On the Ukraine Issue (Part 7): Graduation from "Choosing Between Two Options"

■Life goes on dialectically

My original specialty is "Dreamology".
It was my work last year to systematize the new academic field of "Integral Dream Studies" with full support from Ken Wilber's Integral Theory.
In doing so, I dug up both my "dream diary" and "diary" of daily events for 22 years from 1999 to 2021, and examined in detail a certain "symbol" that frequently appeared in my dreams, what it meant, and how these dreams were intertwined with my real life.
In 1999, I was in my early 40s. the midst of my personal growth and self-realization. I tried to illuminate the process of my own inner growth and development (or, you could say, the process of consciousness transformation) during this most critical period of my life by shining the searchlight of my dreams on it.

The details of this process are beyond the scope of this paper, but it certainly revealed something that could only be seen through such a long-span study.
The most important result of this analysis and examination is that the self (or human consciousness, or life itself) grows and develops through a dialectical process.
The process of the life course indicated by my dreams over the past 22 years was as follows.
First, the dream shows the highest priority life issue for me at that time. Then, the opposites are immediately presented. Then, the challenge of how to reconcile (integrate) the two is further presented. When that task is accomplished, the next axis of conflict appears.
In this way, I can clearly see that my life has been progressing in a dialectical manner. In other words, I have not moved forward while abandoning my preceding self, but rather, I have moved forward while "containing and transcending" my preceding self.
The important point here is that the dream presents the task first, and reality progresses in accordance with the task.

Every one of us, without exception, is faced with a choice between two alternatives at each juncture of our life path: "Take route A or take route B." After much deliberation, we always end up choosing one or the other. In fact, however, the choice that one does not make does not disappear, but rather changes form and always reappears before one's eyes once again. Here, "change of form" means "another phenomenon with the same meaning". In other words, it could mean that what appears as a phenomenon reflects the state of a person's mind at that time.

It is as if we already have a set of growth and developmental tasks that we must complete during our lifetime, and each of these tasks is presented in turn as our life progresses. Although the order may change, no one is exempted from any of these tasks. This is also shown in Wilber's Integral Theory.

■Dialectics at work in the fate of nations and international relations

In fact, the same can be said for the development of a nation. Since a nation is also an aggregate of individuals, its citizens, the challenges that individuals must overcome are also challenges that the nation must overcome. Of course, in a dictatorship, the degree of personal growth (self-transformation) of the dictator will determine political decisions (the fate of the nation). If the state is a system that strongly reflects public opinion, the degree of growth of public opinion will determine the fate of the country.
At the risk of sounding harsh, when a situation like the infectious disease occurs, the dialectical process will not take place as long as people are forced to choose between two options, such as "prevention of the spread of infectious diseases or economic activities," and choose or give priority to either one or the other. Unless we derive a third option that establishes both opposing axes at once, neither problem will be solved. We should be forced to experience this in an ongoing way.
If the political system of a nation is still stuck in the "two-party approach," each citizen must find a third way that "includes and transcends" the two as his or her personal life choice. That is what "the time with COVID-19" truly means.
This is also true for the current Ukraine issue.
As long as we are convinced that the only way to stop Russian invasion of Ukraine is through military aid to Ukraine and economic sanctions against Russia, in other words, as long as we continue to support one pole of the conflict and impose sanctions on the other pole, the dialectical process will not occur. As long as we are stuck in a two-party approach, we will only work to intensify the East-West confrontation, rather than to solve the problem.

■Graduation from "Choosing Between Two Options"

Now, let me offer this lesson there.
"There can never be only two options for any given thing. "

Are you looking for evidence of Yes, or are you looking for evidence of No to the question before you?
In fact, if you look for evidence of Yes, you will find plenty; if you look for evidence of No, you will find just as much.
People who want things to be black or white have only one eye opened.
People who try to ask "black or white," "yes or no," "right or wrong," "good or evil," see things only in a flat way.
However, we live in a three-dimensional world, not a two-dimensional one. In other words, it is a world that is both expansive and deep at the same time.
It is only when we open both eyes that we can see things three-dimensionally. The significance of having two eyes is significant.

It is said, "He who chases two hares will get neither."
In reality, if you don't chase two hares, you won't get one. Giving up one of the two is equivalent to learning only half of the methodology to get what you want. What you get with half of the methodology is not half, but zero (in fact, it may even have a negative effect).
The thought of "at least - at least" drives us into a corner, demeans us, and makes even that "at least" impossible.
The methodology of gaining two hares at the same time has a different dimension from the methodology of gaining one.
To try to gain two hares at the same time is to keep the third hare in your sights as well. However, the objective is not to gain all three hares. You must take one hare with the intention of taking all three. This methodology changes the purpose of trying to get the hare itself.

There can never be only two options for any given thing. There are always more than two options. Dualistic thinking is the immediate hurdle we must now overcome.
When faced with a choice between two options, look for the third option that makes both possible. The third option is not "besides" the two options. If it were, you would not be inclined to choose it.
The third option should be one that satisfies both options at the same time and yet goes beyond the two. Only when you find it will your eyes be opened (and possibly a third eye as well).

"Can I even conceive of such a thing?"
You can't conceive while you think that way.
What you must graduate from is the very idea that there is no other answer.

Nevertheless, there will inevitably be times in life when you will have to choose between two options. Of course, you will choose one or the other. However, it does not mean that the choice you did not make will disappear.
Choosing one of the two is merely taking the first step toward the final answer. Graduation is another name for admission.
The other, the one you did not choose, will eventually change its appearance and come before you again. At that time, you will be forced to open your eyes a step higher.
Thus, to answer one problem is to prepare for the emergence of the next problem.
And you will realize, for the first time, the true meaning of gaining one hare while keeping the third hare in your sights.
Stepping up in life and having your eyes opened are always one and the same.

By striving to find a third option that allows for both when faced with a choice between the two, you are taking the first step toward acquiring an "alien's perspective".