Both/and reasoning

Both/and is an academic concept which refers to a form of reasoning which resists binary or either/or styles of thinking. ^{[1] [2]}

Unlike dualistic styles of reasoning, both/and means that between two options, both can be valid, or that their opposition may present opportunities for dialectical synthesis, rather than a complete rejection of one of the premises in favor of the other.

Both/and is associated with dialectical thinking, which means investigating contradictions in order to attain higher understanding. However, it also appears in broader systems of thought, such as the concept of nondualism, in which the distinction between self and other is transcended. ^{[3] [4]}

The term has been used in a texts on management, literary theory, classroom research, religious studies, methodology, and international relations. ^{[5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12]}

See also

• Win–win game
• You can't have your cake and eat it

References

1. Strawser, Michael (1996-12-31). Both/And: Reading Kierkegaard- From Irony to Edification. Fordham University Press. doi:10.1515/9780823295197. ISBN   978-0-8232-9519-7.
2. Bell, Jeffrey A. (2006). Philosophy at the edge of chaos: Gilles Deleuze and the philosophy of difference. Toronto Studies in Philosophy. Toronto: University of Toronto press. ISBN   978-0-8020-9409-4.
3. Potter, Karl H.; Loy, David (1991). "Nonduality. A Study in Comparative Philosophy". Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. 51 (3): 733. doi:10.2307/2107905. ISSN   0031-8205. JSTOR   2107905.
4. Griebel, Oliver (2019). "Nonduality-Non/duality-Many-One Duality". Integral Review: A Transdisciplinary & Transcultural Journal for New Thought, Research, & Praxis. 15 (1).
5. Smith, Wendy K.; Lewis, Marianne W. (2022). Both/and thinking: embracing creative tensions to solve your toughest problems. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business Review Press. ISBN   978-1-64782-104-3.
6. Friedman, Susan Stanford (2017). "Both/And: Critique and Discovery in the Humanities". Publications of the Modern Language Association of America. 132 (2): 344–351. doi:10.1632/pmla.2017.132.2.344. ISSN   0030-8129. S2CID   148781703.
7. Andermahr, Sonya (2018-09-15). "Both/And Aesthetics: Gender, Art, and Language in Brigid Brophy's In Transit and Ali Smith's How to Be Both". Contemporary Women's Writing. 12 (2): 248–263. doi:10.1093/cww/vpy001. ISSN   1754-1476.
8. Casile, Maureen; Hoover, Kristine F.; O'Neil, Deborah A. (2011-03-15). Millican, Juliet (ed.). "Both-and, not either-or: knowledge and service-learning". Education + Training. 53 (2/3): 129–139. doi:10.1108/00400911111115672. ISSN   0040-0912.
9. "The Secular Sacred: In between or both/and?", Social Identities Between the Sacred and the Secular, Routledge, pp. 163–178, 2016-04-01, doi:10.4324/9781315609454-20 (inactive 11 July 2025), ISBN   978-1-315-60945-4
10. Probst, Barbara (2016-03-08). "Both/and: researcher as participant in qualitative inquiry". Qualitative Research Journal. 16 (2). doi:10.1108/qrj-06-2015-0038. ISSN   1443-9883.
11. Ovadia, Jesse Salah (2013). "Accumulation with or without dispossession? A 'both/and' approach to China in Africa with reference to Angola". Review of African Political Economy. 40 (136). doi: 10.1080/03056244.2013.794724 . hdl: 10.1080/03056244.2013.794724 . ISSN   0305-6244. S2CID   154882479.
12. Thorp, H. Holden (2020-05-15). "Both/and problem in an either/or world". Science. 368 (6492): 681. Bibcode:2020Sci...368..681T. doi: 10.1126/science.abc6859 . ISSN   0036-8075. PMID   32385099.