Monistic Pluralism & Pole Dichotomies

The following is an essay I wrote for a philosophy class; what do you think? leave some comments.

Monistic Pluralism & Pole Dichotomies

The first of the seven characteristics of classical American philosophical thought is the ‘rejection of modern philosophy’ (Stuhr, 3). The reason for rejecting the prior pattern of thought was that it was “fundamentally dualistic” and attempted to answer philosophical questions in terms of dichotomies. These dichotomies are not actual categories that exist separate of the object we are describing but rather descriptions that we create to contrast one to another. We say ‘either/or’ in attempts to understand that thing’s essence; at least in terms of its relationships to idealized signs (Stuhr, 66). The pattern that emerges from this thought process is one of discrimination, separation, exclusion, and isolation where parts no longer constitute a whole but have an individuality that drives them apart. Philip Kapleau writes in the introduction to Zen Keys:

“We are deceived by our limited five senses and discriminating intellect (the sixth sense in Buddhism) which conveys to us a picture of a dualistic world of self-and-other, of things separated and isolated ... This picture is untrue because it barely scratches the surface. ... For if we could see beyond the ever-changing forms into the underlying reality, we would realize that in essence there is nothing but harmony and unity” (Hahn, 8).

This dualistic view of the world cannot give us a complete understanding because the mind does not function like a box with separate containers but more like a stream flowing with multidirectional currents (Stuhr, 149).

In opposition to this dualistic perspective, the classical American philosophy offers two seemingly opposite yet interrelated options: a monistic view and pluralistic view. The monistic belief is that the true nature of the universe is as a singularity; one wholeness that we are too limited to understand so we cling onto parts. Pluralism holds that because our experiences are unique to us as individuals that they are all equally valuable and equally real. As William James writes, “For pluralism, all that we are required to admit as the constitution of reality is what we ourselves find empirically realized in every minimum of finite life” (Stuhr, 4). It is entirely possible for individuals to have pluralistically valid individual experiences while at the same time existing as part of an integrated whole.

Jill Bolte Taylor, a neuro-anatomist explains how both dualistic and monistic thought are embedded within us. She presents a model where the left and right hemispheres of the brain have seemingly different personalities. While this lateralization of personalities within brain might be debated, her description of the left hemisphere fits with what William James calls The Tough-Minded while the right hemisphere is Tender-Minded. It is the left hemisphere, says Taylor, that is responsible for the ego and hence the duality of ‘I’ verses the ‘other’ while the right hemisphere has a tendency for a monistic view of being one with everything. Interestingly enough, she describes the ‘I’ to be solely concerned with past and future while the ‘we’ is solely in the now moment (Taylor). The ability to remember the past as a source of experience and foresee the future has very practical applications in terms of human survival. Unfortunately, this ability also leads to anxiety as we worry over possible outcomes. The ability to be ‘in the now’ can lead to internal peace and well-being. As James would agree, “we are actually multiple selves” functioning as one mutually interdependent being with “neurological unity” (Stuhr, 142).

Hegel is quoted as saying, “The aim of knowledge is to divest the objective world of its strangeness and to make us more at home in it” (Stuhr, 153). But this raises the question of how do we become more comfortable in a world where increasing knowledge leads to greater separation and distinction and we become stranger and farther away from the world we live in. To use an analogy, it is as if we began to take a clock apart to see how it works. We began studying and cataloguing all the parts and even figuring out how they relate to one another, but we became so engrossed in our work that by time we put the clock back together we forgot what its purpose was. Hegel speaks about this process:

“[the object is] a totality in itself, while at the same time (as this identity is only the implicit identity of its dynamic elements) it is equally indifferent to its immediate unity. It thus breaks up into distinct parts, each of which is itself the totality. Hence the object is the absolute contradiction between a complete independence of the multiplicity, and the equally complete non-independence of the different pieces” (Hegel).

I think this idea was at least in part represented when Charles Sanders Peirce critiqued the Cartesian method of doubt- for to be absolutely certain of everything we know and feel would divest the universe of its purpose and meaning (Stuhr, 45).

The act of drawing boxes within our minds to categorize information can be a useful way to establish facts, however if we are not careful we may forget that we have the option to view the world as a unified whole. It is quite possibly because of an imbalance in the dichotomic equilibrium with the human character that we are facing the world crises we see today (although it could possibly also be accredited as to why we are around today). The aim is for the observing mind to see the universe as a unified whole while simultaneously being able to make the distinctions that enable survival. Such a method combining monism with pluralism may lead to the ability for a richer understanding.

Works Cited

Hahn, Thich Naht. Zen Keys. Garden City NY: Doubleday, 2005.

Hegel, Georg. "Hegel, The Notion, Part B. The Object." Encyclopedia of Philosophical Sciences. 13 Mar 2009 .

Stuhr, John J. (Ed.). (2000). Pragmatism and Classical American Philosophy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Taylor, Jill Bolte. "My Stroke of Insight." TED 229Mar 2008 13 Mar 2009 .