Quantum Physics & Yin Yang Philosophy

In quantum physics, we cannot know two factors simultaneously (we cannot see the wave and particle function at the same), yet we accept both these behaviours exist. An electron becomes a space of possibility, encompassing all possible paths. This is not to say that we should believe anything, because nothing is certain. Rather quantum physics is used extremely effectively in everyday life. We know that it works (Barad “Troubling Time/S...” 62-64). Yet there is still uncertainty – is it a wave or a particle? Quantum physics helps us to accept contradiction.

Quantum physicist Richard Feynman said, “the paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling of what reality ought to be” (qtd. in Davis “Explainer: what is wave-particle duality). And it is with this sentiment – the western discomfort of paradox to describe reality – where yin yang complementary logic comes in.

Accepting Contradiction

Yin and Yang is an ancient Chinese, dualistic way of thinking. The yin yang symbol demonstrates the dynamic process of change. Fig. 3 above is based on the shadow bars that trace over a sundial throughout the year, tracking from the summer through to the winter solstice. The shadows track the dynamic process of change, and the yin yang symbol emerges. Yang is the sun, or the sunny side of the hill, yin the inverse – the dark side. In yin yang philosophy “the cosmos is in an endless process of becoming or emerging,” (Ming 631). Li Ming, in an article on yin yang philosophy, describes this worldview as an “ever-changing” or “process” world view: “observation of the change process is elaborated into a systematic philosophy called yin yang philosophy [...] To Chinese, everything is changing and is subjected change” (Ming 630-632).

As the seasons change from light to dark, summer to winter solstice, the light and dark of yin and yang are in an ever-dynamic relationship. This too is an aspect of quantum reality: change as a fundamental concept, symbolized in the dynamism between dual parts.

“Rather than polarize phenomena into either/or notions [...] use both/and constructs for paradoxes, allowing for simultaneity and the study of interdependence” (Lewis qtd. in Chen, “Transcending Paradox...” 189).

“Yin Yang captures the Chinese view of paradox as interdependent opposites compared with the Western view of paradox as exclusive opposites” (Chen paraph. in Fang 26). This echoes Feynman’s point that the conflict in paradox is a conflict of what we feel ought to be (Davis “Explainer: what is wave-particle duality), rather than what is. In an article titled “Transcending Paradox...” Ming-Jer Chen tackles exactly this. He says the western view of paradox is that of “exclusive opposites”, while the yin yang view is “interdependent opposites” – a term he finds integral to yin yang philosophy. “Interdependent opposites” are, he says, when concepts or entities exist “only within the context of each other, or which find their definition only in terms of that of their opposite” (188). He gives the example of dark and light. They give each other meaning, finding their definition in terms of their opposite. This contrasts with the western tradition of philosophers such as Descartes who split the world into binaries such as mind and body, self and other.

Importantly letting go of either/or thinking is not an outright rejection of this thinking. Rather it is embracing choice. Tony Fang notes: “‘both/and’ is used not to reject ‘either/or’ but to embrace it by recognizing both conflict and complement inherent in the duality of Yin and Yang” (46). Both can exist simultaneously. Letting go of either/or thinking means not applying it to either/or itself. It is not a choice between either/or and both/and; it can be both “both/and” and “either/or”. Things can still be mutually exclusive. The aim is to “recognize [...] both conflict and complement”.