The Either/Or phraseology reveals the potential usefulness of The Polarity Tenet, (everything has it pair of opposites) as well as its applicability and fallibility. When applied correctly the Polarity Tenet enhances comprehension and when misused it causes division. The misuse of The Polarity Tenet as involved with The Either/Or perspective arrives in the absolutist and similarly absurdist presentation.

‘You may use Either your right hand Or your left hand to press the button’ would be a correct observation. The Either/Or perspective is wrongly applied to divide in politics and social constructs practically 100% of the time it is used pertaining to such. Whether societal or political there really is hardly ever an accurate, realistic Ether/Or presentation and the phrase itself is a likely indicator of the intent to cause division and limitation, as well as a limited perspective of who might be using it.

The Either/Or perspective is essentially as monothematic as your most ardent monotheist dogma and in fact, such one-way-ism is the root of the Either/Or perspective. You are either the accepted monotheist or you are bad person. You either worship The God the way we deem fit or you are exiled, ostracized, you are an inhuman golem/infidel. Soon enough The Either/Or perspective leads to The Us/Them modality. The Ether/Or and The Us/Them mind leads to all kinds of obvious and tangible fragmentation of the sacredness of people, places and things. It excuses destruction of the sacred in fact through misuse of Polarity Tenet.

The only use of The Either/Or perspective beyond the simple and obvious is The Spiritual Either/Or. The Spiritual Either/Or is the only one that makes sense if critical investigation is applied. The Spiritual Either/Or also is completely contrary to all monotheism which critical investigation also shows as highly questionable Ism to put it mildly.

The Spiritual Golden Rule: Either you treat everything as sacred or you participate in treating nothing as sacred.

There are many people who will argue the point. Many people would tout that they hold certain concepts as sacred and certain people as sacred and therefore it is not an absolute Either/Or. This is very much like the character in Martin Niemoller’s First They Came For The Socialists poem. And worse. Suggesting that there are somethings or one set of things or a person or people who are sacred, and everyone and everything else is highly questionable if not certainly evil and worthless is equivalent to having a shied that hides the fact that you treat sacred individuals and items as not sacred. The idea that there are a set of things you hold sacred hides the fact that you consider all else as other than sacred, that you exploit the sacred, or worse.

Monotheists infamously historically use such emblematic shields to excuse their institutional destruction of sacredness of people, places and things. The shield of protecting or preserving some Ism or another or some place or another is only that, a shield, a prism to misconstrue, a conniving Either/Or construct. The misuse of The Polarity Tenet in airy politicized Either/Or constructs is most basically illustrated in the infamous and often repeated, ‘you’re either with us or against us.’ Practically all The Either/Or situations as presented by politicized institutions are misusing The Polarity Tenet, or more accurately and more despicably, using it with questionable and conning intentions.

Consider pursing impartiality when you hear the expression or think similar ideas. In this you will find the sacredness in everything. In this impartial pursuit you will find caring nurturing for all, except perhaps those who act to separate, to limit and to instigate degradation and exploitation of the sacredness everywhere, in everyone and in everything. Otherwise, take care of all in impartial approach.

​You can connect with Ethan on Facebook, check out his author page on Amazon, or visit his new websites, Geometry Of Energy and Meditation 108, where Ethan offers lessons on individuation, meditation, the conceptualization of energy, and the metaphysical significance of 108.