In this day of political correctness it is important to be inclusive. This has its validity so as not to arbitrarily or insensitively leave people or ideas out of one's considerations. In the past many decisions have been made that have caused people to suffer only because their customs or culture were deemed to be inferior or unrealistic. The pendulum had gone too far in one direction. It is time for everyone to make room for others. We have been encouraged (and sometimes intimidated) to take a "Both/And" approach so as not to leave anything or anyone out.

But has the consideration been taken into account that it is possible the pendulum may have swung back a little too far the other way?

Our Western approach to logic is linear and is based on "cause/effect," "either/or," and so on. This "either/or" approach has created many problems as time went on and we are now at the point where we want not to leave anything out. Let's look at the situation a little closer. Suppose we have a circumstance where a choice has to be made between "either/or" and "both/and". Since we favor "both/and" and make that choice, this automatically and paradoxically excludes "either/or", contradicting its supposed inclusivity.

How can "both/and" include "either/or"? you might ask, for it seems to be a contradiction in terms. Xenn Polarity deals with multiple duality and is able to embrace both self-reference and paradox. When we can clearly delineate when we have to choose and when we have to be inclusive, although we may still make mistakes, at least those mistakes will not be as frequent or damaging.