Daniel Sih: [00:00] Hey there, Spacemakers. I'm Daniel Sih here with my good friend and co-host, Matt Bain. Welcome to season five of The Spacemakers, a podcast to help you live an intentional, meaningful life.

This season, we're exploring an idea that could change the way you see almost everything. How to hold two seemingly opposite truths in tension at the same time. Moving from either or to both and thinking, work and life. Artificial and human intelligence. Pace and space. [00:29] It's a pod course to help you navigate complexity, think deeply, and embrace the power of both and. Thanks to our generous long-term sponsor, Bulk Nutrients.

Narrator: This is the Spacemakers.

Daniel Sih: Hi everyone, welcome back. This is Daniel Sih from the Spacemakers podcast. And we are here exploring season five, how to make space to navigate complexity through both and thinking. And I want to start with a quote from Einstein.

[00:58] It always makes us look smart. Albert Einstein once said, there are only two ways to live. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle.

And I really like that quote because we can walk through life thinking that everything is mundane, not looking at the wonder or the beauty of anything, or we can start to see the creativity in life, to see the mystery, uh, to see the wonder to see the miracle in everyday events. Uh [01:27] and let me give you an example, okay? And uh, if you're driving, you know, do this quite carefully, but I want you to uh look at your hand. I want you to look at your hand, and I want you to take your thumb and touch your little finger to simply oppose your thumb to your little finger. Now, that simple idea of touching your thumb to your finger is miraculous.

It is amazing. Uh, in fact, it's one of the many things that differentiate humans from all the other animals that we have an opposable thumb. Uh, let me [01:57] let me read something from Roger Martin, who wrote the book, The Opposable Mind. He says, human beings are distinguished from nearly every other creature by a physical feature known as the opposable thumb. Thanks to the tension we can create by opposing the thumb and finger, we can do marvelous things that no other creature can do.

Write, thread a needle, carve a diamond, paint a picture, guide a catheter up through an artery and unblock it. [02:25] So, what's even more fascinating is Martin's deeper point. Similarly, we were born with an opposable mind. We can use to hold two conflicting ideas in constructive tension. We can use that tension to think our way through a new and superior idea. So today we are exploring this wonderful, amazing creative idea of both end thinking, what it looks like to have an opposable mind, uh, which is even more amazing than having an opposable thumb. [02:55] It allows us to think about two conflicting, opposing ideas at the same time, to come up with creative tensions and to imagine a better future, all of which is incredibly necessary to navigate a world of complexity and to make space. Welcome, Matt. Do you have an opposable thumb?

Matt Bain: Uh, I've got two, actually. Just for the record, I got two. Packing a spare, which is good. Uh, this is going back a step, and I know Einstein's probably a bad guy to have beef with. But I thought I liked that quote. I actually don't think that I do like that quote. [03:25] I think if you end up saying that either nothing is a miracle or nothing's miraculous, or everything is miraculous. You actually end up saying the same thing.

Daniel Sih: You just think about it. It's like so, say everyone's beautiful, then no one's beautiful.

Matt Bain: You know what I mean? It's just, it's, it's it's lazy.

Daniel Sih: I'm glad you started off with um personal rant, Matt. That's okay. But um, we are talking about both and why it's important to make space for both and thinking.

Matt Bain: We tried to make the case that the world is definitely getting more complicated for a whole variety of reasons. [03:54] And the feelings that come with that are usually one of perhaps overwhelm or numb, numbness, I think. And um, in the face of that increasing complexity, it's far too easy to kind of resort to when you're faced with a particular problem to go with solution A or solution B, and they're usually like polar opposites. We tried to argue that again, because of that increase in complexity, those kind of simplistic responses, just going with A or B, is not going to help you. [04:23] The complexity of the unfolding world world requires a more complex response. And that's what led us to talk about paradoxes, or a simple way of putting it, response that is either both and.

Daniel Sih: So we're gonna talk today about the miracle. I know you like that word, of both and thinking. Yeah.

Matt Bain: But the thumbs. Impossible thumbs. We're gonna talk about a few metaphors that can help our listeners really understand the power of paradox. Yes. Uh, particularly around the area of productivity and work and life where we're focusing this season. [04:53] And so I want to kick off with another smart guy, just because you seem to be critiquing them. You've critiqued um Albert Einstein. Let's see if you can critique near Bohr. Um Nobel Prize winning physicist. He says there are trivial truths. Always a physicist.

Daniel Sih: Always the physicist. He says there are trivial truths and there are great truths. The opposite of a trivial truth is plainly false. The opposite of a great truth is also true. And I think that speaks a lot to paradox. Of course, there are simplistic ideas which just don't make any sense. [05:23] But once you dive deeply into almost any field, you find complex truths which are oppositely true, which is the idea of paradox.

So look, I I first came upon the idea of paradox when I was in school. Uh and I remember it was physics was the first kind of class where I came across this kind of complex idea of both and light is both a wave and a particle, or at least it can only be understood in the context of looking at it as a wave and as a particle. Now, I'm not a physicist, [05:53] but I know that how can it be both?

But at the same time, it has to be both, otherwise it doesn't make sense. So this is called wave particle duality. Basically, scientists have argued or argued for centuries about whether light was a wave because um diffraction looked like a wave, it kind of functioned in a wave way. Um whereas a particle, you know, which knocks electrons off and and kind of does stuff like that, you can tell I'm really scientific, uh, is more of a kind of a [06:22] particle structure. You can't understand light unless you understand it as a both and um if you try to fuse it and say it's it's it's like a a particle light, well, it doesn't work, right?

But only when you hold the tensions in opposite, do you find um some description that describes the full range and spectrum of what light does? That blew my mind because it made me think, well, how can it like I argued for ages? How can it be light? How can a light be a particle?

How can it be a wave? Like it's either or. But [06:51] but only when you describe it as the and can you understand it. And then I I started to realize that that pattern exists everywhere.

Okay. And I've seen it since then in my life. Uh and and so many of the arguments we see in politics, in science, in sociology and religion, are because people are taking simplistic black and white answers and and kind of digging themselves into some type of position and then throwing stones at the other side. [07:20] And instead of that, what if we actually learnt to look at complexity through paradox? So, some examples, you know, we've talked about um in law, there's the tension of rehab versus punishment. You might say justice versus grace. Um, in politics, you know, there's the tension between individual freedom versus uh collective responsibility. That there's always a tension. Tension in governance, you know, how much do we centralize? How much do we decentralize?

Uh, how much [07:47] do we invest in big government, how much do we invest in small business? It's always a tension of a of a paradox. In theology, uh, in our tradition, God is one, God is three. Now, how can God be one and three at the same time? The idea of oneness, which describes the bigness of God, uh, and three, which describes the relationship and the love of God. You can't have love outside of relationship. Put together one and three, and you have a description of of how a Christian would understand love.

Matt Bain: [08:14] Paradoxical thinking is actually more enhanced, better way to view the world. So it's not a concession, it's not a compromise, is actually a better, more enriching way to view life.

Daniel Sih: Yeah, we talked about the spirit of both and or even the and also Yes. and means that you're not looking at you know, left wing or right wing, you're not looking at conservative or progressive, you're not looking at light or particle, like wave or particle. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, you're looking at the and the the also is the the third [08:43] opportunity or the third possibility that occurs when you actually stretch your mind to think about those possibilities.

Matt Bain: Yeah, yeah, that's right. Intention. Yeah, yeah. It just made me think of this example from the C.S. Lewis book, The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, where one of the protagonists, a boy from this world meets a talking star for the first time. And the boy says to the talking star, in our world, stars are merely balls of burning gas. And the star responds, my dear boy, [09:12] even in your world, that's um a star is simply made of a ball of burning gas, but it's not merely that. It's so much more. In terms of my appreciation, my lived appreciation of something like a star, it's useful for me to know what it's made of, but to really enjoy that star.

I don't want to stop there. I want to enjoy the stories about stars, what they've throughout history been symbolic of, like what they've represented. I want the wonder and the awe as well. And having both those perspectives [09:40] adds and enriches my appreciation of stars. Merely if I just went with one, a purely, I guess, like mythological understanding or a symbolic standing of stars, or a purely scientific.

Daniel Sih: I mean, so much of life needs to be seen from multiple angles, right? From multiple facets. So look, let me give some examples of common paradoxes just as a reminder if you didn't hear our last episode. Uh work and life is the one we're going to explore in depth. The tension between a career and well-being. Spontaneity versus planning. [10:11] Truth versus love.

I remember we were going through that one, and your comment was do I look fat in this? To answer that question, there's your paradox right there. Um self versus others. Uh familiarity versus novelty. Uh today versus tomorrow. So that's the kind of the idea of the short term versus the long term. Yeah. Left brain versus right.

Brain, uh, individual and the collective. There's paradoxes everywhere. I think the star example's great, right? In some ways, yes, it's a [10:39] ball of burning gas. On the other hand, there are metaphors that are also true that help us understand the wonder and mystery and beauty and history of what stars have meant to us. Yes.

And so I think we actually need to look at metaphor if we're going to understand paradox because there's something about metaphor that allows us to hold equal and opposite ideas and actually make sense of them. Yeah. So Matt. I'm geeky enough. I actually I actually read a book on metaphors. Uh, and I just like the title. I've got it here on YouTube. Uh I never metaphor I didn't like. [11:09] I heard the title, I'm just, I don't know, it's kind of a dad joke title.

Matt Bain: That's good. And that's the fish writing and bias.

Daniel Sih: That's a fish writing advice from you too. I know. Dr. Marty Goth wrote this book, and it's basically a history of metaphors, which is interesting. Well, I found it interesting.

I'm that type of person. Essentially, a metaphor is a style of writing that tries to capture a key aspect of one thing by relating it to another thing. Okay. So some classics include one from St. Augustine.

[11:38] The world is a book, and those who do not travel read only one page. I like that. Um, yep. U2's famous line: a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.

Matt Bain: When you're trying to throw your arms around the water.

Daniel Sih: That's right, yeah. And uh I never met a metaphor I didn't like. Apparently that's that's a play on multiple metaphors. Douglas Adams, you know, who wrote Hitch's guide to the galaxy. I like this one. [12:00] I love deadlines.

I love the whooshing noise they make as they go by. And uh, you know, so so again, it's relating one idea to the other. Okay, on the one hand, you've got this idea of procrastination of not working hard of trying to have a deadline of feeling stressed at work. And then there's a completely different idea about the wind wash, you know, whooshing past, right? But you put them together, and we can make the connection in our mind because we have an opposable mind, right? Yeah. And so that's the beauty of metaphor. So um, look, in the words of Dr.

Groh, Groth, I'm sorry, I've been saying goth. Um, [12:29] all metaphors are violations of logic in the sense that they assert two different things at the same time. [12:38] So, why don't we talk about three different metaphors that we've stumbled upon?

Matt Bain: Um Yeah, this this is an idea that I believe was at least popularized by uh the author uh and commentator and economist, Nasim Taleb, who kind of came to fame in his book Anti-Fragile. So he talks about the barbell strategy. The basic idea is that you've got a barbell, a long kind of horizontal thin cylinder with really nothing on it at all, apart from the ends, either end.

[13:05] So normally when it comes to lifting, you've got uh an equal weight or a plate on this side and an equal plate on the other, with nothing in between. And he said, particularly, I think it started off with finances. What you want to do is with your financial strategy is you want to invest, say 80 to 90% of your funds in really low-risk money-making schemes over here. So think like, you know, treasury bonds, that kind of thing.

Daniel Sih: AFTs like cash over. So yeah, so really, really low risk, conservative, and [13:34] predictable. And so you stack one end of the barbell with that. With the remaining five to 10%, you invest that in what he goes with, you know, high risk, but uh high reward funds. So venture capitalism, speculative stuff or startups, all that kind of stuff. Critically, here's a point of the barbell, you invest no money in between. So again, think of that bar itself is really got nothing on it apart from the extremities. Here's the killer, right?

This this is so good. So it's asymmetrical. [14:00] So again, 80 to 90% over here and only five to 10% over here. But what those two extremes give you is not so much balance. They insulate you from risk whilst leaving you open for a hold of opportunities that may come up via these more speculative high-risk funds.

Interesting things. So having those two extremes, if you like intention is better than going with anything in the middle. So putting like plates in the in the middle of the barbell, because the risk with going with any kind of middle middle strategy. It sounds sensible, but um, [14:28] so for example, if you're putting a bunch of money into kind of like, you know, medium reward, medium risk investments, it still leaves you open to catastrophic risk. So if things go pear-shaped, then you're still exposed. And also limits you to those, you know, probably not infrequent, but if they pay off, they pay off.

High risk, high reward opportunities. [14:49] I know the balance isn't the right term, but when you actually use a barbell, there is a sense of you need two equal and opposite ends or at least two weights that allow you to kind of hold it, right? Even though they may not be equally distributed. Yeah, that's right. Are any other examples of the other things? Yeah, sure.

Matt Bain: So from other domains of life. You think, you know what, I want to be a well-rounded, well educated person. Well, Taleb would say, okay, here's what you do. You go with what history has proven to be enduring and classic and long lasting and valuable. So 80 to 90% of your study is like with the classics [15:17] over here. So you're going, you know, with I don't know, like call it like your ancient creek, you're ruining your homo, you're reading the Iliad, then you go through your Shakespeare, blah, blah, blah, blah. Over here, with the five to 10% remainder of your time, you read like stuff that's more recent, new, novel, and kind of fringy.

What you don't do is go like with the middle, which is like whatever everyone else is deemed popular at that particular time. Because chances are the bulk of that will not endure the test of time. Right. That's one thing. Um, another thing will be fitness. [15:44] 80 to 90% is kind of like just regular zone two kind of cardio work. So it doesn't kill you, it doesn't burn you out. Five to 10% is high intensity. So zone four, zone five, and you feel it and it kills you. If you just did the high intensity stuff, then again, you'd be wrecked.

It's not sustainable. But both will leave you well rounded. What you don't do is spend most of your time in the zone three, kind of like middle of the road stuff where you think you're working hard, but you're not really working hard enough.

The key thing is like either way, you are minimizing your exposure to risk. [16:13] So in the case of unforeseen, what he calls black swan events that no one sees coming in our more and more kind of what did we call it last week? Banny world, yeah. Yeah, yeah, bounty world, there'll be more and more black swan events. So it insulates you from the risk whilst leaves you um, it leaves you open for upsides and unforeseen rewards and opportunities.

Daniel Sih: Okay, so I'm assuming a [16:30] black swan event is something that is uh out of the ballpark, it comes as a surprise and it can impact you immediately.

Matt Bain: Yeah, and if you're not prepared for it, then instead of like flourishing and growing in the face of that in the face of that event, it will torpedo and sneak.

Daniel Sih: Um I think the metaphor is really helpful because it's this idea that actually when you hold equal and opposite extremes, you somehow navigate the tensions and complexity of life better than if you somehow get to that mundane middle or the middle, like the the middle that's unhelpful. [17:00] I've been thinking a lot about politics lately, and um particularly Australian politics, which seems to be drifting towards the kind of American politics of the extremes.

And I was thinking, well, does that make sense? Do you want to go to one extreme and then go to the other extreme, you know, big tax cuts, no tax cuts, and then and then kind of basically keep flip-flopping policies. But then I realize that's not what we're talking about here. We're not saying go from one extreme and then go to the other extreme. That's more like what the authors Wendy Smith and Mary Ann Lewis call a wrecking ball, [17:30] where you literally pound one end because it's either or thinking, and then you pound the other.

What would it take for, let's say, a political party to be both and to um to hold the dichotomy of extremes in the same breath and to actually somehow navigate that. That's what would be wise. I suppose my question is would that fit this kind of thinking?

Matt Bain: My understanding would be yes, it would, because he talks about again having those things concurrently. So again, almost like running in parallel, [17:58] and he's talking about being intentional about it as opposed to again wrecking, sorry, wrecking ball swing, pencil

Daniel Sih: moving from one to the other, which is black and white. And it's reactionary, and it's reactionary, yes. So that's our first analogy or first metaphor. Yes. Um, the barbell. Uh, look, the the one I think about when I think about paradox is the metronome.

Yes. Now the metronome is a bit different from the barbell because it's a lot of movement, which I think adds something. Okay, so imagine a metronome, uh, you know, metronome, obviously being something that you keep time of when you're doing music.

Obviously. Tick, tick, [18:27] tick on the video, you know, on YouTube, I've literally swinging my elbow back and forth like a metronome, and it creates a semicircle. Okay, if you imagine the swing of the metronome, it creates this semicircle between two equal and opposite extremes. And I think that's a good description of paradox or both and as well, because on the one hand you have work, on the other hand, you have life. On the one hand, you have today, on the other hand, you have tomorrow.

You might have an open door policy, then you have deep work. And the metronome creates [18:56] movement, but it also creates the parameters through which you might make decisions. So some days you might lean more into one end of that extreme, others you might lean into the other. You can't always in some seasons you might lean heavily into let's say work, and then other seasons lean heavily into you know, life and family relationships. Um, you can't ever ignore either, so to kind of weight it so heavily one way that you ignore the rest, [19:22] but you need to constantly be ticking back and forth, making micro adjustments, um, and to be making wise choices about where do I use my time, holding those two equal and opposite intention?

Matt Bain: So it sounds like as opposed to the barbell, um, the barbell metaphor, this one is being more conscious and informed by the context and the environment. And also this one highlights the fact that you can't ignore one or the other, like you said, [19:48] which goes back to our more clinical definition of paradox, which involves interdependence. Yeah, you can't ignore them because they are on one fundamental, like profound level, they're connected.

Daniel Sih: When they're part of the same semicircle, right? But the extremes need to be held intention. Do you want to dive into a third metaphor, which is walking the tightrope?

Matt Bain: So this made us think of um, and I'm sure people will be familiar, some people will be familiar with this guy. His name was Philippe Petite, if I'm pronouncing that right. And [20:15] all the way back in 1974, he tightrope walk between the two towers without informing the authorities.

It was like it was it was basically like a flagrantly um illegal act. Um, and it was a four, yeah, it was 400 meters up in the air, and he and he had an eight-meter pole to balance going from one twin one tower to the next. And if you want to see it, it turns out I refresh my memory by watching the documentary that came out in 2008, which is called Man on [20:44] Man on Wire.

Daniel Sih: It is amazing, though, the story of like how his friends literally like what they they snuck up kind of massive over time, yeah.

Matt Bain: Over time, and then set this incredible feet up. Yeah, but either way, I mean, how does the idea of um walking a tightrope? Yes, how does that describe paradox? Because I'm on [21:06] on the one hand, it doesn't feel like paradox because it's more like balance. Yes, you know, and and I don't know, I'm not sure like the idea of work-life balance where you're always trying to feel guilty because you're not getting equal and equal amounts of balance right in your work and life. That's not what we're talking about with paradox, right?

Matt Bain: No, no, balance I think implies being static, being completely still and in terms of scales, yeah. Yeah, yeah, that's right. Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's right.

Daniel Sih: That's right. But tightrope walking is not static, right?

Matt Bain: [21:30] No, no, no. Even if it's just like tiny like little micro movements, I suppose, but you need to maintain some degree of movement and constant adjustment in order to, if you like give the illusion or the the sum effect of balance.

Daniel Sih: Yeah, so the key with a tightrope walker is you only manage to walk the line if you're constantly adjusting left and right, making micro shifts between either end, and the poll is kind of helping you with those extremes. I think part of the secret to navigating [21:59] a complex world through paradox is to be micro shifting and and making choices about do I do this or do I do that? I I know someone thinks both and when they will make completely almost seemingly opposite decisions when the context changes.

Um, and it's not because they're random or haphazard, but it's because they have the ability to read context, think both and and make adjustments to their position based on [22:27] the context, the relationships and and the time. It does, but I'm I mean, I'm

Matt Bain: here to tell you it sucks because it requires some degree of constant vigilance, doesn't it? It'd be easier if you could just, and this is why again the the lure of um black and white, simple either or thinking, right? It'd just be nice if I could be completely balanced. I suppose it's like the equivalent of like sitting in an easy chair or a lazy boy [22:53] and kicking back and not having to worry about making any micro adjustments in real time, but I can sit here and just chill out for the foreseeable future. Once and done, my decision has been made. That is so much again simpler and it sounds easier than again walking the rope and having to constantly micro adjust and constantly be attuned to your environment.

Daniel Sih: That conversation reminds me of um our chapter what is wisdom because I actually think we're asking the question, how do you make wise choices? And the way to make wise choices is to constantly navigate that [23:23] awkward tension, which and it's a lot easier to just pick a side, right? So in our book Paul Matthews, this is his this is his chapter, uh, he talks about wisdom and he talks about Proverbs 26. So written by King Solomon, it's in the scriptures, uh, and there are two proverbs that are right next to each other. So essentially two what descriptions of of wise living. Uh, one says, do not answer fools according to their folly, or you will be a fool yourself. And the very immediate one from the same person is [23:52] answer fools according to their folly, or they will be wise in their own eyes.

So, you know, I like that idea. You know, which is it? Well, he seems to be contradicting himself, but I actually think he's not.

I think he's holding paradox, right? Because there are times where you might meet a friend, you can see that you've lived that experience before, you can see that they're heading towards a cliff. It would be wise to let them know that.

And it would guide them. There'll be other times where you know [24:16] the person is clearly not open to advice. If you share what you see, you might damage the relationship.

So you're going to keep your mouth shut because it's wiser not to share advice. Two great truths. Two great truths rather than a simple truth.

Yeah. So we've got to be very careful not to drift towards either or black and white thinking, where we remove the tension and we're right and the other side are wrong. Classically, if you're right and the other side are wrong, and you can't see any reason why anyone could vote for that [24:42] party, or how anyone could think that way, or how anyone could hold that perspective, well, then you're not open enough to be able to see to see the potential of the end. Uh it doesn't mean you have to believe in everything, but it does mean we need to be open enough to hold that barbell. Hopefully that helps people kind of start to think about what we mean by paradoxical thinking.

Yeah, it's good. So Matt, we're gonna have some silence in a moment, but maybe before we do, it can be helpful to do the opposites. You know, what might the opposite [25:12] of paradoxical and also thinking look like?

Matt Bain: We've got three different, three different options for that. Uh the first you could call the mundane middle. The middle or the average, you know, or the typical may seem safe and conservative and smart, and you could say, oh, come on, man, like it's the wisdom of the crowds. Everyone's doing it. A, you are not insulating yourself against uh unnecessary risk. That's a first thing. And B, and like in our case, maybe just as, if not more important, you are closing yourself up [25:42] to surprises, to big rewards, to payoffs to enrichment to a more comprehensive understanding and appreciation of life.

Daniel Sih: Again, I think politics, you know, no one gets what they want. It's a lose-lose compromise. Whereas actually, what if there was a win-win third way rather than either-or. We're not saying compromise on the tension, but but to hold the extremes.

Matt Bain: You don't want to kind of settle for uh middle of the road, bland, boring, tepid, vanilla, lukewarm flavour, right? [26:11] You don't want that.

Daniel Sih: I'm wondering where our podcast fits. All right. Um obsessive focus. Yes. Tell us the next one.

Matt Bain: I guess this is another metaphor, rabbit holes. So yeah, so the risk is again, if if if you're thinking, well, it's it's got to be this or it's gotta be that, then there's every chance that you will, again, whichever way you go, you will uh research and get obsessive about A or B. And A, we'll go deeper and deeper and deeper and deeper and deeper. So you find yourself going down like this this rabbit hole. [26:40] And the thing about rabbit holes is that again, like you just what do they say? The definition of institutional manners is just digging a hole in the same direction, hoping to get some other kind of outcome or ending up somewhere different. Yeah.

Daniel Sih: So when when you're faced with tension or complexity, you just keep digging the same hole.

Matt Bain: Double down, yeah, double down, you double down, you double up. I'm right, you're wrong. Yes. And you kind of reinforce what you already believe. Let's be honest, you're just going deeper down a hole. So you get lost as well. You lose perspective.

Daniel Sih: And we don't have to go into this, obviously, but [27:09] when you look at the algorithms of social media, it's a classic, it it's classic rabbit hole thinking because you get an algorithm that supports your world view, uh, and then you just hear the same news, you hear the same ideas, you hear the same perspectives, and so you end up thinking no one else could possibly think anything differently. Yeah, that's true. Um, so you reduce the tension, but you also reduce the wisdom because it's no paradox.

Matt Bain: No, yeah, it's it's a risk of you start considering a conspiracy theory as an explanation of what's actually quite a complicated event. [27:35] And next thing you know, all you're seeing and all you understand your entire perspective is is one great big conspiracy theory.

Yeah. And then the third one, this just rolls off the tongue, ideological entrenchment. So it's probably like not dissimilar to the idea of a rabbit hole, but it's probably more again, instead of losing sight of again, let's start up with position A and position B, and you've committed to position A, you just don't lose sight of position B. You view them as the enemy. So it actually becomes a more and more polarized [28:04] and you become more and more antagonistic and you become more and more. If your view is a risk of being one-dimensional, you start viewing your opponent's view as being completely one-dimensional as well.

Daniel Sih: Yeah, so Smith and Lewis in their book, both end thinking call that trench warfare. So um they describe the rabbit hole as like an individual one, but then if you get to people who are in rabbit holes in the opposing sides, you end up with the true trench warfare.

You know, based on the uh World War One example where literally, you know, France [28:32] and Germany were locked in trenches and they just kept digging and digging and digging it. It wasn't a good ex good outcome. Yeah, so I suppose that's helpful because if you find yourself caught in either-or thinking, if you're digging a rabbit hole, if you're only seeing one perspective, if you can't possibly understand how anyone could vote or think or act the other way, well, then maybe it's time to open up your perspectives and to live in a complex world through both end. Uh so there's a quote [28:59] as we head to a moment of silence. This is another physicist.

Matt Bain: We're breaking up. We actually don't know who this person is. Okay. Uh, this is someone from the internet. So highly trustworthy. Mary Parker Follett. Um, and forgive me if I should know who she is. We should never allow ourselves to be bullied by an either-or. There is often the possibility of something better than either of two given alternatives.

Matt Bain: So the thing that I really appreciate about that quote is that she says we won't be bullied. [29:26] Yeah. So I guess like the wisdom there is don't let your immediate kind of response be, well, it's got to be either or, but take the time to think about is there a paradox here that again is this tension indicative of something that's useful?

Daniel Sih: Let's have a moment of silence. Let's reflect on what it looks like. Um, what metaphors stand out? Are you being bullied into either-or thinking? Um, are you drifting into either-or thinking without meaning to?

Matt Bain: the [30:21] Now, as per usual, Dan, we want to wrap this up with an activity because actually doing something as a result of these hot course episodes is important, not just talking about and having great ideas and using $10 words like paradox and metaphor.

So we want to go, we want to land with an activity. We've talked a lot about the tension that is involved with paradoxes, and we've talked about how that is understandably uncomfortable. And so we've talked about there are ways that we will try to kind of circumnavigate this and relieve that tension when it's not always useful or helpful. So we don't like mind the paradoxes for all they're worth, you know. [30:49] So uh three ways that we've already mentioned that end up being compromises or concessions when we should be pushing ahead into living with the paradox. So we'd like you to spend some time this fortnight thinking about out of those three options that we went through, which one is your your likely default in terms of which one are you most likely to drift to, drift towards as opposed to pushing forward and living with that paradox.

Daniel Sih: So it's worth reflecting on all those three as we move into the next [31:17] episode, which is about how to navigate the paradox of pace and space. We're going to dive into my book Space Maker, which is about how to unplug, unwind and think clearly in the digital age, how to navigate the tension of keeping pace, so keeping up and working well and performing at a high level, and the tension of making space, of unplugging, of resting and of unwinding as a habit.

We're going to dive into this content and get very practical next fortnight. Thanks for listening. Keep thinking paradox, keep being in wonder [31:46] of the miracle of the opposable mind. Everything's a miracle. Of the opposable mind. And uh until next time, make space. See ya.

[31:56] Thanks to our generous long term sponsor, Bulk Nutrients. Are you ready to put these ideas into practice? If you'd like to spend a year working with me to improve your habits, productivity, and work life rhythms, check out Productivity Masterclass at Spacemakers.au/masterclass.

Narrator: The Spacemakers with Daniel Sih and Matt Bain.