binary philosophy, nature, and me

[Mondrian]

I felt I had a significant moment of epiphany yesterdy afternoon where I realised that there were no pre-ordained rules governing my life.

I then considered how this notion of a certain pre-ordained, metaphysical, ethical, spiritual reality had been guiding and holding back my life. I felt I was closer to expressing who I am or doing what I want to do.

I then went on to think about how for so many years I have been focussed on the inner world but that now I am wanting to express in the outer world. I have welcomed this as a bit of a break through.

But then I started applying this binary philosophy to my situation. By that, I mean the idea that everything needs its opposite in order to exist e.g. day and night. So I thought that my failed attempt to scale the invented inner heights of enlightenment was now just switching to the outer world and that my attempt at riches here would be correspondingly illusory and subject to failure.

I questioned the merit of having epiphanies at all, for to have a moment of insight, lucidity and clarity is to assert the existence of longer periods of confusion to which one must return in order to emerge into the next epiphany.

I had been looking for something tht did not have an opposite and this is perhaps nature in the sense of the originary thing that exists before dualities spring into life or individual physical things spring into existence, either conceptually or chronologically. In a similar sense, everything is natural because everything originated from this 'point'.

I'm also thinking that this natural point is the creative point and I am thinking as to whether the real me is at this creative point. It seems that if I look to this or that, career, for example, I am forever seeing part of myself as with that career and part of myself as with some other career. For in asserting the suitability of a career thatI am not currently engaged in, I assert the reality of the possibility to be engaged in the other kind of career.

I'm wondering whether I should chuck out the binary philosophy, whether its applcation is flawed. It seems to leave me with nowhere to go as doing one thing asserts the necessity of the other that it is not.

I'm wondering whether it is this natural point that is not subject to binary. However, it seems that this point can only be uncovered rather than named, in the same way that not-smoking is not a thing but the absence of something preventing a natural state.

Obviously I'm confused.

I was startng to think that that Darksage (remember that thread a few of months ago?) fellow had a point about how everything both is and is not at the same time.