Ch. 8 Quantum Logic (3/23-3/29)

[Hannah]

Classify the following propositions as true, false or maybe.

A. In 1933, Franklin Roosevelt became President of the United States.

B. In 1932, Franklin Roosevelt became President of the United States.

C. On January 18,1932, Cary Grant had his 28th birthday.

D. The river Necker flows through the city of Frankfurt.

E. The river Necker flows through the city of Heidelberg.

F. Humanity evolved from Old World apes.

G. Force always equals mass multiplied by acceleration.

H. Francis Bacon wrote the plays attributed to Shakespeare.

I. Sex education leads to an increase in sex crimes.

J. In the years in which sex education increased in the U.S., reported sex crimes also increased.

K. The census of 1890 showed 4,000,000 inhabitants of New York City.

L. An ordinary pack of cigarettes contains 20 cigarettes.

M. Ronald Reagan knew about the Iran-Contra guns-and-cocaine deals of North, Secord and Hull.

N. Ronald Reagan did not know about the Iran-Contra crimes until he heard the news on TV.

O. All the differences between men and women result from cultural training.

P. Sombunall of the differences between men and women result from cultural training.

Q. All differences between men and women result from genetic factors (testosterone, estrogen etc.)

R. Sombunall of the differences between men and women result from genetic factors (e.g., testosterone, estrogen etc.)

Q. The lost continent of Atlantis exists under the sea near Bermuda.

R. The lost continent of Atlantis never existed.

S. Hitler only had one testicle.

[jjones]

Sorry for the late reply. I hope that everyone had a fantastic Equinox!

This chapter really revolutionized my thinking the first time I read it. The essence of the chapter (in my understanding) was this idea of a "Maybe" state that is often overlooked by those who constrain themselves to Aristotelian logic. This chapter provides one of the most easily accessible explanations of ideas related to Schrodinger's Cat (without even mentioning cats dying in boxes).

RAW emphasizes that while most people like things to fit neatly into "True" or "False," most of our knowledge actually exists in a "Maybe" state. In other words, our egos love to fool ourselves into higher levels of certainty than we are actually capable of perceiving. One of the best examples RAW provides is that many people like to claim with 100% certainty that Jesus IS the Son of God. Since this is an untestable claim, it would be much more ontologically accurate to state, "Maybe Jesus is the Son of God." Of course, this assumes that the individual has not been indoctrinated with Christian dogma that says you must dominate others with claims of utmost certainty about who Jesus's father might have been (regardless that we didn't have DNA testing back then) lest other Christians doubt your faith in God.

It's not that I don't think people are aware of the "Maybe" category. In fact, I believe that if you ask people whether or not they acknowledge the "Maybe" category, most people will say yes (not unlike how almost everyone will tell you they want to work on themselves, even when they are actively resisting the work). However, when the moment arises that "Maybe" seems to be the best answer, many seem to forget that "Maybe" exists. This can be explained by Cognitive Behavior Psychology, and the theory of Cognitive Dissonance.

The theory of Cognitive Dissonance explains that people prioritize minimizing Cognitive Dissonance in decision making. Cognitive Dissonance is the discomfort that arises from trying to hold two conflicting ideas in your conscious awareness at once. This implies a spectrum of intensity of Cognitive Dissonance as well as individual tolerance to Cognitive Dissonance. Because many who are trapped within sensate experience seem to compulsively do what will make them feel comfortable in the moment (regardless of the long term consequences), many do not develop a very strong tolerance to Cognitive Dissonance and instead collapse at even the slightest experience of opposing beliefs. This aversion to Cognitive Dissonance is one of the major mechanisms that maintains and enforces a collapsed or contracted level of awareness. I don't think this is very hard to believe but if you don't believe me, just take a look at political debate within the last 10 years for plenty of examples.

What this theory seems to be ultimately getting at, however, is that people are not comfortable with the "Maybe" category. An individual's ability to hold things in the "Maybe" category inherently requires a higher tolerance of Uncertainty and Cognitive Dissonance. If Cognitive Dissonance arises from Uncertainty (specifically the uncertainty of how to reconcile two seemingly opposed ideas), then those who cannot handle Cognitive Dissonance are inherently not using the "Maybe" category. To use the "Maybe" category is to admit to oneself that, "This may be true or may be false, I just am uncertain at this current stage of awareness."

In fact, so much of Magick seems to be about training our Uncertainty muscles. Many practices even force the practitioner to confront Cognitive Dissonance head on, causing the practitioner to surrender to the Uncertainty because we are engaging in a Non Rational activity. The Non Rational inherently defies rationality. Since society often defines rationality as the ability to accurately label objects "True" or "False," when we engage in a ritual practice without lust of result, we are actively saying, "If I do this ritual, maybe my intention will be realized." This might help to explain why Non Rational practices (including Magick) continue to hold so much power and cause profound change in the practitioner. A magician is actively strengthening their mind to hold Cognitive Dissonance without collapse, effectively loosening the death grip that Rationality imposes when Rationality is threatened.

To go back to the idea that people will tell you they know about the "Maybe" category and then fail to use it, it often seems to me that people don't know when to use it. And since the ego likes certainty, it can be so hard to resist the urge to collapse your awareness for the sake of momentary mental and/or emotional comfort. If your life has been built on a value system that hinges on the absolute reality that Jesus is the Son of God, when you try to take that away from someone, it causes them a profound amount of pain. Suddenly, their whole worldview is being attacked, and the idea that they could've believed in something else (something else which maybe triggers greater life experience) reveals just how shaky their Foundation is.

But as we grow in our abilities to reconcile opposites, hold conflicting ideas, and manage Uncertainty & Cognitive Dissonance, we develop in our ability to perceive nuance and depth. Eventually, our mental muscles reach a stage where the seemingly opposing ideas that caused us profound mental discomfort in the past are revealed to not oppose each other at all, and each can exist in their own right.