The Problem Isn’t Dualism, It’s Hierarchical Dualism

“…Ecofeminists insist that binary/dualistic thinking about both women and the
environment inevitably lead to the devaluation of women, nature and nonhuman beings.”
(Lupinacci 2016, p. 5) First, I would like to say that I agree with this argument as it pertains
to ‘the environment’. Humans do not form a natural duality with nature as light forms a
natural duality with darkness or as hot forms a natural duality with cold, and so dualistic
thinking about humans and nature is an act of ontological violence. I do not, however,
agree with the argument that dualistic thinking is inherently flawed/violent. Dualistic
thinking is inherently flawed and violent when binary/dualistic thinking is structured by the
1
dogmas of A.D./C.M. Worldview(s) , but that does not mean that there is no natural-
healthy form of binary/dualistic thinking. Light/Dark, Black/White, Masculine/Feminine,
which are natural dualities, do not cohere with the progenitor of artificial dualities, good vs.
evil. Light/Dark, Black/White, Masculine/Feminine—both polarities are good , and
all natural manifestations form an authentic, reciprocal, harmonious
synthesis of the two . The problem is not the dualism masculine/feminine. The
problem is the poisoning of this natural duality by conflation with the artificial duality
good/evil. The problem is attempts to manufacture artificial unity and regularity in
manifestation’s reflection of the NIE through domination of the natural order of difference
and irregularity in manifestation’s reflection of the eternal, which prevents each person
from embodying their own authentic synthesis of the dual principles. The problem is
violently homogenizing people into a single polarity based on their biological identity. The
problem is dominating the natural order of difference and irregularity in manifestation’s
reflection of the NIE to create a violently homogenized standard for reflecting the NIE that
people are forced to emulate.
The problem isn’t dualistic thinking. The problem is the dualistic thinking that
arises from western twin myths (Four Arrows 2010; Four Arrows 2014) wherein one twin
(the masculine twin…) always attains its teleological imperatives through dominating or
otherwise rising over the other twin (the feminine twin…), which is to say twin myths that
are poisoned by the conflation of natural duality with the artificial duality good/evil. The
problem isn’t dualism, it's the inability of humanity to unite the dual principles that exist
within us because we have been deluded into believing that one of the principles is good,
that the other principle is evil, and that order is to be attained through domination of one
principle by the other. The problem isn’t dualism, its our vision of ‘power over’ rather than
‘power with’. The problem isn’t duality. The problem is our conflation of duality with
good/evil. The problem is our inability to authentically wed polarities in harmonic
relationship to the different and irregular contexts of our embodied existence because we
are taught to believe that one polarity must dominate the other. The problem isn’t duality.
The problem is our hierarchical perversions of duality.
If only the modernist (materially rational) mind could hold the paradox of being as
both one and two and thus as three, as both unity and difference. Duality is both 2 and 1
(which means that it is 3, 2+1). 1 is as much descriptive as duality as 2, even if the 2 may be

1
Artificial-Domineering Worldview(s) (A.D. Worldview[s]) assume that the order of (human) nature is evil and must be rendered as
good through hierarchical domination by an external authority. Colonial-Modernist Worldview(s), which are an incarnation of A.D.
Worldview(s), synthesize the dogmas about the ‘evil’ of natural order and the dependence of virtue on domination with the materialistic
reduction of reality to passing time and physical space.
more useful for the heuristic purposes of identifying the qualities of the polarities that,
when united (1), give rise to the ebb and flow of life… But alas, we languish in Colonial
Modernity (in the 1, 2, 3, 4, 10 of the Pythagorean sun-cult)… would that we could
remember the 0, 1, 2, 3 of the Daoists.

0: The Nothing (latent).

1: The Infinite (active).
01: Nothing-Infinite Eternal and its Emanations Force, Form and Consciousness (the
Uncreated).
2: Uncreated (without motion, eternal [no beginning or end], unchanging) and the Created-
2
Manifest (with ‘motion’ , beginnings and ends, changing).
3: Both dual (Nothing-Infinite and the Finite, 2) and unitary (Nothing-Infinite/Finite, 1),
1+2=3.
3
4: Body(Manifest)-Spirit(NIE), Mind(Manifest/NIE)-Emotion(NIE/Manifest).

Luke R. Barnesmoore
UBC Urban Studies Lab
Department of Geography
University of British Columbia
luke.barnesmoore@geog.ubc.ca

2
Not necessarily motion in the 4th dimensional sense of the term with which we are intimate through lived experience, but motion all the
same. (Ouspensky 1922)
3
The tobacco starts with 2 leaves when it first sprouts. Then two more leaves emerge and there are 4. Duality stacks on duality in the
process of creation… 2 leaves are balanced by 1 stem (3). 4 leaves are balanced by 1 stem (5).
References:
Four Arrows (2010). Unlearning the Language of Conquest: Scholars Expose Anti-
Indianism in America. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Four Arrows. (2014). ‘False Doctrine’ and the Stifling of Indigenous Political Will. Critical
Education, 5(13): 1-12.

Lupinacci, J. (2016). (Un)Learning Anthropocentrism: An Ecocritical Framework for

Teaching to Resist Human-Supremacy in Curriculum and Pedagogy. Pullman: Washington
State University.