Sides , Sides.

I’ve never liked the expression pick a side. It’s not that I’m against choosing a position, but the phrase assumes there are only two sides to any given issue.

Take war, for example. When two countries are at war, the debate often centers on who is right and who is wrong. But for me, the most pressing issue is the loss of innocent lives, no matter which “side” they belong to. To those who see the world in black and white, this perspective might seem like a cop-out—an unwillingness to take a stand. However, I believe there are always more than two sides to any issue, and classical geometry agrees with me.

In Euclidean geometry, a two-sided figure does not exist because a polygon, by definition, is a closed shape with at least three sides. However, in more abstract or non-Euclidean contexts, there are some concepts that resemble two-sided figures:

1. Digon – A digon is a polygon with two sides and two vertices. In Euclidean space, it is considered degenerate because its sides must overlap. However, in spherical geometry (on curved surfaces like a sphere), a digon can exist with two distinct sides.

2. Monogon – A one-sided figure called a monogon also exists in theoretical geometry, but it is only meaningful in non-Euclidean spaces.

In standard geometry, figures need at least three sides to enclose an area, making a triangle the simplest possible polygon.

Likewise, real-world issues are rarely as simple as one side versus another. When conflicts arise—especially those driven by those in power—I grieve for the innocent lives lost, no matter where they stand. In an era of extraordinary technological advancements, we should pause and ask ourselves: Do we really need violence to solve our problems?