Two directions in the complex dimension
The double look is a fundamental notion about how our mind apprehends reality. About everything are separated two approaches: 1) How was the thing constituted? 2) How does the thing appear in the context in which it is formed?
Considering everything as structured, these looks are two directions of the complex dimension: 1) The upward look (from less complex micromechanisms to the thing). 2) The downward look (from more complex observers to the thing).
At the conjunction of these two looks is the same thing, in two very different aspects:
1) For the upward look the thing is a continuity of interactions governed by rules. There are no “elements” since all individuation is itself the result of underlying interactions. The (virtual) origin does not see the results but only the process continuing.
2) For the downward look the thing is a result, a discontinuity,an individuation endowed with particular properties. Micromechanisms are also individuations. The reality of things appears as a stack of planes of existence.
Upward / ontological look
The upward look is close to the ontology of philosophers. The difference is that ontology is inaccessible. The origin of things is not knowable. It is apprehended only through proprietary representations of the mind. In other words, the top of the complex dimension simulates the micromechanisms of the base. The upward look is born in the mind and not in reality per se. It is the expression of the Real pole, the part of the mind devoted to representations of reality, to non-self. The Real pole, in science, is frequently confused with reality per se. The scientist equates his mind with the essence of things. Not. He is still an intermediary, otherwise there would never be errors and corrections in science.
Downward / epistemic / teleological look
The downward look is akin to the epistemic of philosophers, which is concerned with the ways in which we look at things. It assumes its subjectivity. But it is completely objective as experienced, identifying sensations. The downward look is the expression of the Spirit pole, the part of the mind devoted to representations of the self. Personal universe independent of that of the Real pole, variably accepted as imaginary.
As subjectivity, the downward look conveys an intention. This is how it is called teleological: there is downward causation, from more complex to less complex.
Categorical and necessary opposition
The two looks are necessarily conflicting. They look at the same sequence of states in a contradictory way. For the upward look the cause is before the result. Privileged causality. For the downward look the result is in front of the cause. Primary purpose.
The conflict between the two looks is inevitable and necessary. It is through it that the thing is not reduced to one of its aspects (which would prevent it from being fully apprehended). The thing per se is not accessible, but the double look makes it possible to identify it. Nothing is forgotten. The mind seeks on the one hand to experience itself as the thing and on the other hand to understandit. This is how it can recreate the complexity of the thing, without losing sight of what it is as an entity.