out due to this dualistic theory !
In India, there is a "Dwaita" (dualistic) and the residuals being "Adwaita" (non-dualistic) !