Or and and.
Nothing exists within the or. It is geometry’s line without thickness; that which Buckminster Fuller rebelled against.
The or is duality; it is two: two entities with no relationship.
Much can exist within the and. It is the fertile width of recombination.
Any relationship exists in the space of and. You and I.
You and I is a triad: you, I, and: the relationship. Three distinct parts.
There are two primary colors of relationship: mediation and reconciliation. Bill Reed taught me this.
Their difference lies in the consciousness, or lack thereof, of the and.
Assume you and I are opposites; poles (+) and (-).
Our entry into a relationship can either preserve the oppositeness of the poles or can seek, in degree, to homogenize the poles.
Mediation compromises the poles. Reconciliation preserves the poles.
Mediation changes each of the two poles. Mediation is algorithmic, without consciousness, an average. A narrowing of the spectrum between poles toward synthesis.
Reconciliation preserves the poles via a consciousness residing in the reconciliator. This consciousness is lent by each of the poles as a lace child, with its own emergent properties. Reconciliation preserves the width of the spectrum between poles, and the poles may remain pure.
The reconciliator completes a triad of three conscious entities: you, I, and the reconciliatory relationship. You and I change and become through time. The reconciator must always be becoming; it must improvisationally evolve the relationship of unyielding poles through time’s change.