Introduction: The Uncomfortable Middle
There is a peculiar discomfort that haunts thoughtful people—a tension between two equally strong pulls on the human soul. On one side, we crave certainty: clear answers, solid ground beneath our feet, the confidence that we know what is true and real. On the other side, we're drawn to mystery: the acknowledgment that reality exceeds our grasp, that there are depths we cannot fathom, that some questions may have no final answers.
Most people resolve this tension by choosing a side. Some become dogmatists, clutching their certainties so tightly that they squeeze the life out of them, defending their positions with an intensity that betrays their hidden doubt. Others become radical skeptics, so comfortable with uncertainty that they refuse to commit to anything, floating in a sea of relativism where nothing really matters because nothing can really be known.
But what if the tension itself is where we're meant to live? What if the discomfort of holding both certainty and mystery together is not a problem to be solved but a posture to be embraced? What if wisdom lies not in choosing one over the other, but in learning to dance between them?
The Tyranny of Certainty
Let us begin with certainty, for it is often the more seductive of the two. There is something deeply satisfying about knowing—really knowing—that you're right. Certainty provides psychological comfort, social confidence, and practical direction. It allows you to make decisions without paralysis, to defend your convictions without wavering, to build your life on what you believe to be solid foundations.
Religious fundamentalism, political extremism, and ideological rigidity all share a common feature: absolute certainty. The fundamentalist knows without doubt that their interpretation of scripture is correct. The extremist knows without question that their political vision is righteous. The ideologue knows without hesitation that their framework explains everything.
And there is, admittedly, a kind of peace in this. When you're certain, you don't have to wrestle with ambiguity. You don't have to sit with uncomfortable questions. You don't have to revise your beliefs when new evidence emerges. You can simply be right, and everyone who disagrees can simply be wrong.
But this peace comes at a terrible cost. Certainty, when it becomes absolute, transforms into a prison. It closes you off from new truth, new perspectives, new growth. It makes you brittle rather than resilient, because any challenge to your certainty feels like an existential threat. It turns conversations into battles, because anyone who sees things differently isn't just mistaken—they're dangerous.
Moreover, absolute certainty is often a lie we tell ourselves. Underneath the confident assertions, there's frequently hidden doubt, carefully suppressed. The person who must shout down every dissenting voice is not secure in their convictions but terrified of them being questioned. True confidence whispers; insecurity shouts.
The philosopher Bertrand Russell observed: "The fundamental cause of trouble in the modern world is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt." This isn't to say that intelligence requires paralysis, but rather that wisdom recognizes the limits of its own knowledge. The more you truly understand about any subject, the more you realize how much you don't know.
The Seduction of Mystery
But if absolute certainty is a trap, so too is absolute mystery. There is a kind of person who becomes so enamored with uncertainty that they never commit to anything, never plant their flag anywhere, never say "I believe this" with any conviction.
This posture can appear sophisticated. After all, acknowledging mystery seems humble—an admission that reality is bigger than our ability to comprehend it. And in many contexts, this is true wisdom. But taken too far, it becomes its own form of cowardice.
When everything is mysterious, nothing demands your allegiance. When all perspectives are equally valid (or equally suspect), you're never required to make a stand. When every question dissolves into "well, who can really say?" you're freed from the responsibility of belief, commitment, and moral action.
Radical skepticism can become a comfortable place to hide. If nothing can be known with confidence, then you can't be wrong. If all truth claims are suspect, then you never have to defend your own. If reality is entirely mysterious, then you're off the hook for figuring out how to live in it.
Moreover, this stance is often intellectually dishonest. The person who claims to doubt everything still acts with implicit certainty in countless ways. They trust that the chair will hold them when they sit. They believe their memories are generally reliable. They assume other people have minds and feelings. They live as if cause and effect are real, as if logic has validity, as if some actions are better than others.
Absolute skepticism is unlivable because to live is to make choices, and to make choices is to act on beliefs about what's real and what matters. The question is not whether we'll have certainties, but whether we'll be honest about the ones we have.
The Ancient Wisdom of "Learned Ignorance"
The medieval philosopher Nicholas of Cusa wrote about what he called docta ignorantia—learned ignorance. This was not simple ignorance, the state of just not knowing things. Rather, it was a sophisticated understanding of the relationship between what can be known and what cannot, between the finite human mind and infinite reality.
Cusa argued that the highest form of knowledge is recognizing that God (or ultimate reality) necessarily exceeds human comprehension. Not because we're stupid, but because the infinite cannot be fully grasped by the finite. This wasn't meant to end inquiry but to frame it properly—to pursue knowledge zealously while acknowledging the horizon beyond which our knowledge cannot reach.
This concept has parallels across wisdom traditions. Socrates claimed that his wisdom consisted in knowing that he knew nothing. The Taoist sage Lao Tzu wrote that "those who know do not speak; those who speak do not know." The Jewish mystical tradition speaks of Ein Sof—the infinite that cannot be named or comprehended, yet can somehow be encountered.
What these traditions share is a paradoxical posture: passionate pursuit of truth combined with humble recognition of truth's inexhaustibility. They seek to know while acknowledging the limits of knowledge. They make truth claims while remaining open to deeper truth. They stand on convictions while leaving room for mystery.
This is not contradiction but complexity. It's the recognition that reality has layers—some accessible to human reason and experience, others that transcend it. And wisdom requires navigating both.
Where Certainty Belongs
So where, then, does certainty have its proper place? When is it right to say "I know this" with confidence?
First, we can be appropriately certain about some basic features of reality and logic. The principle of non-contradiction—that something cannot both be and not be in the same way at the same time—seems unavoidable if we're going to think at all. The reality of our own existence, even if we're uncertain about its precise nature, seems undeniable (Descartes' "I think, therefore I am"). The existence of other minds, while not provable in an absolute sense, is a rational inference we're justified in making.
Second, we can be confident about well-established empirical facts. The Earth orbits the Sun. Evolution by natural selection occurs. Vaccines prevent diseases. While scientific knowledge is always provisional and subject to refinement, pretending these are mere opinions is not intellectual humility but willful ignorance.
Third, we can have appropriate certainty about our own experiences. You know what you're feeling, even if you might be wrong about why you're feeling it. You know what you perceive, even if you might misinterpret what you're perceiving. First-person knowledge has a kind of immediacy and authority that third-person knowledge lacks.
Fourth, we can commit with confidence to moral and spiritual truths that we've tested through lived experience. If compassion has consistently proven life-giving and cruelty consistently proven destructive, if honesty has built relationships and dishonesty destroyed them, if a particular spiritual practice has deepened your sense of meaning and connection—these experiential confirmations warrant real confidence, even if you can't prove them to a skeptic.
The key is that these certainties remain humble. They're open to refinement, correction, and deeper understanding. They're held with conviction but not with violence. They provide ground to stand on without requiring that everyone else stand on exactly the same ground.
Where Mystery Belongs
And where does mystery have its rightful place? Where should we resist the urge to nail everything down with certainty?
First, mystery belongs at the edges of existence. Questions about ultimate origins (why is there something rather than nothing?), ultimate ends (what happens after death?), and ultimate meaning (what is the purpose of it all?) push against the boundaries of what human reason can definitively answer. We can have beliefs, intuitions, faith—but we should hold them with an awareness that we're reaching beyond what we can prove or fully comprehend.
Second, mystery belongs in the depths of other people. Every human being is, in a sense, an infinity. You can know someone deeply—their patterns, their wounds, their hopes—yet they always retain the capacity to surprise you, to be more than your understanding of them. The moment you think you've got someone completely figured out is often the moment you've reduced them to a concept rather than honoring them as a mystery.
Third, mystery belongs in the complexity of existence itself. Reality is staggeringly intricate. The number of variables in any real situation is effectively infinite. The web of causes and effects stretches beyond what any mind can trace. Pretending we can reduce this complexity to simple formulas or ideological systems is not wisdom but hubris.
Fourth, mystery belongs in the paradoxes we cannot resolve. How can time be real if every moment immediately becomes past? How can we have free will if we're part of a causal chain? How can God be both transcendent and immanent, both unchanging and intimately involved in a changing world? These paradoxes have occupied great minds for millennia not because everyone before us was stupid, but because they point to genuine tensions in the nature of reality that may not admit of tidy resolution.
The invitation is not to stop thinking about these things, but to think about them without demanding that they yield to our desire for intellectual mastery. Some truths we can know. Some truths we can only approach, circle around, be grasped by rather than grasp.
Living in the Tension
So how do we actually live in this tension? How do we cultivate both appropriate certainty and appropriate humility before mystery?
First, we must learn to distinguish between different kinds of questions and claims. Not all beliefs require the same level of confidence. "I believe kindness is better than cruelty" can be held with greater certainty than "I believe this particular economic policy will solve poverty." "I believe love is central to human flourishing" is a different order of claim than "I believe this specific theological interpretation is correct." Learning to calibrate our confidence to what the evidence and our experience actually warrant is crucial.
Second, we must cultivate intellectual humility without falling into intellectual paralysis. Humility means being willing to say "I might be wrong about this" even about things you believe strongly. It means listening genuinely to perspectives that challenge your own. It means updating your beliefs when you encounter compelling reasons to do so. But humility doesn't mean never committing to anything. A humble person can still say "Based on what I understand, I believe this is true, and I'm going to live as if it is."
Third, we must learn to hold our convictions with what the poet Keats called "negative capability"—the capacity to remain in uncertainties and doubts without irritably reaching after fact and reason. This doesn't mean abandoning reason, but recognizing that some truths require sitting with ambiguity, letting paradoxes remain paradoxical, allowing mystery to be mysterious.
Fourth, we must practice what might be called "believing engagement." This means taking truth claims seriously enough to explore them deeply, to live into them, to test them experientially—while remaining open to discovering that they're incomplete or incorrect. It's the opposite of both blind faith (believing without examination) and cynical skepticism (refusing to believe anything enough to really test it).
Fifth, we must accept that growth often requires changing our minds, and changing our minds is not weakness but strength. The person who believes exactly the same things at 40 that they believed at 20 has not been paying attention. Life itself teaches us, challenges us, refines us—if we let it. Being wrong and discovering it is not failure; it's learning.
The Gift of Not Knowing
There is, paradoxically, a kind of freedom in acknowledging what we don't know. When you stop pretending to have all the answers, you're free to ask better questions. When you admit the limits of your understanding, you're open to insights you would have missed if you thought you'd already figured it all out.
Not knowing creates space for wonder. Children are full of wonder precisely because they don't yet know everything. They can be astonished by a butterfly, fascinated by how water flows, delighted by a story they've heard a dozen times. As we age, knowledge often crowds out wonder—until we become too sophisticated to be amazed.
But what if wisdom is, in part, recovering wonder? What if the goal is not to eliminate mystery but to learn to love it, to see it not as a gap in knowledge that embarrasses us but as an invitation to ongoing discovery?
The mystics understood this. They spoke of a "cloud of unknowing" that surrounds ultimate reality—not because God is playing hide-and-seek, but because the infinite necessarily exceeds finite comprehension. And yet this unknowing was not experienced as deprivation but as abundance. The mystery was not empty but full, not absence but presence too vast to be captured in concepts.
The Danger of Premature Closure
One of the greatest intellectual and spiritual dangers we face is premature closure—settling on answers before we've really lived into the questions. This happens in countless ways:
The young person who adopts a complete worldview from their parents or community without ever genuinely questioning it. The intellectual who finds an ideology that seems to explain everything and stops genuinely engaging with challenges to it. The religious person who mistakes their particular interpretations for divine truth itself. The materialist who decides metaphysical questions are meaningless without ever seriously grappling with them.
Premature closure feels like arrival, but it's actually stagnation. It's choosing the comfort of answers over the fertility of questions. And while we all need some settled beliefs to function, we should be careful about which questions we declare closed.
Some questions should remain open throughout a lifetime. What does it mean to live well? What is the nature of love? What is my purpose? How should I understand suffering? What happens when we die? These aren't questions to answer once and file away. They're questions to live with, to return to, to let deepen and evolve as we ourselves deepen and evolve.
The philosopher Rilke wrote to a young poet: "Be patient toward all that is unsolved in your heart and try to love the questions themselves... Do not now seek the answers, which cannot be given you because you would not be able to live them. And the point is, to live everything. Live the questions now."
This doesn't mean we have no provisional answers, no working beliefs. It means we hold them lightly enough that life can teach us, that experience can refine them, that mystery can continue to speak.
Certainty and Mystery in Relationship
Nowhere is the tension between certainty and mystery more evident than in relationships. Love requires both.
You need some certainty to love. You need to believe that the other person is real, that their feelings matter, that your connection has meaning. You need enough predictability to trust, enough stability to build a life together. Without any certainty, relationships dissolve into anxious uncertainty or game-playing.
But you also need mystery to love. If you reduce someone to what you think you know about them, if you believe you've completely figured them out, love dies. Mystery keeps love alive—the recognition that this person before you is always more than your understanding of them, that they contain depths you're still discovering, that they have the capacity to surprise, to change, to be perpetually new.
The best relationships hold both. "I know you" and "I'm still getting to know you." "I trust you" and "you remain wonderfully unpredictable." "I understand you" and "you continue to amaze me."
This applies not just to romantic relationships but to all genuine encounters with others. Every person is a mystery worthy of reverence, and every person is knowable enough for real connection. The tension is the sweet spot where intimacy lives.
The Spiritual Dimension
For those with spiritual or religious commitments, this tension takes on additional depth. Faith itself seems to exist precisely in the space between certainty and mystery.
Faith is not the same as certainty. If you were absolutely certain, you wouldn't need faith—you'd have knowledge. But faith is also not the same as blind hope or wishful thinking. It's a commitment made in the presence of genuine mystery, a trust extended beyond what can be definitively proven.
The great theologians understood this. Thomas Aquinas, despite building elaborate rational arguments for God's existence, insisted that God remains fundamentally incomprehensible to human minds. Karl Barth emphasized the infinite qualitative distinction between God and humanity. The apophatic tradition in Christianity focused on what cannot be said about God rather than what can.
Yet these same thinkers made positive claims, built theologies, and lived with conviction. They held certainty and mystery together—certain of God's reality and love, humble before the depths they could not fathom.
Perhaps mature spirituality is always this dance—conviction that doesn't collapse into dogmatism, openness that doesn't dissolve into relativism, confidence in what you've experienced combined with humility about how much remains beyond experience.
Conclusion: The Courage to Live Between
Living in the tension between certainty and mystery requires courage. It would be easier to collapse into one or the other—to become either a rigid fundamentalist or a radical skeptic. Both positions offer a kind of peace, a resolution of tension.
But easy is not the same as true, and comfort is not the same as wisdom.
The invitation is to be brave enough to say "I believe this" while remaining open to being wrong. To commit to what you've come to understand while acknowledging how much you don't understand. To stand on convictions without turning them into weapons. To honor mystery without using it as an excuse for never committing to anything.
This is not weakness but strength. It's not confusion but clarity about the nature of reality—that some things can be known and should be affirmed, while other things transcend knowledge and should be approached with reverence.
You are allowed to have certainties. You don't have to pretend that everything is equally uncertain or that all perspectives are equally valid. Some things are true. Some things are false. Some ways of living are better than others. You can stand on this ground.
But you are also invited into mystery. Into questions that don't resolve neatly. Into paradoxes that remain paradoxical. Into depths that exceed your grasp. And this is not a failure of understanding but an encounter with the infinite.
The wisdom is in knowing which is which, and in having the flexibility to hold both.
So believe boldly. But hold your beliefs with open hands. Commit fully. But remain teachable. Know deeply. But love what you cannot know.
Live in the tension. It's where the light gets in.
No comments:
Post a Comment