I am assuming you've read the previous articles on energy, elements, and the elemental triplicities. If you haven't, I recommend starting there and coming back.
The scales weigh two things. That's the central metaphor of libra being scales. Libra deals in the tensions between opposites.
Some old dead person purportedly said that there are two kinds of truths. Trivial truths are true in and of themselves, and their opposites are false. 2+2=4 is true and 2+2!=4 is false. A profound truth, however, is something that's got some degree of subjectivity and perspective to it. Competing goals are a good example of this. We "want our product to be fast, quality, and cheap". We may hold all these goals in common, even though they pose challenges for one another. A cheap comb with a simple production process that can endure 10 years of careful use might check all three boxes, even if getting there involves plenty of research and development. Another example might be the need to instill discipline and yet also independence when raising kids. Both conflict with one another, but only a fool would argue either is unnecessary. This conflict is tension, the idea that in embracing one truth, you are not free to completely disregard its competing truth. One might never perfectly bring the two truths into harmony, but perfection has a habit of evading anything real. The pursuit of the ideal with a bar(a more realistic version of the ideal) to measure the output of your efforts "good enough" is how you approach the perfect and ideal while still living in the real world. Usually this is some mix of utilitarianism and measuring some absolute standards, like "I am not going to sell a kidney" to cover the edge cases of utilitarianism.
Ite, so there's this thing where normies(adherents of liberalism in particular) worship the middle ground fallacy as a gold standard. The painfully obvious reality is if you stare at any of this stuff for more than 30 seconds you'll realize you can't just mix shit 50-50 and call it a day. Weighing truths will be handled in my article on Libra, but for right now let's assume truths of equal merit that are in tension. Here's a story from a rabbi I could have sworn I already wrote down here, but can't find:
A judge sits down and finds the jury, a baker, and a woman with children. The baker explains that the woman stole a loaf of bread from him. The woman explains that she is a single mother and stole the bread to feed her children, who would otherwise go hungry. The judge sees that he could exercise complete mercy and forgive the woman of her theft, but this would cause precident that stealing is not punished and might put the baker out of business. The judge likewise sees that he could exercise complete severity and penalize the woman, either through a fine or jail time. In either case, her children would suffer further. The judge thought long and hard, finally coming to a verdict. He turned to the jury and said "We should be ashamed at the state of the city we live in, a city where a single mother cannot feed her children. I fine myself and the jury for allowing this to happen." He then fines each member of the jury and himself a small amount that adds up to the cost of the loaf of bread and pays it to the baker.
The normie is indoctrinated from a young age to view this situation very differently, either picking pure mercy or severity. However, some breed of enlightened centrist, in their infinite wisdom, might declare that "both sides" are at fault and neglect to offer any solution whatsoever. This non-action benefits whatever the status-quo might be at the moment, such as an ongoing genocide in Gaza. If you dig past this surface contradiction, however, you can tease out the underlying mechanics. The woman was forced to steal because she lives in a society where there are no support networks, and she is violating the rule of "if you can't afford bread, you legally must starve" that may not be written out explicitly into the law where the public can see, but is nonetheless the reality of the law's rigorous application.
Hagel and Marx had stuff to say about dialectics, but I'll be honest that I haven't read what. University osmosed the concept of the two opposed truths being thesis and synthesis, and their result being a synthesis of the two. I won't claim to understand dialectical materialism, however, and will instead point you to his writings and the many people who have analyzed it. They'll do a better job teaching that stuff to you than I will.
Ok, ok, so you can understand the tension between different ideas, but this also applies to aesthetic sensibilities. When you're making art, you are cooking up an artifact that will bring about an art moment in the audience's brain. You can control the art, and you can guess about the audience's brain and how they will construct the art moment through experiencing your work. As a kid, I remember producing stories and pictures that contained a single aspirational element meant to feel a certain way. This what one might call one-note or one-dimensional. As I've gotten a chance to consume other literature and art made by skilled artists, I've come to identify tension between elements is necessary. Let's take a look at a picture pulled from furaffinity.
I just pulled this at random because it was on the front page today. In case the image dies in the future, it's of an anthropomorphic cougar man in dark clothes in a snowy environment. The mountains behind him offer a delicious contrast of black and white, and this contrast is mirrored again with the foreground of the man's dark clothing and the bright skies in the background. The creature's head resides in the top third of the painting where the most contrast can be found. Together, these details cause the image to "pop" as we look at them. This is as true with three act structures to drive tension in a plot or complex motivations to drive tension within a character arc that might span multiple episodes/chapters/books. If you want something to be interesting, offer tension. The tension of expectations against the future creates suspense. The tension of expectations against the present can create horror or comedy. Art is driven by tension of opposites, and it is Libra energy which unlocks the wielding of this tension.
Libra energy can be thought of as the simple phrase "On one hand, X, but on the other hand, Y." You might ultimately pick one, the other, neither, or both(that's a tetralemma, a powerful tool of Buddhist logic), but it's in the actual weighing that you find Libra eneregy. Anyone can close their eyes and pick. It's Libra that consider the matter from multiple angles. This sensitivity to opposites, especially when both hold truth, is a Libran sixth(or however many) sense. Use it to make decisions, perform dialectics, or to inject tension into art.