F. Scott Fitzgerald once said, “The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.” As a psychologist, let me tell you, that quote is the ultimate mic drop for those of us who practice what we call dialectical thinking. Basically, it’s the mental gymnastics of holding two opposing ideas without spiraling into a meltdown. A true skill, especially in today’s world, where contradictory “facts” fly at us like confetti at a parade—and we’re expected to make sense of it all without losing our grip on reality.

These days, it’s like we’re constantly being asked to choose sides. One “fact” says the sky is blue, another “fact” insists it’s green, and instead of pausing to look up and see what’s actually going on, people just pick a color based on who said it. Did your favorite social media influencer declare it blue? Cool, now it’s blue forever. Your cousin, who moonlights as a conspiracy theorist, says it’s green? Better stock up on green-sky gear. There’s no room for nuance, no time for critical thinking. We’re living in a world of instant reactions, not thoughtful reflections. And F. Scott would be shaking his head in disbelief.

But here’s the thing—holding two opposing ideas in mind without collapsing into cognitive chaos is what separates the big thinkers from the knee-jerk reactors. In psychology, dialectical thinking is about understanding that two seemingly contradictory ideas can both be true. It’s not about picking a side; it’s about integrating those ideas in a way that helps us make sense of the world in its full, messy glory. For example, can I believe in freedom of speech and still think some people should be banned from the mic? Absolutely. Do I think life can be incredibly tough and incredibly beautiful all at once? Yup, sign me up for the emotional rollercoaster.

The problem we’re dealing with now is that instead of engaging with these opposing ideas, we’re diving headfirst into tribalism. It’s not about the facts anymore; it’s about who’s stating them. Your political team said it? It’s gospel truth. The other side said it? It’s fake news. Forget the fact that maybe—just maybe—both sides have a sliver of truth that, when combined, would give us a fuller picture. Nah, that’s too much work. Easier to plant your flag and shout from the mountaintop.

So where does that leave us? Well, for one, we need to stop treating intelligence like it’s about memorizing facts and taking sides. Intelligence, real first-rate intelligence, is about being able to see the complexity of things—to acknowledge that opposing ideas can exist simultaneously and that both might have value. It’s about taking a deep breath and saying, “Okay, let’s figure this out” instead of shouting down anyone who disagrees with you.

And hey, I get it—this kind of thinking is exhausting. It’s much easier to latch onto one belief and ride it out forever. But the truth is, if we want to stay sane in this whirlwind of conflicting “facts,” we’ve got to embrace the dialectic. We’ve got to accept that things aren’t always black and white. Sometimes, the sky can be both blue and green, depending on how the light hits it. Or maybe it’s purple. Who knows? The point is, our ability to function in this world depends on our willingness to hold the contradictions without letting them tear us apart.

So, next time you’re bombarded with opposing ideas, take a page out of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s book, and remind yourself that it’s okay to live in the gray zone. Maybe that’s where the truth really is anyway—somewhere in the middle, between the blue and the green.