302. Logical Limitations

We usually try to avoid contradictions. If something we’ve seen or heard contains a contradiction, we think there must be something wrong with it. We think this way because we’ve been trained to be logical, and non-contradiction is a cornerstone of ordinary logic and reason.

We value logic so highly because it is practical. Using logical reasoning, we can infer truths about the physical world, which we can then use to develop technologies that allow us to better manipulate objects and events. This offers enormous practical benefit, as it means we become more capable of meeting the many material needs that human beings have.

It is because of its proven benefit that we tend to use logic as the primary tool not just to understand how nature works but also to adjudicate thought itself. We try to develop an understanding of our subjective experiences using the same tools that have helped us understand the physical world. We think that every experience must also be rational and logical, and if it isn’t then something must have gone wrong.

But logic and reason were not developed from the totality of human experience, and we shouldn’t expect them to work for our subjective experiences just as well as they work for the physical world. It may be the case that when we encounter contradiction in our experience of life we are not discovering something false, but the exact opposite — a truth so profound that it defies ordinary understanding. Allowing for this means allowing for possibilities outside of what is strictly rational or logical.

Of course, this doesn’t mean that we should abandon reason. It will always be a valuable tool for the investigation of experience. But we must remember that it is only a tool and that means we can put it down when necessary. We need to keep ourselves open to possibilities that are contradictory or paradoxical. It is only by doing so that our awareness can expand to include those things that would otherwise be blocked by too strictly adhering to logic and reason.