'Complimentarity' is a category that relates the inherent, and irreducible 'inseparable-duality (paradox) of the wave-particle duality in quantum mechanics, and the inseparable-duality of everyday life; of parts within wholes; of individuals within communities; of finite (physicality) within infinite (meta-physicality, possibility).
In recent years there’s been quite a deal of turmoil and conflict in the world. In this and other posts I present some ideas that might help some to gain more sense of the world, and of recent events.
While researching for my new book "The Dynamics of Gender and Life", I collated data from various sources and noticed that the basic fermion-boson pairing (as explained here) is more informative of gender behaviours, than my original wave-particle pairing.
That said, the wave-particle pairing ("complementarity") does generally indicate gender biases (e.g. "it's a woman's prerogative to change her mind", amid the boundless possibilities inherent in the wave nature. Men not so much -- they're expected to be more dependable, precise, detailed (particle-natured)).
TL;DR (Summary)
When lost in a forest it can be helpful to climb a mountain or a tree to get a sense of where we are, to scout for obstacles or dangers, and to determine the best direction to head.
In a similar sense, when in the midst of a forest of conflicting ideas, beliefs, religions, philosophies, opinions and various conspiracy theories, it’s helpful to gain a philosophical high ground to gain some clarity about life.
But how do we do that?
An excellent article, in my opinion, explaining some of the fundamental aspects of quantum mechanics.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-universe-is-not-locally-r...
I recently attended a philosophy class focused on the ancient Greek philosophers, such as Plato, and others.
I was surprised by the relatively shallow depth of the ideas discussed, when viewed from a quantum holodynamic perspective.
I came to the conclusion, rightly or wrongly, that unless the philosopher is post-quantum, they're not really going to add much insight into life.
Continuing on from 'Consider some stuff', we can inquire further about the nature of stuff.
Since it's infinitely inclusive, my choices (and everyone else's) necessarily are 'made of' this one-stuff, whatever it is.
As well as the brain matter that facilitates (filters and frames the range of) choices.
Once again, one-stuff can't be excluded from all that occurs, otherwise it wouldn't be one-stuff that is the ground of all.
Update (August, 2016) - see latest regarding the dynamics of gender
When writing Be and Become during the latter half of the 90's, the various revisions of the manuscript1 included chapter (Nine) titled as "Men are particles, women are waves".
"Men are particles, women are waves" quite adroitly and succinctly expresses the inherent dynamics of life towards individualism, and collectivism -- men and male animals do (as a general rule!) bias themselves towards the hard, physical, individualistic side to life (characteristic of particles). Women do bias themselves towards the soft, inter-connective, cooperative, relationship side to life (characteristic of waves and fields).
As has been more clearly and forcefully articulated by (Emeritus) Prof. Robert Jahn of Princeton, understanding the deeper complimentary and interdependent nature of 'masculine' and 'feminine' is immensely important to the future survival of our species.