The symbol for my newsletter is the mythological symbol of the Ouroboros. This icon holds deep meaning for me personally, as well as many practical, thought-provoking implications. In this first essay, I share why I chose this particular icon. This essay is intended to contain its own premise, journey, and conclusion but is best understood within the context of being part one of two. Part two is published here.
The Ouroboros is a very ancient symbol, first appearing circa 1400 BC. The self-devouring snake, or dragon, has appeared in several various forms, religions, and mythologies. For more information about the history of the symbol, I suggest you start with Wikipedia and click from there. 🙂
The Ouroboros is embedded deep within every facet of life. The snake eating itself represents the cyclical nature of life, the unmaking and reforming, and deconstruction with creative intent. It is not a religious icon. It is an iconic representation of life itself.
The Ouroboros is beautiful in its simplicity, powerful in its imagery.
The Ouroboros shows us how life ought to be. It can show us how to balance our thinking and to identify where we have gone wrong. The Ouroboros also shows us where we will create ruin when we have ventured too far into an imbalanced territory. What happens when the snake eats itself too fast, outpacing his ability to be remade? What happens if the snake slows down, no longer devouring, no longer creating?
This is where we come upon our problem. If the snake were to cease devouring itself, it would be a slow, passive, fearful death. If it were to devour itself too quickly, creation could not match destruction, and all would be lost in fiery, spectacular ruin. Can you see how our world is operating this way? Can you see this tension within yourself, the experience of having your ideas challenged (unmaking) and reformed (remaking)? Perhaps you can feel the resistance within yourself, refusing to allow this process. Or, perhaps you’re far too engaged, your thoughts changing as quickly as the direction of the wind.
Think of the conversation between Conservatives and Liberals. Everyone has an opinion in this matter. The Conservatives want to hold back, the Liberals want to speed up. There are extremes on both sides. Even so, there are clear identifying markers of the tension of the Ouroboros. Obviously, this is an oversimplification of politics to illustrate a point. But what happens if you were to introduce nuance? Do the extremes cease to exist? Do sides suddenly vanish? No; instead, the introduction of nuance merely declaws the fundamentally flawed idea of sides, giving it a harmless facade and masking the danger.
The Ouroboros is a perfect, eternal circle. There are no sides. It is not preferable to be either unmaking or creating. Both must occur simultaneously, in an eternal paradoxical tension. However, this is not how we structure our lives. This is not how we structure our thinking. Even though we all agree that cognitive flexibility is a desirable trait within the context of navigating the nuances of social complexity, we still build our structures and conduct ourselves in such a way as to deny this obvious advantage entirely. That is, we double down on our opinions when challenged, we cut off dissenting voices that might provide additional perspective were we curious enough to listen, and we outright refuse to engage with anything that is outside of our paradigms so that we remain safe within the narrative of our echo chamber.
Creating sides automatically generates a set of intractable complications.
At the very least, sides create sets of “winners” and “losers.” Indeed, the very concept of a side is absolutely wrong-headed if the desired outcome is to bring people together. To use language like “join us” or “they were converted” does not address the root problem; it merely masks it, embedding the problem (person) within a different narrative. You can be sure of this: Anything we use to categorize and divide ourselves will ultimately create dangerous tribalism, "us versus them,” and systems built to ensure those power differentials remain intact.
The Ouroboros reminds us that the ideal is found within the balance and perpetual rhythmic motion of the center. I do not mean only politically; I mean in all of life. The movement within the center serves us best.
Unfortunately, the idea of a center is contaminated. It often implies a reduced, less extreme version of whatever stance you have taken. A castrated version of any ideology is just as harmful as its extreme. This is a misunderstanding of what it means to be in the center.
I do not suggest passivity. The absence of opinion is a fearful, cowardly way to live. We must take our place and we must know what we think. We must prioritize thoughtfulness about life, regardless of the subject. We should not always have something to say, however.
You can have lots of opinions or lots of friends, but probably not both.
The objective should not be to change the world but rather to know what we think so that we can take our place in the world and act accordingly. You cannot do this if you are insulating yourself. If you insulate yourself, you won’t know what you think when you’re challenged. You will be in an echo chamber, perpetuating the narrative, repeating what you have heard but not what you actually think.
The center is not a socialist, quasi-Marxist repackaging of “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs,” which divides us into binary categories (oppressed, oppressor) and creates more conflict. If there are winners and losers, that should be the natural result of personal choices, not the forced outcome of a political structure.
To hold the center is perpetual motion, embracing the unmaking so that new creation can emerge. In the center, it is not possible to be monolithic or even categorized as such. Many of us in the center wholeheartedly disagree with each other. There is no side to take, though. This does not imply disorder; curiosity and exploration are comfortable existing in the unknown because the act of questioning will always produce something of value.
The goal of those in the center is not to be right and enjoy the self-satisfaction of victory. Nor is it about endless conversation without action. By allowing assumptions to be undone and rediscovered, reforged through the fires of having beliefs challenged, the result is that we behave accordingly. In other words, once we have explored, we must do something with what we have discovered. We do not need more theoretical philosophical discourse. We need action.
To be in the center is to willingly, constantly ask yourself, “What am I doing? What do I think? What does this mean? What do I believe? Why?” And there is no end to this. The Ouroboros demands we release the stranglehold we have on our opinions, no longer viewing them as a final destination. How to navigate life best is a question that must constantly be asked and answered.
The rhythm of life indicates it is an endless journey.
There will be moments where we look back and discover that our conclusions were wrong. But when has that been something to avoid? To be wrong about something, you have to have believed in the first place. At least you entered into the arena in some capacity. It is better to have made a bet, lost, and learned than to withdraw from the world altogether. Not every opinion is worth having, but it is always worth having an opinion. It is not plausible to think that our current mindsets and models for navigating life will always be correct. We must be willing to update our thinking because, as we mature, we will look back and find we were more wrong than we imagined possible in the moment. We must allow for this. We must encourage it. It is through this process that we arrive at mutually improved outcomes. When we are not concerned with who is right or who has chosen the correct side, we are able to focus on what is best for our community, what is profitable for all people.
The center is a stance, but it is not a side. It offers no stage, as other positions do, no platform to evangelize from, no profit to the ego. The center is where diversity can genuinely exist—diversity of thought, race, belief, and conviction. There is no side to join, only a conversation. What we share in the center are values. What we value more than anything is empathy and compassion. In the center, we exist in an ever-changing landscape, balancing on the edge of a knife because we know that to err too far in either direction will lead to death. Therefore, we are determined to engage wholeheartedly, willing to challenge and be challenged.
In the polarizing world we live in today, it is too easy to get caught on one side or the other. It’s far easier and more common that someone will linger on the sidelines without an opinion or keep their thoughts at bay in fear they will be judged. It’s true we should be willing to question ourselves repeatedly as the Ouroboros teaches us. We could benefit as a society by more thought-provoking open forums where all parties are okay with being wrong or at least being willing to question their own stance.