Dear Globatron readers, After many many months of tirelessly (or tiresomely) engaging in a discussion of truth, ideals, philosophy, art, etc. I have stumbled upon a most extraordinary insight. This very well could be the most important thing I’ve ever done with my life! I owe some thanks to Frank R., who has been engaged with me in a debate over censorship. It was in trying to understand that mysterious unknown bond that connected us in conflict that my mind revealed for me, just today, what I can only call a revelation, a genuine liberating idea that is truthful and powerful in its implications. Prepare yourself for a whole new way of seeing the world, brought to you from the thunder and tumult of Globatron, the Akbar Lightning strikes!
Akbar’s Maxim –
When two people are engaged in a debate there are only two possible truths. One, there is a solution to the problem or two, there is not. If there is a solution then the two people are joined in their desire for it and are thus allies, and if there is no solution the two people are joined by their suffering from the problem.
Akbar’s Maxim (long version) – When two entities are engaged in a debate or conflict there are only two possible truths. One, there is a solution to the problem. If this is the case, the two entities share a desire for that solution and are therefore allies, as the solution would solve that which brings them together, which is the problem, thus setting them free, liberating them in how they perceive the other. Two, it is possible there is no solution to their problem. In this case, the more difficult one to discern, each party is common to one another in that they suffer from the problem, from an internal force to which there is no end. In this way they are the same, and that sameness is directly tied to the unsolvable problem that they are fixated upon.
Implications are obvious. When engaged in a debate it is best to assume that the other party is your ally, because like it or not you share a desire for a solution or you share a tragic fate of being attached to a problem for which there is no solution. All debate therefore is a mirror into which you shall look if you wish to see yourself. If you wish therefore to love yourself, you ought love those who face you in that mirror. This is hard, but it is the truth, and the truth shall set you free. (that last bit is a bit of a cut and paste idea).
Lastly, I have been thinking lately of the ease with which people talk about the elusive nature of truth, and I thought is it not convenient that we all think that? Is it not convenient that human beings see the truth as something so vastly out of their reach, and I thought what if we changed, by a matter of choice, how we talked about truth, by at least being open to the possibility that the very attitude with which we approach it might nurture the difficulty we find in attaining it. Is it not possible that by changing our attitude about the truth, that by assuming truth to be ubiquitous and glorious and liberating and lovely and wonderful and exhilerating and in every little action of my choice vs. fate-filled fingers and toes, that this action might shake it free from the high branches and allow us to taste it, to share it, to revel in it, to live free from the shadow of that kind of skepticism that insists we remain forever apart from one another.
I present my Maxim to your scrutiny Globatron community. I don’t see any other way, that for two people to engage around a problem, it must have within it something they share or wish to share. Every argument over this Maxim will be replete with its own echoes. I want to thank the planet of Globatron, its website, the university, and its founder and acting God, all hail Globatron! for granting me this garden whereby I might discover such things in the freedom that it affords.