Hamlet’s famous question “should I live or die?” depends on how we feel mentally and our overall point of view. Healthy people always want to live, but those with negative outlook or bad choices in the past may struggle with this decision.
“When ill luck begins, it does not come in sprinkles, but in showers.” – Mark Twain
The Dialexity Method aids in the early identification of such issues and offers “mental safeguards”. The point is, that Existence and Non-Existence work together, and trying to avoid suffering won’t make it go away. The only way is to accept the suffering and find a way to work with it.
“Dying is easy, young man. Living is harder”
“The greatest discovery of my generation is that a human being can alter his life by altering his attitude.” – William James
Pros and Cons. The very first sign of “biased thinking” is attempting to select the Pros and Cons based on the “either-or” approach (google Hamlet’s Pros and Cons). To avoid this, first focus solely on the primary advantages of Existence. Such advantages must be highly individual, as we draw energy from personal memories and convictions.
Left Scheme shows one of many possible taxonomies of “good”. It defines the fundamental benefit of existence as “Living” that comprises two aspects: Developing Your Inner Self, and Creating a More Beautiful World. These are then broken into Learning, Accomplishing, and so on (lower levels).
Right Table uses these concepts for defining its columns A – G. The first 4 lines (green and pink) define Pros and Cons of thesis and antithesis, whereas the last two (blueish) define “control statements”.
Analysis of just one column will explain how the entire table was constructed. (For the more detailed explanations see Moral Wisdom from Dialectic.)
Column A. If the major benefit of existence is Living (1A), then the major drawback of non-existence is Dying (4A). Note, that Dying does not refer to existence (rather to non-existence), therefore it cannot be considered as “negative side of living” (another typical mistake of “biased thinking”).
Then, positive side of non-existence (3A) must oppose the negative side of existence (2A). The first must represent the “Gentle Death”, while the second – the “Rough Life”. Dialectically, “Gentle Death” equates to “Yielding” or “Giving Birth” (passing energy to someone), whereas “Rough Life” is akin to “Killing” (taking away energy from others).
All of this yields two “control statements”. Living without Yielding means Killing (5A). Yielding without Living means Dying (6A). They are critical in cultivating proper “thinking habits”, ultimately coming to Taoism, which emphasizes that everything is in a perpetual state of renewal and decay, and even our smallest actions can have significant consequences.
“A secret for releasing struggles in life is to learn to yield. Yielding does not mean giving in or giving up. It just means moving with the flow of the current, which makes everything easier and more fluid.” ― Peggy Sealfon, Escape from Anxiety
Columns B-G were derived using the same methodology. In the end, Existence and Non-existence appear quite similar. The primary disparity between statements (B+) and (N+) is that the former lean towards greater “leading activity,” whereas the latter emphasize higher “flow adaptability.”
Both groups complement each other, much like Yin and Yang. We can also compare them to kinetic and potential energies in classical mechanics, enthalpy and entropy in thermodynamics, and the real and imaginary parts of complex numbers.
Such a complementarity is widespread in nature (see the book The Complementary Nature), and is deeply rooted in many cultural traditions. Consider for example the concepts of Tonal and Nagual from The Teachings of Don Juan. They literally mean Existence and Non-Existence. Those who can tap into Non-existence are virtually immortal. Now compare this to the statement (5B) from our Table: “Growing without Potency yields Aging and Draining”, and recall that Potency (3B) comes from the “Positive Non-existence” (N+). Isn’t this the reproduction of Don Juan’s idea?
The idea of getting energy out of “nothingness” is as old as our civilization. The only reason science does not tap in it is that it cannot understand and measure “nothingness”.
Other noteworthy statements are these. (6B) suggests that our civilization is not evolving, but rather repeating cycles. (6C) suggests that automated application of formal logics, machine learning, and any other rules is destructive. (5D) and (6D) suggest that learning and knowledge can be detrimental: “Knowledge without action is wastefulness and action without knowledge is foolishness.” — Al-Ghazali
Hybrid Statements. All of the above statements can be combined with each other to produce many new statements, as exemplified on the right. Reading such “hybrid” statements is akin doing a more challenging mental exercise.
For example: “Learning (1D) without Yielding (3A) causes Killing (2A)” – suggests that we should only learn practical things that immediately yield tangible results. Otherwise we become “unconscious killers”
Pink cells show statements that are more likely to make people raise their eyebrows. Each person should decide for themselves which statements they find eyebrow-raising. Using more pink color may indicate a higher risk of self-destruction. (Note: the chart doesn’t include all the columns from the first table.)
“Not-knowing is true knowledge. Presuming to know is a disease.
First realize that you are sick; then you can move toward health.” ― Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching
Complementarity Matrix. Another way of identifying one’s strengths and weaknesses is through composing the matrix of probabilities, as exemplified on the left. Here every cell indicates probability of “synthesis of brighter future” – a mutual complementarity of two positive statements, expressed as a probability that together they will yield a better quality of being (from 0 to 1). Higher probabilities (green cells) indicate strengths, lower probabilities (pink cells) – weaknesses.
This matrix is not symmetric, as it reflects two different views (separated by diagonal line). When we are in good mood, our estimates approach the optimistic (uppermost right) view, considering that “all is resolvable”. When in bad mood, we are closer to the pessimistic (lower left) view, generated by ChatGPT, and assuming that “not all is resolvable”.
Both views give much of pink color to the “Not To Be” state (2nd row and column in the matrix). But ChatGPT also gives pink to intersections of 3(B-D) and 1(C-D). In other words, it is much more skeptical about our abilities to analyze, create and learn.
Forecasts. Table on the right explains the meanings of quadrants from the “synthesis” matrix. The 1st quadrant is about combining Being and Not-Being into one “lifestyle”. The 2nd and 3rd quadrants are about getting the most out of Being and Not-Being. The last three quadrants show how different benefits can complement each other. Nearly in all cases both views vote for Being, except that in the first quadrant GPT disagrees with combinability of Being and Not-Being, due to categorical “either-or” approach.
Perhaps the most problematic quadrant is II – III, where GPT only scores +1.6, while dialectics scores +6.0. This is the “primary area of effectiveness” since B+ and N+ are the most “orthogonal” statements with the highest potential for complementarity. In other words, they provide the basis for a “belief in miracles” capable of conquering all kinds of pessimism.
As noted earlier, this comes from the low probabilities of synthesis between 1(C-D) and 3(B-D) in a negative mood. Any means of increasing these probabilities can save us from self-destruction.
Shaping the Future. Table on the right provides “recipes” of how to fix most of “existential” problems. Each pair of original statements 1(X) and 3(X) yields a new pair of “actions and reciprocations” (7(X) and 9(X)), that unite 1(X) and 3(X) into a “bright future”.
As we saw above, the most problematic columns are C and D, for which we get the following advices: Inventing and Nourishing (7C), Sharing with the World (8C), Hearing the World (7D), and Hearing yourself (8D). These can be used for constructing the “success story” (see below).
Generally, all statements (A+) and (R+) can be clustered in just two groups, X = (A, C, F) and Y = (B, D, E). Within each group all statements are quite similar to each other, whereas between two groups they mirror each other: 7(X) ~ 9(Y), 11(X) ~ 12(Y), and vice versa. In other words, there is just one pair of (A+) and (R+) – “going in” and “going out” – each time manifesting itself uniquely.
Also, all (A+) and (R+) can be further analyzed in terms of “extended” hybrid and synthesis matrices, as described above, to better model the future outcomes.
Success Story. The last step is uniting the most problematic cells of the synthesis matrix into some kind of success story.
On the right is the image generated by Hotpot for the “problematic” theses (1(C-D), 3(B-D)): Potency, analysis, learning, creating. Adding 7(B-D) and 9(B-D) does not help much (Inventing, Nourishing, Sharing, Hearing the World and Yourself)
ChatGPT story for intersections of 1(C-D) and 3(B-D):
“John developed his woodworking skills through classes and internships, while building his self-confidence and perseverance. He adopted a structured approach to his creative process, breaking down projects into smaller tasks, establishing timelines, and using analytical skills. With his deep understanding of furniture design and woodworking techniques, John successfully launched his own custom furniture business and gained a reputation for high-quality craftsmanship and unique designs.”
Dialectic in Conflict Resolution
Appendix. Question to ChatGPT: What means or actions could improve synthesis of the better result in the following pairs of traits:
1) “Create, build (1C)” and “Potency, being able (3B)”
2) “Create, build (1C)” and “Ordering, analysing (3C)”
3) “Create, build (1C)” and “Know (3D)”
4) “Learn (1D)” and “Potency, being able (3B)”
5) “Learn (1D)” and “Ordering, analysing (3C)”
The short summary of the answer: develop practical skills, self-confidence and perseverance, a structured approach to the learning and creative process, breaking down tasks, establishing clear timelines, improving analytical skills, a deep understanding of the subject matter, experimenting with new ideas and approaches, and applying knowledge creatively.
Here’s a short success story based on the suggestions:
John wanted to start his own business creating and building custom furniture. He focused on developing specific skills and knowledge by taking woodworking classes and interning at a furniture workshop. He also built his self-confidence and perseverance by practicing his craft regularly and overcoming obstacles. John developed a structured approach to his creative process by breaking down projects into smaller tasks, establishing timelines, and using his analytical skills to make informed decisions. With his deep understanding of furniture design and woodworking techniques, he was able to apply his knowledge creatively and experiment with new ideas. As a result, John successfully launched his own custom furniture business and gained a reputation for high-quality craftsmanship and unique designs.