Piet to Rod, Heloisa and Maria

Dear Heloisa, Maria, Rod,

It is fascinating that Maria and Rod, in working with Rod's latest not-trying exercise, both wound up focusing on letting go, allowing, surrendering. It resonates with the notion of paradox, which Rod has brought up repeatedly. If a paradox cannot be solved, something else has to give, some elements in the presuppositions have to be let go of. It also resonates with religious terms. Many religions encourage us not to worry too much, not to try to figure everything out, but rather to surrender.

The question that immediately arises is: to surrender to what? In the world of religious sects, there is an enormous range. In some cases it is pretty clear that the call to surrender is a call to give up your responsibility (and your money!) to the organization, with the danger of leaning in fascist directions. In other cases the call to surrender is more benign, but rather powerless and ineffective; a higher being is invoked as the one to which to surrender, but in such abstract or seemingly outdated forms that there is no clear connection with actual daily life.

However, in many religions there are and have been individuals who have actually found a way out of the not-trying paradox, in an authentic way. The reports of their findings have a vigor and a clarity that is easily recognizable, whether letting go is called wu-wei, as in Taoism, grace as in Christianity, or otherwise.

Now how to connect this with the working hypothesis? How can working with the working hypothesis become an authentic way of letting go? Let's look at the way a scientist works with a working hypothesis, in the case of a really tough and seemingly intractable problem. He or she will try this and that, and face a blind wall, a paradox: nothing seems to work. Then, by mulling things over, chewing on it, and just holding it in mind for a long time, at some point suddenly a new opening appears, a new angle on the whole situation.

In science, the results of such a breakthrough are well documented, but the process of the breakthrough is hardly ever reported or discussed. The results are testable theories that can be analyzed rationally. The process itself, interestingly, is not rational at all. If anything, it is learning to let go. By letting go of the assumptions that got you into a paradox, within a context of having familiarized yourself utterly with all aspects of a situation, it is possible for a new insight to pop up.

It is this process of working with a working hypothesis that may work for us, too. Really taking that hypothesis seriously, that everything is already complete, we find ourselves facing an enormous paradox. The challenge is: how to let go, how to allow a new insight to present itself.

I look forward to hearing from y'all how you see these partial parallels between what we're doing here and both science and religion,

Piet