How to Break the Cycle of Repetition?

It is a simple question. Yet the meaning can be shaped depending on the way we seek answers. The cycle of repetition can be aligned with “History repeats itself”, which is a phrase often used. As I am one of the victims of my repeated actions, I always have questions; do we really understand why our actions repeat? And if we do deeply consider these questions, I believe there will be less repetitions and mistakes, while leaning towards more constructive outcomes. Yet it seems to have been believed that we don’t take either our actions seriously into consideration or something else, given what is happening in our daily lives.

Tracking The Cycle of Repetition

When I did repeat my actions, I wanted to break that cycle. It isn’t easy though. And I tried to explore beyond my limited knowledge toward the exciting literature. Firstly, I found that we rely more on reasoning rather than wisdom, which forms the cycle of repeating our mistakes under the same conditions. This idea emerged when I read “the Soul”, the first chapter of “The Debate of King Milinda”, written by (an) unknown author(s), translated and edited by Bhikkhu Pesala, around 100s BCE, based on a conversation between King Milinda and the Buddhist Monk Nagasena.

In chapter 1, King Milinda basically questions Buddhist philosophy while Nagasena explains the seven combinations of reasoning, wisdom, confidence, virtue, mindfulness, energy, and concentration, which could only help to escape from a cycle of birth. Nagasena states that “animals have reasoning but not wisdom.” This leads me to ponder: if mankind has wisdom, why will we repeat our actions daily? Why do we always make the same mistakes? For instance, despite knowing the costs of war in general, violence, and exploitation, why do we continue these actions every day? So, does this indicate a lack of the wisdom to figure it out, not to be repeated? According to Cambridge Dictionary, wisdom involves the ability to utilize “knowledge and experiences to make good decisions and judgements.” In line with that statement, it is obvious that we don't have the ability to make good decisions or judgements, which causes our actions to be repeated.

On the other hand, in a conversation with King Milinda, Monk Nagasena simplifies that wisdom as cutting the attachment off, while reasoning is defined as holding it. To clarify, doing the repetition could be said as the reasoning, and looking beyond it can be defined as the wisdom. I believe this distinction sheds light on why, when discussing Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, we often perceive the one who escapes as wise and knowledgeable. However, we may overlook our inherent biases shaped by ideology, identity, or life experiences. According to Plato’s Republic introduction section, I found that a fruitful discussion, which lays down three types of people: those driven by appetitive desires, spirited desires, and rational desires. In the explanation, appetitive desires encompass those for food, drink, sex, and money, while spirited desires seek for honor, victory, and good reputation. Finally rational desires encompass the pursuit of knowledge and truth. Given this statement, it can be concluded that the majority of us includes appetitive desires and spirited desires. Rational desires are considered less common, as we often choose the knowledge and truth based on our identity, race, and religion, rather than looking beyond these factors.

This becomes one of the reasons that I believe that breaking free from the cave isn’t necessarily wise, but rather, it is what they do afterward that matters. Because when we are often either free from poverty or being educated, we think and feel superior and pretend to know everything, especially if it can be seen by each of our individuals less or more. But why are we unable to halt this cycle? Again, why do their or our actions repeat themselves? Why do people continue making the same mistakes? Therefore, one of my answers is straightforward: the people rely more on reasoning rather than wisdom.

Secondly, I found that we are not free from the conceptual social-political construction, thereby perpetuating repetitive actions. This notion stems from reading of “The Pramana Samuccaya”, written by an Indian Buddhist philosopher Dignaga (450-540 BCE), which offers a universal definition of how mankind gains its cognition. Basically, he argues that the valid knowledge could only be obtained from our direct experiences, and inferences based on such experiences. More specifically, he asserts that perception arises through our direct experiences, which support cognition specific things or particular objects while inference is obtaining such our direct experiences, which is formed by valid knowledge to cognize universal or general things. As much as I understand, in other ways, the inference is a form of valid knowledge that makes us conclude based on our perception and previous knowledge and experiences. It means, inference is not based on direct experience or observation of cause and effect, but rather on a generalization based on our past experiences. Yet, he also argues that the perception is free from conceptual construction, a stance with which I came to disagree.

Once Aristotle insisted that “man is by nature a political animal”. Similarly, an Italian philosopher and diplomat Niccolo Machiavelli, in his work the “Prince” in 1513, argued that it is better for a political ruler to be feared than loved if only either one is a choice, but fear shouldn’t turn into hatred. He also believes if a ruler is feared, there is less likely to be overthrown by either individual opponents or the people. And he suggests that love is fickle, changeable, and unpredictable, but fear is more constant. For instance, if someone in a country murder someone, he or she is punished by the state, such as execution or imprisonment, which will make the state more trustworthy and follow orders and obedience. Furthermore, Machiavelli argues that the people are less cautious towards those who make the people to love him rather than for those who make the people to be feared. Otherwise, he also notes that love is tied by a full obligation of demands, but it is easy to be broken on every whisper of individual interest.

Given his statement, he appears to deeply understand that we can’t escape from ideology, identity, or life experiences, which I define as the conceptual social-political construction. So that, we, in our everyday life, encounter the conditions of “known knowns, known unknowns, unknown knowns and unknown unknowns”, according to Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld in February 2002. To make a simplified version of his statement, known knowns refer to something we are aware of and understand, Known and Unknown refers to something we are aware of but don’t understand, unknown know refers to something we are not aware of but understand, and finally unknown unknown refers to something that we are neither aware of nor understand. To extend this, in the case of Jet from the film “Avatar Book 1, Episode 10,” he hates the recklessness of the Fire Nation. But why do his actions mirror the brutality and carelessness like the Fire Nation soldiers, all while justifying that it is the price of freedom? What I am considering is the justification is just a justification that believes in our belief, values, and experiences. Consequently, we repeatedly engage in our actions, by providing our own justifications. Therefore, we are not liberated from the social-political constructs that influence us.

To conclude, I think by delving deeper into the roots of our actions and challenging ingrained ideologies, we can aspire to break free from this cycle and pursue more enlightened paths. Only through a shift towards prioritizing wisdom and transcending societal constructs can we hope to navigate towards a future marked by genuine progress and constructive outcomes. Therefore, my two arguments— that we are inherently rational beings and that we cannot escape from the social-political construction, shed light on why we repeat our actions under the same conditions.

How to break the Cycle of Repetition?

Personally, this is the most challenging part of my daily routine. As the saying goes, a broken clock is correct two times a day, and similarly, our beliefs are often tied to what we have known before, implying that we are all victims of the cycle of our actions.

To be continued.