A single line divides a page in two. It just takes one cut to separate a Dot and a Dash, to create the couple ‘0,1’, which together can express all Information.
Wisdom may be inexpressible. But Information is eminently expressible. In fact, expressibility is what makes it ‘Information’.
This, they say, is the Age of Information. ‘Information’ is from the Latin: In form-atio. Knowledge which has: ‘taken form’, in other words, given name and dimension.
The Information Age was begat in the Binary System of Number Representation.
The ability of the computer’s magnetic core to organize all information in hierarchical structures of dualistic-pairs in a coding of: ‘0,1’. ‘True: False’, as the Boolean Algebra folks like to say. [Or would you prefer: ‘True: Not-True’?]
But how did you decide on the First-Divide?
If you are sure that: ‘True; False’ is itself a ‘True’ distinction you are a convert, no longer an inquirer to its truth. You stand, already divided.
So, as the Zen-Man would say, what then is your Original-Face before you were born to Male and Female?
The Subject: Object Divide doesn’t originate in heaven but in the very terrestrial assumption of a Separated ‘Self’. Cut once; get two. A pair is the first and minimal unit of division, the elemental DNA, the fundamental building block, of every Man-Made Model.
And once you grant the pair a self-evident truth, a string of irrefutable derivative extensions follow. And on this platform, all major Religions have erected their models of Divinity and Philosophy and Science, their altars of Truth.
This is the ancient metaphoric twosome of Purusha and Prakriti, loosely translatable as ‘Man and Nature’ or in folk-form, ‘Axle and Wheel’.
Subject and Object, Center and Circumference, True versus False, the Inner-Inviolate versus the Outer-Defiled, the Witness and the Witnessed, the Existent versus the Transient, Real versus Illusion, Achievement versus Shortfall. An immaculate, permanent, pure Heaven in contrast to a violated, transient, impure World.
And the Diva of all Divides: ‘I’ and ‘Not-I’.
The word: ‘Two’ has somehow managed to hold on to its clothes, keep its identity over the many centuries and continents it has crossed. I know of no other word quite like it: Dvi [Sanskrit]; Duo [Latin]; Dio [Greek]; Do [Persian]; Tvau [Norse]; Tvee [Dutch]; and you can guess ‘Zvei’ and, ‘Deux’.
‘Double’, a word cognate with Doubt, Duplicity and the Devil. The Duo in front of the Deity.
As repeatedly emphasized, there is nothing ‘Wrong’ with binary divides; there is nothing ‘Right’ either. ‘Right and Wrong’ are themselves binary divides. As are the very notions of Double and Divide.
True and False, Right and Wrong. Absence and Presence. Emptiness and Fullness. Null and Whole. These are inexact but intuitively helpful beginning conceptual pointers that exit once their work is done.
[In Plato’s “Phaedrus”, Socrates compares the soul to a team of two horses, one disciplined and obedient and the other, rebellious, unruly, driven by a human charioteer.]
The Two-ness Template is just another pedagogic tool, similar in purpose to the notion of ‘Model’. As with the notion of ‘Model’, you will need to reach for the form of the Self-Negating Expression to clear the air.
Try your hand at: ‘All is Illusion!’ in the recognition that the claim itself being part of the ‘All’, is asserted to be ‘Illusionary’. Visit the Posts on Aristotle’s defense of the Principle of Contradiction and his ‘Self-Destroying Argument’.