This or That?

February 4, 2022

“‘Black and White’ thinking is a choice.”

For this piece, let’s call this “B+W” thinking.

And, despite its seeming popularity, it’s pretty overrated.

Before we unpack this a bit, though, I’m curious: Do YOU think it’s a choice?

In other words, do you think we always have to look at people/ideas/events/things etc. in either/or terms? Either this or that? Right or wrong? Moral or immoral?

This way of thinking is sometimes called dualistic, which is basically a derivative or “morality”, and what we often refer to here as “absolutism”.

It’s either absolutely this or it’s absolutely that.

However you want to word it, the question is simple: Do we always have to relate with a sense of whether or not we condemn or condone? In gentler terms, we call this “liking/disliking.”

To you, is this or is this not a choice?

If you think it is, cool. We can probably have some fun pretty quickly then, and we can definitely get creative.

If you think otherwise, or you’re simply not sure, allow me to be blunt: It is a choice, and in reality, there is mostly “gray”.

Let’s put this in pretty provocative terms. I have had a lot of conversations with people recently—and over the years in general—about aggression, and about violence. Here’s a first principle: If someone or something exists, it is part of life. It wouldn’t exist otherwise.

B+W thinking is objectively violent, in that it violates something or someone else’s claim to exist. You can only truly embrace B+W thinking if you are willing to violate something or someone (which, by the way, we do to ourselves).

Does B+W thinking inevitably lead to more egregious “violence”.

No. Of course not. We’re human. We self-regulate.

Is it related, though? Yes.

Here’s the trickiest part, though: none of this means it’s “wrong”. B+W thinking also matters, as does, yes, “violence” (and aggression).

Don’t think so? Cool. Good luck. That’s why people roll their eyes at spirituality, fyi.