"It's all about balance." Is it really?
No, not really. "Balance" implicitly refers to an equalization, an evening out, a middle ground, not more of one or the other but having things be equal. To balance yourself on a beam is to not fall over to the left or right, but to stay in the middle, equally centered.
"an even distribution of weight enabling someone or something to remain upright and steady."
"a condition in which different elements are equal or in the correct proportions."
The problem is when simply stating "it's all about balance", it simply means all, everything, to "balance everything". As if "all" things need to be balanced and brought to the middle; not sometimes choosing one over the other; not putting more weight, value or importance in one polarity or the other. Just be "balanced" and follow a "middle-path" towards everything, making them even and equal.
On a scale, you can indeed balance two things equally if they weigh the same, but if they don't weigh the same then the balance shows which one weighs more as a proportion or ratio of the other, and it's not an equal balance. Scales and balancing can show if two things are equally measured, but that's not to say everything should be brought to equal measure.
In life, there are things that matter more, that have more weight, value and importance inherently. Truth and falsity, and right and wrong, are examples of what not to equally balance or go to the middle ground with.
To balance out right and wrong or good and evil in our actions is foolish thinking. It's not always "balance" that is what "it's all about". There can be the dissolution or disintegration of one polarity towards more actualization of the other. The proportion or ratio of right to wrong that we do -- or good to evil that we do -- should not be 1:1, 2:1, or 5:1. The goal is not to have proportions of how much right to wrong we do. The goal is to be at no proportion or ratio, where we don't do wrongs. There is no imaginary "balance sheet" where we can keep doing wrongs to others so long as we do "good" deeds in other parts of our lives...
How to we work towards that goal of removing the wrong or falsity in our lives?
Truth is a synonym for reality and existence, the universe. All that is gets put into the universal grouping concept of "the Truth". Truth and moral truth are one way, non-contradictory, and don't unite with their opposite or falsity or immorality. 1+1=2 can't unite with 1+1=3. It's contradictory.
Similarly, not stealing from some people but stealing from others doesn't make for a real cohesive and united moral way of living, but rather a disunited, disharmonious and contradictory state of being. True moral ways don't unite with false moral ways, as they are incompatible. People who deny the justness or legitimacy of murder, rape, etc. do not want to unite with those who support those wrong-doings.
You don't unite falsity with truth, or obfuscation with clarity. The absence of clarity can tend to create obfuscation of what is really there, and also leads to confusion rather than true understanding. This can lead to chaotic behavior in attempts to make sense of reality while still lacking the clarity to see what is really happening.
For example, due to a lack of understand our world, many people champion centralized authoritarian systems of rulers to rule over everyone else, playing dichotomous games of voting for others to solve our problems for us. When one party doesn't work out for us, the majority votes in the others party, and back and forth we swing in an infinite pendulum, stuck in a false dichotomy for our way of life.
Removing one polarity of falsity we accept or believe to be "true" will provide us with more clarity to see a truth we previously ignored or overlooked. Rather than not being able to see it due accepting falsity, now we can see it. Removing falsity and the negative manifestations of behavior (like immorality) is where the balancing -- of what is more important; of what weights more in our lives; and of what is of greater value -- can happen. So long as falsities, obfuscations or confusions are accepted, they will prevent acceptance of greater truths, clarity and vision of what to do.
We are supposed to apply a "balance" scale measure to our actions and behaviors, not to balance right and wrong action, but to put more weight, value and importance to align ourselves -- to balance ourselves -- with the polarity of truth, good, right, morality, justice, order (Maat), not to blindly "balance" and accept to do right and wrong actions "equally", to speak with truth and falsity "equally", to be "centered" in doing both right and wrong, etc.
We can also balance our knowledge of truth and falsity, good and evil, right and wrong. This is to know the difference between good and evil, right and wrong, truth and falsity, so as to not fall for evil, wrong or falsity in our lives and the way we live it. With the knowledge and understanding gained, we can balance ourselves (actions, deeds, desires) against the feather of truth and see if we measure up to various truths (like moral truth), and then change our behavior in accordance to "revive", "rebirth" or "resurrect" ourselves into better versions of who we can be.
In terms of the implicit balance, middle, equal, unity, etc., there are indeed valid aspects of life where this can be applied. We can balance and bring unity to our expressions of consciousness, to balance the "mind and heart" or the "left" and "right-brain"; thought, emotion and action; and the body (action), mind (thought) and "soul" (emotion). There is unity of "dualities" or "opposites" that need to be complements to each other forming a unified whole ("mind/heart", "left/right" brain); and the unity of multiple categories like the trinity of thought, emotion and action that will also complement each other when unified. We unite and are "balanced" based in non-contradiction of our own capacities, where what we think, feel and do is not conflicting or contradicting.
It's not a "perfect" or fixed static middle or balance when some opposites are united (like left and right-brain thinking), but a fluctuating dynamic use of the capacities we have within us. Rejecting certain capacities in consciousness -- like someone who is more "left" or "right" brain thinking/being that rejects the opposite -- comes from not understanding who we are.
Of course certain people may have more propensity or aptitude at using certain functionality of consciousness. We have similar or different personality types compared to others, but we all have a near infinite potential within us. We all have consciousness that has the same capabilities at the core, but we all grow up different, engage in things differently, and gain different knowledge and experiences to shape us into who we are and what consciousness functionalities we develop more of.
Some of these capacities in consciousness within us need to be used and developed for greater harmonious unity within ourselves. It leads to creating and manifesting actions in the world that better reflect an understanding of what shouldn't be created into existence, like wrong-actions that may seem right. Being more emotional and denying logical critical processing can lead people to be manipulated more easily and believe something wrong is "right"; while being more logical and denying the significance of emotional salience and feeling harms/wrongs can lead to justifying wrongs and manipulating people. In either case, wrong-actions result from not being a more fully developed being that uses complimentary capacities to navigate life.
We balance our modalities of consciousness -- "left-right" brain, "mind-heart", thought-emotion-action -- in order to be unified in ourselves, and this allows us to be more balanced and aligned with truth, right, good, etc. That's how we get in an "upright" position of "balance".
Follow your heart - goes on to steal someone's husband/wife. Yup. Whoever said that definitely forgot that emotions aren't always right.
HAha! Exactly. The folly of one-sided appeals to emotions will lead one astray. Thanks for that valuable feedback.
What if you think, if I say the balance parable is, good and bad, black and white, heaven and hell, man and woman, earth and sky, sun and moon, water and fire, etc., all in pairs, Already set to create balance .. how do you think ..?
Enter my favorite guy- Heraclitus... The world is in a constant state of flux (paraphrase). What we must strive for is a dynamic equilibrium (that's sounds much more erudite than "balance").
The same principle holds true for us as individuals. If one is too "right brained" it creates a disharmony... the same principle is true of people who rely too much on the "left-brain" aspect of their nature. Harmony... harmony & dynamic equilibrium in all things my Brother!
Yeah the term "dynamic equilibrium" can specify a more precise application of "balance" in certain contexts, I like it! Thanks.
I wrote a book about it using it as a model for political analysis. Never got published... story of my life!
A balance between two things is often just not something to seek. As you are probably well aware of the argument to moderation is a well-established logical fallacy.
Yup good catch, that is often used in conjunction with the belief in blind "balance", that EVERYTHING is ok as long as it's "balanced" in moderation lol.
Yep, that's an absolutely flawed belief. When you have a good option and a bad option, there is no need for balance between the two and the right place is by no means in the middle.
That's why compromise isn't the best solution. I often hear about how compromise is the best way to go through life... or the only way ... lol. Yet those people don't seem to look at the how to make real progress, 1, +1, +1, but they like to do 1, +1, -1, +2, -2, +1, +2, +1, -3. Gradualistic thinking, 2 steps forwards, one step back. Half measures, half-truths. The real solution is always to start at fundamentals like definition of terms to establish the same level of understanding and then arrive at the actual truth that can be arrive at. Thanks for the feedback.
I agree. Many people think they are advocating for balance, but they are in fact slowing down progress by trying to find some balance between the problem and what is often the solution.
@krnel really valuable piece of information. Interesting post of balance between right and left brain. Just followed you and Upvoted. I completely agree with your statement We can balance our knowledge
Yup, we can know positive good acts like charity or helping an old woman across a street, but we need to know what wrong acts are more importantly. If we don't know what's wrong then we don't know if we're doing wrong and can't stop it. Overt human slavery was one such example. Thanks for the feedback.
its all about having positive balances
LOL From your avatar I assume you mean bank balances =p
While I will not deny that having assets is valuable, I do disagree that 'it' is all about that.
If one doesn't suffer a loss now and then, what is the point? One might as well be a slime mold for all the growth in understanding one would derive from such a featureless existence.
Take a chance, take a hit, take a profit, when it's time.
I think of it as having two meanings. One being monetarily and the other meaning being whats described in this post.
I got the idea for my name from an Immortal Technique song called Positive Balances.. listen to it you may enjoy
I am unfamiliar with the band name. I suspect a rap/R&B outfit. Amirite?
Yessir youre right, its nothing like the mainstream garbage that's being pushed on the radio though
Copy that, over.
Generally a well conceived and written post. I particularly appreciated the reference to Egyptian religious symbolism.
However, there are some unfounded assumptions, such as that our left and right brains operate optimally when equally called upon. It is rather that we each, as you noted, have our particular strengths, and tend to perform best when playing to our strengths.
As conditions change, our use of our various left- or right-brained talents become more or less important. But this is really a trivial criticism, one I am sure you would have arrived at, or been able to express had you focused more on the issue, rather than on your overall thesis.
A more serious criticism is that we should not be without strife. Any philosophical essay that neglects the importance of stress cannot promote growth. It is at the edges of our lives that we grow, where things are unknown, and chaotic. It is there we learn new things, and discover the things we thought we knew weren't true after all.
Balance, the concept of peaceful stability, has appropriate moments. Shredding on the edge of survival may well be more valuable and informative. Perhaps one must maintain a balance between peace and terror, love and anger, joy and grief, to really fully reach one's potential.
I know that those moments I most regret, those events I most desperately tried to avert, but which nonetheless overwhelmed me, the losses I feel most poignantly, are those from which I have most grown.
Peaceful, lazy days I barely remember.
Thanks for a thought provoking post!
All thought is distraction, the wheel turns regardless of our thoughts.
The only balance I have found is to embrace and accept ALL.
namaste
That's part of the problem, this "no thinking" nonsense. Accept all the evil, no nothing, tolerate it, sure.... LMAO. No, accept that it exists, but don't accept that is needs to be. Things can change.
I live with pain, and I found a great deal of strength in the acceptance of it. Some things cannot change.
Learn some thing new from your post about balancing thanks man.
You're welcome ;)
@krnel Visionary post i seen awesome keep it up