Enjoyed the invention of a new term in the writer’s room today “Dilinequity”. We are becoming a knowing parody of ourselves
Afterwards I was playing around with incompatible truths inspired by the story, just to see if I could start to get a handle on this. I noticed that I was drawn to something I’ve been using in my coaching practice; the use of ‘and’ to question dualism, to be able to hold apparently or actually contradictory truths. I began to ask myself if an inequity might be a paradox?
I woke up this morning thinking about the paradox of observation.
People behave differently when they are being watched.
We need to observe natural behaviour in order to understand it.
Is it possible that we were operating at one level removed from the source of the inequity, when we already said ‘people can mislead others to get what they want’. Isnt the source of the inequity, why they need to mislead them?
I can see that maybe this would be a different story though, perhaps.
What I did think was interesting is how this paradox breaks up the quad underneath understanding. The first one seems to be about conditioning and instinct and the second element about senses and interpretation.
And this all gets a bit meta when I consider this quote from Kierkegaard “This, then, is the ultimate paradox of thought: to want to discover something that thought itself cannot think.”