The union of opposites in thought, or the adoption of contradiction as a fundamental property of the universe, is the ultimate heresy against reason and sanity. However, I do not ply this thought of mine to put forth some kind of condemnation of something as sin or transgression of thought, but merely show that there is something in it that is powerful, dangerous, corrosive to coherent thought, and that even as the ultimate enabler of hypocrisy and oppression, there is something in it that could be described, in an almost ludicrous manner, as Truth (capital T).

For if both a thought and its contrary were true, we are engaged in double-think, which allows for both freedom of thought as ideas are adopted as they suit oneself, and oppression if one imposes them upon another.

It posits that there is a dualistic universe, or that rather than truth or falsehood, that there are multiple types of truth (let's start with "A truths" and "B truths") and that when one adopts one thing as truth, the contrary is relegated to an illusory falsehood. Ultimately, where "A truths" and "B truths" mix is in the lives of those who experience the effects of said truths, while for most the "B truth" that corresponds to an "A truth" is concealed, while for those who experience the "B truth", the "A truth" is concealed.

This paradoxical paradigm, if it were possible to apply it to humanity (and it very well may have been applied by sly German philosophers of the 19th century), would be the ultimate way to divide and conquer: provide on one side "Truth Garden A" where all kinds of things are experienced according to a self-consistent set of experiences that confirm a body of knowledge that is constantly refined and built upon in various ways, and then on the other hand we have "Truth Garden B", where the people are simply ignorant of the knowledge of "Truth Garden A" or believe it to be irrelevant or transcended by something, and these "Truth Garden B" people believe that those who adhere to "Truth Garden A" to be wrong according to the various knowledge that "Truth Garden B" has accumulated through learning and perceiving to be experiencing the truths of various doctrines.

When people from "Truth Garden A" leave their garden, they intermingle with "Truth Garden B" people, and "A people" find all kinds of flaws in the views of "B people", while "B people" find that the worldview of "A people" does not conform to their perceived experience. In this way, what it is like to be a person who perceives the "truths" of each garden is concealed from the opposite garden, and their interactions have this element of concealment fundamentally built into them. The experience of the people of each garden has elements that are concealed through various means from the people of the opposite garden, and when each side investigates the other they find each other completely flawed in various ways due to each side fundamentally having a way of understanding that can not comprehend the other correctly.

Now, let us posit that there are people who have been to both gardens, and they know that the experience of Garden A is incomplete, and also that the experience of the people in Garden B is incomplete, and so they posit that the zone where they interact is one of confusion: no one actually understands each other, because everyone is missing something fundamental to the situation, which is that Truths A and Truths B are two different ways of looking at the world which present a different reality to others. So, they declare that truth is subjective, and form a secret garden: Truth Garden C, where everyone is an idiot who doesn't understand that truth is subjective.

Now, of course, there are mechanisms in place to prevent people from applying the view of Truth Garden C to their lives among the common folk, such as the fact that Truth Garden A and Truth Garden B both have ways of silencing people who believe that Truth Garden C is correct. There could be many ways: by crucifixion, burning at the stake, encouraging behavior that causes the acquiring of disease, causing megalomania and overconfidence, psychiatric diagnosis, antipsychotics, arrest, imprisonment, or by arguing from the small common ground that both gardens believe in and calling it objective. The manner in which the people of Truth Garden C are told to "keep it to themselves" have varied over time, but the fact is, Truth Garden C doesn't pick a side, finding each flawed, and may even have the ability to manipulate people from both Garden A and Garden B. It may even be that the ruling class is people who once came from Truth Garden C and used the knowledge obtained to form Truth Garden D, with Garden D being people who have the knowledge of Truth Garden C but use it to gain power to manipulate the people of Truth Garden A and Truth Garden B through power and determine, among other things, how they will interact with each other.

Somewhere there are other gardens, perhaps many gardens, but they are not acknowledged, except by the people of Truth Garden C and D. Some of Truth Garden C explains the existence of these gardens, but usually they keep it to themselves, preferring not to die. On the other hand, Truth Garden D, knowing of the other gardens, usually attempts to stifle knowledge of them, but does not always succeed. Usually these other, "secret gardens" are kept to themselves and occasionally exploited for power.

So, imagine now that we have four gardens:

Truth Garden A: Which contains truths based on knowledge.
Truth Garden B: Which contains truths based on belief.
Truth Garden C: Which contains truths based on transcendental enlightenment.
Truth Garden D: Which contains truths based on will and power.

Then, there are possibly the other gardens, which are sometimes ventured into by those in Truth Gardens C and D, but the knowledge of these gardens and how to interact with them is generally so dangerous, that knowledge of them is kept from Truth Garden A and Truth Garden B, in which the general public reside.

Does this situation sound vaguely familiar?