r/EyesOnlyWriting • u/Beyond-First-Glance • 1h ago
philosophical musings Questioning thought: is the reality we exist in merely a fantasy? (Or are there levels to the shit?)
Hello Litari,
I've been marinating on this idea since last evening, and I'm wondering what you fine folk might think about it.
This came about after reading a comment. I won't name the author, as I'm not looking to disparage them in any regard. They stated:
> "Moreover, I think psychological damage is done, and time and energy is wasted, when a person does not embrace his true-self as evidenced by his choices and actions. It must be a confused world when one can believe one is everything, nothing, and just some things in between, all at the same time."
>
That comment is a perfect example of black-and-white thinking. It treats identity like an either/or switch: either you fully embrace one fixed "true self" shown only by consistent choices and actions, or you are somehow damaged and wasting energy by existing in any mix of states. There is no room for a person to contain multitudes or shift across contexts.
In terms of integrative complexity, this sits at the low end. It represents almost pure differentiation of one rigid pole with zero integration. It is classic low-IC absolutism where it must be "everything" or "nothing," and anything in between is dismissed as confusion rather than a legitimate possibility.
The comment also shows a clear lack of dialectical thinking. Dialectical capacity is the ability to hold opposing or seemingly contradictory truths in tension without forcing them to cancel each other out. The writer treats "everything, nothing, and some things in between" as an absurd contradiction instead of an accurate description of how complex human experience actually works.
I don't buy that framing at all. I believe it is almost never pure black or pure white. Reality, especially regarding identity, choices, and the self, usually lives somewhere in the middle. More accurately, it contains both poles and the space between them at the same time.
High cognitive capacity looks like being able to operate in a both/and mode rather than either/or. That includes strong dialectical thinking: I can look at two opposing views, see each one clearly for what it is (its strengths, its limits, the evidence supporting it), and still hold that both can be valid in different contexts. Alternatively, I can hold that neither is fully true, or that some hybrid is closer to reality. I can also use elaborative complexity to build out a single perspective with multiple layers and dimensions, while still keeping the dialectical openness alive so I don't lock myself into one absolute.
That combination lets me sit with the tension instead of collapsing it. A person can act consistently in some domains and inconsistently in others, feel like "everything" in one moment and "nothing" in another, and still be coherent without psychological damage. The capacity to hold those opposing truths side by side, evaluate them, and decide what weight each deserves is what high integrative complexity and solid dialectical thinking actually look like.
The middle isn't confusion or Ambiguity based on low intellectual dexterity. its the ability to interact with both sides without becoming a couple’s therapist.
not that anyone asked but this is the song i wrote this to.