‘Living in a Binary World’
CAERS Substack Article #90
When we hear the word ‘binary’, our first thought is likely one of the ‘0’s and ‘1’s that power the electronic devices upon which we rely so heavily today. At some level even those of us with little understanding of such programming (like me) realize that more and more of our lives depend on the combinations and permutations of these two numbers that enable our phones and computers to work their magic.
This method of communicating our thoughts and ideas would have seemed quite alien during most of human history because communication for us has evolved from miming our thoughts to drawing pictures and ultimately to using language, all of which appear very non-binary. However, as technology has illustrated, all of these complex developments can ultimately be captured in the binary, digital code of ‘0’s and ‘1’s.
Despite the fact that we are the most sophisticated species on the planet, at heart we too are binary creatures in that we have a strong tendency to break down everything into binary patterns as well: good or bad, friend or foe, etc. This is likely the result of our desire for a simplicity that is more easily understood and dealt with, along the lines of Occam’s razor. However, it is also a reflection of the oldest and deepest part of our brain that is wired in a binary fashion—flight or fight, ‘0’ or ‘1’.
Although this can be very adaptive, it does come at a cost, particularly when it forms the foundation for, or even competes with, our much larger and more imaginative upper brain. Our predisposition to seeing and dealing in extremes (nothing or something, ‘0’ or ‘1’) is very powerful and lightning-fast, and it is hardwired to emotions that are fed by potent neurochemicals like adrenaline and dopamine, for example. Our desire to seek pleasure (safety and survival) and avoid pain (danger and death) is part of this reality.
The problem is that few things in life fall into an ‘either-or’ classification. Trust is a good example; there are degrees of trust, a spectrum. No doubt each of us knows individuals who we trust a lot, to whom we would gladly lend a large sum of money, others we would only trust with smaller sums, and still others we would trust with little more than spare change.
We can run into problems when we don’t recognize how many aspects of our lives are not binary but lie along a continuum between two poles that are frequently in opposition. That can be magnified when we attach a lot of emotion to our binary perspective. In fact, it may not only harm us, but it can also harm others or our relationships with them. If you look carefully today, there is widespread evidence for this.
Any time we engage in tribal behaviour or cling to an ideology we run the risk of binary thinking because doing so can lead to ‘us and them’ thinking. Another human being is either part of our tribe and shares our ideology, or they don’t, in which case they become part of ‘them’ and not ‘us’. Things can go off the rails not just when tribes and ideologies don’t have ideal moral compasses, but also when they have two distinct moral compasses, one for ‘us’ and one for ‘them’, which may be radically different. The one for ‘us’ is the one used to treat others in our tribe or who share our worldview, and therefore how we expect to be treated, too. But the compass utilized for ‘them’ is seldom as kind, understanding or compassionate, and we find creative ways to justify any serious discrepancies. At the root of it all, however, is a primal devotion to binary thinking.
Why are we so tempted to do so? I suspect, in part, because it takes time and energy to supplement our reflex binary thinking with our more sophisticated and reflective mental machinery. It also requires courage to extend our thinking and behaviour beyond simple denial and avoidance, our two commonest defence mechanisms for dealing with scary or painful realities.
It is interesting that we tend to resort to binary extremes in our thinking when our near- universal experience with respect to nature is that extremes tend to be harmful: droughts and floods, feasts and famines, etc. By and large we are happiest when any of the myriad middle grounds between the extremes manifests instead. A balance of reasonable comfort and discomfort seems to be more sensible because it often satisfies best.
Sadly, our binary inclination means that we are frequently drawn to extremes of pain or pleasure; often it is our seeking of maximal pleasure that leads to the severe pain of addiction, for example. Many people may be willing to recognize that our penchant for binary thinking can lead to addiction, but believe that addictions are uncommon and therefore so is binary thinking. However, addictions are far commoner than we like to admit—the list is near endless (drugs, alcohol, gambling, sex, porn, electronic devices, etc.). But more than that, binary thinking is not limited to addictions—most of us engage in it on a very regular basis.
Don’t believe me? There are two clues that binary thinking is operating. The first is obvious: only two potential explanations are acknowledged to exist and they are often conflicting. The second is that strong emotions are involved. How often do we see that anyone questioning or disagreeing with an official or dominant narrative is depicted as an extremist, accompanied by derogatory or even hate-filled name-calling. There are no in-betweens or gray zones— completely agree with us or be the victim of utter intolerance.
Nowhere was this more evident than during the pandemic. If one did not agree with everything demanded by the authorities then one was considered a conspiracy theorist who dealt purely with misinformation. Questioning the vaccine mandate equated to being anti-science, but worse still, it was then generalized into a characterization of being racist and misogynist as well. A child not wearing a mask became a vehicle that could bring about the death of their grandparents.
When we engage in binary thinking and fail to see the full spectrum of possibilities it is easy not to see, or choose not to see, the slow creep of harmful rhetoric and behaviours until it is too late. At one extreme we may chastise anyone who disagrees with us in even a small respect. But equally dangerous is when we fail to see a slow deterioration into true evil because we cannot recognize it until it is so blatant that it may be too late. This has been the concern with respect to MAID (Medical Assistance In Dying): the potential for a relentless path down a slippery slope whose steps along the way cannot be recognized due to our binary thinking until we stumble upon some truly malignant extreme such as eugenics.
The devotion to binary thinking that clouds our identification of a continuum has been repeatedly seen throughout human history. It is a reluctance to identify danger in stages along a spectrum because we cannot see a spectrum at all. Only once something has completely lost all of its sweetness do we finally recognize how sour it has become.
It can be a very useful exercise to spend some time identifying all of the binary thinking that is utilized every day. It can be both scary and depressing to recognize and examine one’s own use of binary thinking. Whenever you have unchecked emotion accompanying a response that admits to only two virtually opposite possibilities then binary thinking may be lurking.
I have become convinced that much of the less than noble speech and action in the world stems from our reluctance to identify and avoid binary thinking. What do you think? Could our world be a better place if we slowed down, controlled our emotions and looked for a spectrum of possibilities for the problems we face? If so, the sooner we rise above binary thinking the better.
J. Barry Engelhardt MD (retired) MHSc (bioethics)
CAERS Health Intake Facilitator