In the biblical narrative, duality emerges as a consequence of humanity’s choice to eat from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, an act framed by me as providing the necessary “opt-out” from a higher harmony and morality, to ensure free will. Eating the “forbidden fruit” plunges existence into a polarized state, where good and evil are no longer integrated within a unified moral framework but are instead stretched to sharp extremes. Defining “true good” as an objective morality derived through reason, akin to Ayn Rand’s Objectivist philosophy, we contrast it with the “false good” of duality—subjective moral constructs built around objective truths, ostensibly to protect them. These constructs, however, oversimplify morality into rigid rules, such as the prohibition of marijuana, a non-addictive substance, transforming what could be objectively moral into something subjectively immoral. The question arises: why does duality promote these extremes—the “false light” of overt good, which guilt-trips individuals for exercising their rights, and the outright evil of harming others through objectively immoral actions? This article explores this tension through the lens of moral harmony versus dualistic polarity.
Duality, as visualized through a sharp, pointed sine wave, oscillates violently between highs of “false good” and lows of blatant evil, far exceeding the gentle bandwidth of true moral harmony. In this framework, the “false good” manifests as societal norms and laws—like marijuana prohibition—that claim moral authority but lack rational grounding. These rules negate the need for reflection, reducing morality to a checklist of “thou shalt nots.” By doing so, they obscure the objective morality of self-directed actions, such as responsibly using marijuana, where no harm is inflicted on others. This false light pretends to illuminate virtue but instead casts shadows of shame and guilt over individuals exercising their rational liberty, turning the “forbidden fruit” into a self-replicating cycle of taboo.
Conversely, the extreme lows of duality—outright evil—emerge when actions violate the objective moral boundary of non-aggression, such as harming others through violence or deceit. In the dualistic setup, these lows are not merely aberrations but are structurally enabled by the same system that produces the false highs. The war on drugs, for instance, exemplifies how a “moral” crusade can amplify immorality, fueling black markets and synthetic drug proliferation while punishing responsible individuals. This polarity suggests that duality does not merely separate good and evil—it distorts them, creating a feedback loop where the extremes reinforce each other.
The “false light” of duality thrives because it is a lie masquerading as truth, a middle ground between objective morality and outright falsehood. By wrapping rational freedoms in immoral prohibitions, it stifles the use of reason, which Rand argued is essential to discerning true good. For example, marijuana use, when consensual and harmless, aligns with Objectivist principles of individual sovereignty and responsibility. Yet, dualistic morality deems it evil, not because of evidence, but because it fits a narrative of control. This lie burdens individuals with unearned guilt, alienating them from their right to a self-directed life and pushing them toward either conformity or rebellion.
Rebellion against this false good often misfires, however, amplifying the opposite extreme. When individuals reject subjective moral shackles, mistaking freedom from faux morality for true liberty, they may slide into objectively immoral acts—say, driving under the influence and causing harm. Duality’s sharp sine wave ensures that escaping one extreme often catapults individuals toward the other, rather than toward the balanced sine wave of rational morality. This dynamic reveals why duality promotes extremes: it lacks a stable center, offering no path to integrate freedom with responsibility.
The structural flaw of duality lies in its reliance on external authority—rules, statutes, and norms—over internal reason. True moral harmony, as a soft sine wave, reflects a reasoned balance where actions are judged by their consequences (e.g., does marijuana use infringe on others’ rights?) rather than blanket prohibitions. Duality, by contrast, externalizes morality into a binary code, stripping individuals of the agency to navigate ethical gray areas. This outsourcing of thought fosters the “false light,” as people accept subjective rules as gospel, and enables evil, as others exploit the system’s rigidity for harm—like drug cartels thriving under prohibition.
Moreover, duality’s extremes are self-perpetuating because they feed off human psychology. The “false good” leverages shame and fear to enforce compliance, while the lows of evil exploit resentment and desperation. Prohibiting marijuana, for instance, doesn’t eliminate its use; it criminalizes it, creating a shadow economy that duality’s “moral” framework cannot address. This interplay suggests that duality promotes extremes not by accident but by design—its polarized nature thrives on conflict, unable to sustain the introspection required for true moral harmony.
The “forbidden fruit” analogy is apt here: just as the Tree introduced duality, modern taboos replicate it, hiding moral truths within immoral wrapping paper. Marijuana’s prohibition obscures the liberty of rational choice, while the war on drugs cloaks profiteering and violence in moral rhetoric. This replication ensures that duality’s extremes persist, as each new rule or rebellion spawns another layer of distortion, further distancing society from objective morality.
From an Objectivist lens, duality’s failure is its rejection of reason as the arbiter of morality. Rand’s philosophy posits that true good arises from rational self-interest, where actions like responsible marijuana use are moral because they respect individual rights. Duality, however, replaces reason with dogma, promoting a “false light” that punishes the innocent and an evil that rewards the predatory. This disconnect explains why duality cannot escape its extremes: it lacks the tools to reconcile them.
The chaos of duality’s sharp sine wave contrasts starkly with the harmony of a reasoned middle path. Where true morality evaluates actions by their objective impact—say, distinguishing responsible marijuana use from reckless endangerment—duality paints with broad, erratic strokes, condemning and excusing without nuance. Its extremes persist because they are mutually reinforcing: the more oppressive the “false good,” the more rebellious the evil, and vice versa, leaving no room for a stable, rational center.
So, duality promotes the extremes of “false light” and outright evil because it is inherently unstable, built on subjective distortions rather than objective reason. The “false good” of rules like marijuana prohibition guilts individuals for rightful freedoms, while the evil of black markets and rebellion emerges as a distorted counterforce. This polarity, visualized as a jagged sine wave, lacks the balance of true moral harmony, which requires reason to navigate liberty and responsibility. By outsourcing morality to rigid norms, duality self-replicates its flaws, hiding truths in lies and lies in truths, perpetuating a cycle where neither extreme reflects the rational good humanity could achieve outside its grip.
Setup to Fail?
The narrative of the Garden of Eden presents the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil as a singular, transformative element, prompting the question: how might its introduction be considered the seed for the entire framework of duality, shame, guilt, and control, particularly if it was the only opt-out mechanism from a state of higher harmony? This tree, as the sole point of divergence, initiates a shift from a unified moral existence into a polarized reality, setting the stage for human experience as we know it. Additionally, one might ask: how does the creation of more “forbidden fruits”—hiding moral truths within immoral veneers, such as masking rights as infractions—render individuals weaker, less creative, and more controllable? This part digs into these dynamics, tracing the tree’s foundational role and the cascading effects of its legacy.
In the Edenic state, prior to the tree’s fruit being eaten, morality exists as a seamless whole, free from the tension of opposites. The tree’s introduction, however, offers a choice—described here as the only opt-out—fracturing this harmony into a dualistic system of good and evil. When Adam and Eve partake, they gain not just knowledge but a lens of polarity, where actions are judged against an external standard rather than their intrinsic value. This shift starts dualistic reality, as shame and guilt emerge as immediate consequences, embedding a new framework of control that hinges on internalizing judgment and external authority.
The tree’s role as the sole opt-out ensures that this new reality is inescapable once chosen, locking humanity into a cycle where subjective morality overshadows objective truth. Shame transforms nakedness from innocence to disgrace, and guilt binds individuals to a system they cannot unmake, setting a precedent for control through emotional manipulation. This original “forbidden fruit” thus becomes a prototype, replicated in societal norms that perpetuate duality—rules that obscure rational liberties, like the right to self-directed action, within immoral prohibitions, such as banning and criminalizing marijuana despite its harmlessness when used responsibly.
Creating more “forbidden fruits” by wrapping moral truths in immoral veneers weakens individuals by disconnecting them from reason, the tool needed to discern true good. When rights—say, personal autonomy—are recast as moral infractions, people are conditioned to accept external dictates without question, diminishing their intellectual strength. This reliance on imposed standards, rather than reflective judgment, mirrors the post-Edenic loss of agency, leaving individuals less capable of resisting or even recognizing the erosion of their freedoms.
This process also stifles creativity and enhances controllability, as fear of transgressing these new taboos—like the guilt of Eden—constrains exploration and expression. By hiding truths within lies, such as deeming a rational choice immoral, society discourages independent thought, fostering conformity over innovation. The resulting dependence on authority renders individuals more pliable, their potential curtailed by a self-replicating system that echoes the tree’s original rupture, ensuring that duality’s legacy of shame, guilt, and control endures.
The appeal to authority fallacy occurs when an argument relies on the opinion of an authority figure as evidence, rather than on the merit of the reasoning or facts presented. It assumes that the authority’s status alone validates the claim, even if their expertise is irrelevant or their conclusion lacks substantiation.
Did Jesus Bring More Externalized Law, or Challenge it?
Jesus’ teachings often challenged the rigid framework of Jewish law, raising the question of whether he was advancing freedom of thought through his critique of these traditions and the Christian idea that moral law resides in the heart rather than on stone tablets. His approach to rules like the Sabbath and ceremonial hand washing suggests a move away from externally imposed “good” toward a rationality rooted in personal conviction. Let’s examine how Jesus’ actions reflect a focus on rights and reason over societal norms, drawing on both these examples and additional instances to highlight his emphasis on individual moral liberty.
In confronting the legalism of his time, Jesus reframed practices like the Sabbath and hand washing to prioritize human need and intent over ritualistic adherence. When criticized for allowing his disciples to pluck grain on the Sabbath (Mark 2:23-28), he asserts that the day exists to serve humanity, not to enslave it, underscoring reason over blind rule-following. Similarly, in Matthew 15:1-20, he dismisses the Pharisees’ fixation on hand washing, insisting that moral purity stems from internal qualities—thoughts and actions—not external ceremonies. This aligns with the notion of the law being written on the heart, suggesting Jesus sought to free thought from the constraints of a dualistic “good” enforced by tradition, encouraging a reasoned morality instead.
Further examples reinforce Jesus’ preference for rights and rational ethics over societal norms. In the encounter with the woman accused of adultery (John 8:1-11), he sidesteps the prescribed punishment of stoning, using logic to expose the accusers’ hypocrisy and affirming her right to life through mercy. The Parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37) also transcends cultural norms, presenting a despised outsider as the true neighbor through acts of reasoned compassion, not legal obligation. These moments reveal Jesus’ commitment to liberating individuals from the pre-established “good” of his society, championing a freedom of thought that upholds personal agency and justice over conformity.
…And Injustice for All
The narrative of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, culminating in the “fall from grace,” marks a pivotal shift in the human condition, raising the possibility that it introduced injustice as a norm by establishing legalities steeped in subjective good and evil. This framework, born from the Edenic rupture, not only criminalizes the exercise of rights but also fosters genuine immorality through rebellion against its constraints. This section explores how the tree’s legacy ushers in a dualistic system that distorts justice, penalizing liberty on one hand while inciting harm on the other, fundamentally altering the moral landscape.
The “fall” initiated by the tree replaces a harmonious, reason-based morality with a polarized structure of legalistic norms, where subjective definitions of good and evil take root. This shift manifests in rules—like the modern prohibition of marijuana—that label inherently neutral or rightful acts as immoral, rendering individuals criminals for exercising personal liberty. Such legalities, echoing the tree’s introduction of shame and guilt, prioritize control over justice, embedding injustice as a societal default. By cloaking rights in the veneer of sin, this system transforms the pursuit of rational freedom into a punishable offense, a direct descendant of the original opt-out from grace.
On the flip side, the tree’s legacy also breeds actual immorality by provoking rebellion against its subjective constraints, often leading to objective harm. When people reject these imposed “goods”—mistaking liberation from faux morality for true liberty—they may veer into actions that violate others’ rights, such as reckless behavior under the influence or violent defiance. This duality, with its sharp extremes, ensures that injustice thrives: the law-abiding are unjustly penalized, while the rebellious, in breaking free, amplify evil. Thus, the fall not only distorts justice but perpetuates a cycle where both compliance and resistance reinforce immorality, tracing back to that first bite of forbidden fruit.
Objective Morality: The New Serpent Tempting a Fallen Humanity
The narrative of the Garden of Eden, with its forbidden fruit and subsequent fall, also offers a rich archetype through which to view Ayn Rand’s philosophy, prompting the question: could Rand, among other truth seekers, be seen as replaying this story, with eating the fruit akin to embracing reason in our “fallen reality,” positioning her as a new serpent tempting humanity? When overlaid with Ken Wilber’s Integral Theory, this analogy deepens—might prerational and prepersonal states represent a new Eden birthed by the fall, where partaking in reason becomes the new fruit, and transrational, transpersonal states a return to the true Eden within, akin to “Galt’s Gulch” in Atlas Shrugged? Further, could John Galt embody this new serpent, urging people toward reason and a Logos-driven paradise? This particular section explores these parallels, weaving Rand’s Objectivism into the Edenic mythos and Wilber’s developmental framework.
According to Ken Wilber, the prerational and prepersonal stage refers to early human development where thinking is intuitive, instinctual, and prelogical, and the sense of self is not yet fully individuated, as seen in infants or early childhood. The rational and personal stage emerges with the development of logical reasoning and a distinct, self-aware ego, characteristic of mature adulthood where individuals can reflect and make deliberate choices. The transrational and transpersonal stage transcends rationality, integrating higher states of consciousness and a sense of self that extends beyond the individual ego, often associated with spiritual or mystical experiences.
In the Eden story, the serpent tempts Eve to eat from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, thrusting humanity into a dualistic reality of subjective morality and injustice. Ayn Rand, in her fierce advocacy for reason as the arbiter of morality, mirrors this serpentine role—not to deceive, but to awaken. Her philosophy posits that the “fallen reality” of collectivism and irrationality can be transcended by embracing reason, much like eating a new forbidden fruit that liberates rather than condemns. In Atlas Shrugged, this call manifests through John Galt, who tempts individuals to reject societal norms and reclaim their rational agency, suggesting a reinterpretation of the fall as a necessary step toward enlightenment rather than a curse. Rand, as the new serpent, thus inverts the original narrative, framing reason as the path out of the fallen state.
Through Ken Wilber’s Integral Theory, this archetype gains further dimension. Prerational and prepersonal states—marked by instinct and unreflective conformity—could be seen as a new Garden of Eden, a naive stasis born from the original fall’s legacy of duality. Here, Rand’s call to reason becomes the new fruit, an objectively moral act that propels individuals into the rational, personal stage of development. The transrational and transpersonal stages, where integration and transcendence occur, then parallel a return to the true Eden within—a state of harmony akin to Galt’s Gulch, where reason and Logos reign. John Galt, as the archetypal serpent, tempts humanity not into sin but toward this higher unity, guiding them through the wilderness of the fallen world to a self-realized paradise where rational freedom restores what the first fruit disrupted.
Prometheus Steals “Fire” (Reason) from the Gods
The reimagining of the Garden of Eden archetype through Ayn Rand’s philosophy and John Galt’s role in Atlas Shrugged invites a further mythological parallel: could it be said that Rand and Galt are akin to Prometheus, bringing the fire of the gods—reason—to humanity in this new archetypal drama? This lens casts their mission as a defiant gift of enlightenment, challenging the fallen reality’s dualistic shackles much like Prometheus defied Zeus to empower humankind. Let’s explore how Rand and Galt embody the Promethean spirit, delivering the transformative power of rational thought to a world dimmed by subjective morality.
In the Edenic reimagining, Rand emerges as a serpentine figure, tempting humanity with the fruit of reason to transcend the fall’s legacy of injustice and irrationality. Yet, this role aligns strikingly with Prometheus, who stole fire from the heavens to uplift a primitive race. Rand’s Objectivism, with its unwavering championing of reason as humanity’s salvation, mirrors this act of rebellion against a higher authority—here, the societal gods of collectivism and tradition. John Galt, her fictional emissary, enacts this Promethean theft in Atlas Shrugged, withdrawing the “fire” of rational minds from a world that punishes their brilliance, only to offer it back as a beacon for those willing to embrace it. Like Prometheus, they risk condemnation to ignite human potential.
This Promethean parallel enriches the drama, positioning Rand and Galt as liberators who defy the punitive order of the fallen state. Just as Prometheus endured torment for his gift, Rand faced intellectual scorn, and Galt’s strike in the novel symbolizes a sacrifice to awaken others. The fire they bring—reason—burns away the illusions of duality, offering a return to a Logos-driven harmony akin to the true Eden or Galt’s Gulch. In this light, their temptation is not a fall but an ascension, a daring act to restore humanity’s divine spark, making them not just serpents of a new Eden but Promethean heroes in a reimagined mythos of liberation.
Reason: the Third Path
The framework of duality, birthed by the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, presents a polarized reality of subjective “good” and objective evil, yet it could be said that reason emerges as a “third path”—not a mere middle ground, but a distinct option transcending both lies. The subjective good, codified externally through rules like marijuana prohibition, claims moral superiority but reveals its own overt evil when it harms individuals exercising their natural rights in alignment with rational, true good. Reason, then, offers a way to realign internal conviction with external action, cutting through the distortions of duality to anchor morality in truth rather than compromise.
This “third path” of reason stands apart from the lie of an externalized good—say, laws punishing harmless choices—and the lie of overt evil, such as harming others through violence or deceit. Ironically, the enforcement of subjective good often mirrors this overt evil, as it inflicts harm under a moral veneer, like imprisoning someone for responsibly enjoying a natural right. Far from blending these falsehoods, reason rejects their premise entirely, insisting on a morality derived from objective reality and individual liberty, not dictated by authority or rebellion, thus exposing the dualistic extremes as two sides of the same deceptive coin.
By embracing reason as the “middle path,” individuals escape the trap of duality’s oscillations, where external good and evil both distort truth. This alignment of inner and outer reality—choosing actions like free speech or personal autonomy based on rational non-aggression—dismantles the shame and guilt of the “forbidden fruit” legacy. Reason, as the third way, isn’t a negotiation between lies but a return to an authentic moral harmony, where the true good prevails not through control or harm, but through the clarity of thought unbound by subjective chains.
Conclusion
The societal fallout from the fall from grace is clear: the more “good” is codified, the more “evil” festers, and the less room remains for reason. Marijuana’s criminalization exemplifies this, a right buried under subjective immorality, silencing discussion with shame while fueling underground harm. Jesus’ heart-written law hints at an escape, as does Rand’s rational call—both challenge the Tree’s legacy of fractured morality.
In this light, duality’s promotion of extremes stems from its anti-reason core, a self-replicating trap of guilt and harm. The Tree birthed a world where even the “good” is a lie, its injustice cloaking truth in taboo, while Rand and Galt, as serpent and fire-bringer, beckon us back to a rational Eden. From marijuana to speech, the forbidden fruits multiply, but so does the potential to reclaim the third path—where morality isn’t dictated, but discovered.
Did you enjoy the article? Show your appreciation and buy me a coffee:
Bitcoin: bc1q0dr3t3qxs70zl0y5ccz7zesdepek3hs8mq9q76
Doge: DBLkU7R4fd9VsMKimi7X8EtMnDJPUdnWrZ
XRP: r4pwVyTu2UwpcM7ZXavt98AgFXRLre52aj
MATIC: 0xEf62e7C4Eaf72504de70f28CDf43D1b382c8263F
THE UNITY PROCESS: I’ve created an integrative methodology called the Unity Process, which combines the philosophy of Natural Law, the Trivium Method, Socratic Questioning, Jungian shadow work, and Meridian Tapping—into an easy to use system that allows people to process their emotional upsets, work through trauma, correct poor thinking, discover meaning, set healthy boundaries, refine their viewpoints, and to achieve a positive focus. You can give it a try by contacting me for a private session.
