|
We are fellow travellers on Planet Earth. Not only are we rare but we also have made ourselves an endangered species, because although we all want to
live in peace, we have not been able to do so. The reasons are many; the causes varied; so are the remedies. One of the major causes of conflict amongst the peoples of the world is intolerance for those holding
opposite views. There is, therefore, a need to recognise the possibility that the opposite view may also contain profound truths.
"Contraria sunt complementa", that is, opposites are complementarity. There is, however, a distinction between two sorts of truth:
trivialities, where the opposites are obviously absurd, and profound truths, recognised by the fact that the opposite is also a profound truth. (1)
The complimentarity approach allows the possibility of accommodating widely divergent human experiences in an underlying harmony, and bringing to light
newer prospects and ethical views for the exploration and mitigation of human suffering. If we adopt the complementary approach to problems of life we may discover to our pleasant surprise that seemingly
irreconcilable points of view need not be contradictory. These, on deeper understanding may be found to be mutually illuminating; the two apparently opposing views being partial views of a ‘totality’ seen from
different planes. It is well known that the electron is a particle. It is equally well known that the electron is also a wave. The wave and particle natures are flagrantly opposite because a certain thing cannot at
the same time be a particle (that is, substance confined to a very small volume) and a wave (that is a field spread out over a large space), but the electron exhibits both, though not simultaneously as the two
natures are mutually exclusive. The wave-particle duality of electron presents a most familiar example of complementarity of opposites in the domain of physics. In fact, the Principle of Complementarity formulated
by the Danish physicist Niels Bohr, has emerged from quantum physics. There is now a growing interest in exploring this Principle which links astonishingly well Western Science and Eastern Wisdom.
In a conflict-ridden world, dealing with the matters of world peace has assumed great importance. In this regard the role of philosophy has regained
the relevance which it seemed to have lost in the post-World War II decades dominated by technological advances. In the prevailing scenario of diverse, and at times, conflicting ethical and cultural norms,
behaviours and self-destroying individualism, all experience - whether in science or art - has to be communicated through human means of expression. But the condition of analysis and synthesis of human experience
has always been an important problem. When experiences have been mutually exclusive, they have been expressed in a typical complementary manner since the very origins of language.
Tracing the growth and development of the numerous schools of Indian philosophy, each claiming the Vedas as the original source, Kireet Joshi
attributes the cause of conflicts among these schools to the natural tendency of Reason to assert its supremacy over Intuition. He says, ‘This is because Reason proceeds by analysis and assembles its facts to form a
whole, but in the assemblage so formed there are opposites, anomalies and logical incompatibilities. The question was as to how these opposites, anomalies and incompatibilities can be reconciled. And if we study the
history of Indian Philosophy, we find that the natural course Reason took was to affirm some and to negate others which conflicted with its chosen conclusion so as to form a flawlessly logical system’. (2)
In his journey from the psychic to the supramental, via the spiritual, man experiences various stages of the transformation of his being. At each of
these stages man perceives a different vision of Reality. But all these visions represent a journey from truth to truth- from a lower truth to a higher truth. Any of the above contradictions and anomalies result
from an inherent limitation of Reason and Logic because the Ultimate Truth is beyond both Reason and Logic. Therefore what is desirable is to understand the views of the adversaries so that the presuppositions of
different schools of philosophy could be harmonised into a synthetic whole.
Truth is one; only its visions, paths and approaches are many. That is why the same truth, when perceived from different angles, may give rise to
contradictory visions, but in reality all these visions are complementary. However, when we experience the one, the cognition of the many vanishes, and when we dwell in the many, we don’t generally experience the
one because the two are often mutually exclusive.
The theory of non-one-sidedness of reality or Anekantavada evolved by the Jainas, the concept of Gotrain Buddhism, the principle of
uncompromising reconciliation of uncompromising extremes followed throughout the ancient Indian tradition, and the Christian doctrine of ‘love thy neighbour as thyself’, are some of the principles which contain in
them the theme of complementarity which if understood and practised in life can help us live a harmonious life on this planet. Let us, therefore, explore this theme briefly.
In the city of Como, Italy, most of the leading scientists of the world gathered in 1927 to commemorate the 100th anniversary of Alessandro Volta’s
death. Only Einstein was conspicuous by his absence. It at in this meeting that Niels Bohr, for the first time, introduced in a public lecture his concept of complementarity. As it was meant to be a public lecture,
Bohr used only a few and simple mathematical equations in his formulation of the theme of complementarity. What Bohr tried to stress in his lecture was the need to recognise the profound and persistent difference
between the classical and quantum descriptions of physical phenomena.
It may, however, be mentioned here that any phenomenon in nature, whether it refers to the phenomenon of daily life or to atomic physics, has to be
described in the language of classical physics. In the classical description, causality is taken for granted, whereas in the quantum description one has to accept indeterminacy and probability as inherent aspects of
natural description. What Bohr was pointing to in that historical lecture was the strange realisation that in the quantum world, the only way the observer (including his apparatus) could be uninvolved was if he
observed nothing at all. In other words the object and the tools of observation form an inseparable whole.
In order to characterise the relation between a phenomenon observed under different experimental conditions, Bohr introduced the term
‘complementarity’, to emphasise that such phenomena together exhaust all definable information about the atomic objects. The notion of complementarity in the physical world refers directly to our position as
observers in a domain of experience where experimental conditions play a major role in the description of the physical phenomenon. One experience may reveal, for example, the particle nature of electron, another the
wave nature. It is for the scientific observer to decide which facet of the electron to expose by his choice of experiment. Whether an electron is a wave or a particle has the same status as the question: Is America
above or below India? The answer would be ‘neither and both’.
Bohr dedicated 30 years of his life to spreading the message of complementarity in fields outside of physics. Not only in quantum physics but also in
other fields of human knowledge do we come across situations which remind us of situations as is in quantum physics. For example, the characteristics of individual persons and human cultures present features of
wholeness, the account of which (according to Bohr) implies a typical complementary mode of description. Niels Bohr developed the idea of complementarity in sociological and political contexts as he was well aware
of the need to promote mutual understanding between nations with very different cultural backgrounds.
The theme of the complementarity approach is that the apparently paradoxical, contradictory accounts of events should not divert out attention from the
essential wholeness. We should attempt not to reconcile the dichotomies but rather to realise the complementarity of representation of events in two quite different languages. The separateness of the descriptions
only confirms the fact that in the normal language that we human beings have developed for communicating the results of our experiments, we can express the wholeness of nature only through a complementary mode of
description. Bohr’s favorite aphorism was Schiller’s: "Nur die Fülle führt zur Klarheit" (Only wholeness leads to clarity).
The language of complementarity is a language of respect for others’ views, which promises to be the language of the future. With the miraculous
achievements in the communication system of the world it will be a lot easier and quicker for us to approach any part of the globe, and understand and appreciate others’ cultural and ethical norms and ways of life
as complementary modes of living. Such a cross-cultural intercourse would provide us with a holistic picture of Truth which in Schiller’s world ‘lies in the abyss’. I have given earlier only the first line of
Schiller’s couplet reported to have been one of the favourite sayings of Niels Bohr. After the line: "Only wholeness leads to clarity, and Truth lies in the abyss" (Nur die Fülle führt zur Klarheit, Und
im Abgrund wohnt die Wahrheit).
CONCLUSION
The motto ‘Contraria sunt complementa’inspires people following different norms and ways of life to respect others’ views even if those are
opposite to theirs’. Nobody need be victimised because he or she holds the opposite view, as the same too may be a profound truth. The same truth when perceived from different angels may give rise to contradictory
visions, but in reality all these visions are complementary. Light is particulate, light is also wavy. The wave and particle natures are totally opposite to each other but these are complementary characteristics of
the same photon.
Acknowledgement
I express my deep sense of gratitude to (Late) Prof. D.S. Kothari for giving me inspiration, guidance and all material help for this paper.
References:
- Hans Bohr, "My father" in Rozental, Niels Bohr, 328.
- Joshi Kireet, "Philosophy, Logic and Yoga of Integral Transformation", Key Note Address, Working Group on Spiritual Experiences Behind
Indian Philosophical Traditions, Delhi University
top
|
