We have already seen in Cart Before The Horse that there are two valid and yet incompatible definitions of Truth:
1. that which is correct;
2. that which exists (or ‘what is’).
They are incompatible because, for example, a Lie is incorrect and yet it does exist.
Those who are Type 1’s automatically create their own dialectic of truth vs lies. They champion one and resist the other. That is how their attention is focused. Scientists are by and large Type 1, as their work with the scientific method is geared towards a process of ‘distillation’ whereby facts are recursively isolated and purified from a polluted mud of falsehood and truth. In this respect, truth bears the highest value for Type 1’s. When it comes to the matter of speaking or conveying truth, the truth should speak for itself, at least to rational minds. Persuasion as a vehicle for communication is an unfortunate and unnecessary side effect of the human condition.
The Type 2’s however are not swept up in this dialectic. In not resisting the existence of lies, they see persuasion not as something bad that must be avoided, but simply for what it is. Just as one might accept the influence a stirring piece of music has over their emotions. Persuasion is an integral part of communication, and to avoid this fact would be foolish.
Having identified the distinct properties of Types 1 and 2, it should noted that the individual need not identify with one in preference over the other. Let us not deny the benefits of applied science, such as technology, for the sake of a sanitized view of truth. It is feasible that one might avail oneself of having this ‘split personality’ where the meaning of truth is applied to different situations.
The Schizophrenic is drowning in the same waters in which the Mystic is swimming with delight.
~ Joseph Campbell
Persuasion is ubiquitous, you might say it is the essence of communication (technical matters aside), even if I have to persuade you to listen to reason. Type 1 embraces logic; Type 2 gravitates towards rhetoric, accepting persuasion even knowing it is in its nature ‘spellbinding’. Just as we accept music, we come to value oratory, the art of storytelling that our ancestors reveled in. As a ritual it is fun, and full of humor and vitality. The audience knows the story is not real, but through the power of persuasion the narrator convinces them otherwise. They want to believe, they want to be persuaded. It is through persuasion that one’s perception of reality is shifted.
Rhetoric is the faculty of observing in any given moment the available means of persuasion.
Persuasion is inevitable. When someone speaks, we can learn to listen more carefully so that we can catch the flavor of the persuasion… the what is. Because of the ancestral ‘gods’ or archetypes, you could say that man is influenced by his mythos before his ethos. There is a perennial battle of sorts between the two.
Ironically, and perhaps paradoxically, the Type 1’s rely on persuasion a lot more than the Type 2’s. Scientific people must suffer the burden of proof for their rationalizations, and they must convince their peers of their views. While truth most certainly does speak for itself, the speaker must find a way to direct the attention of the listener so as to see it. Bound by their own dialectic, they are compelled to impress upon their audience that what they are saying is correct, and in doing so to remove doubt. A certain level of IQ, as well as sufficiently piqued curiosity, is required for the listener to even pay attention and keep up. It is not for everyone.
Type 2’s are not in the game of convincing others or debating, because for them there is no dialectic, no true vs false paradigm. When someone makes an assertion, they are listening carefully – not only to the idea being conveyed, but also to the persuasion. The two are inseparable, like a bird and its wings.
While rhetoric has become synonymous with trickery, the intent is not necessarily to deceive but to charm. One who has charisma has literally the divine grace to cast magical ‘charms’. It may explain why in some cultures, salesmen have no qualms about convincing you to buy their wares; they feel no shame because it is not their intention to deceive – they simply have Type 2 characteristics. These types tend to follow personal rituals, carry lucky charms, and give blessings to their customers – perhaps appealing to an archetypal merchant motif.
In the recent history of mankind, science has come on leaps and bounds, announcing itself as the latest zeitgeist spreading Type 1 doctrine throughout the educated world. And as technology takes off, mesmerizing us, the inherent quality of approximation to nature that science theory has always claimed to be has became increasingly overlooked – to the extent that the laws of nature (aka physics) became venerated over nature itself. Nowadays the default view is that nature is CAUSED BY laws of physics, and this view is taken for granted.
And so it should be noted that – if we are to agree that an approximation to truth is not the same as truth – nature is not caused by the laws of physics. An apple does not fall because of the law of gravity; gravity is the falling of the apple. The actual and the conceptual are coincidental. A physical tree does not exist because of the concept of a tree. There may be some cases, such as a bridge, where the concept does precede the actual – but the components of the bridge, the shapes, stress absorbers, etc are all tethered to reality.
The effect of believing that laws of nature are antecedent (and superior) to nature is that man develops a skill in dominating nature. Taken to its extreme, we see the pathological destruction of nature in the name of technology. There is a correlation between i) the veneration of the invisible, fixed laws of nature over the visible, dynamic reality of nature, and ii) the destruction of nature.
Where have we seen this adulation of the conceptual over the real before? Ah yes, in the Abrahamic religions where the spiritual is worshipped over the material. Much like the Type 1’s separate their truth from fiction, so do the followers of Abraham (or Ibrahim) separate spirit from matter. Matter is regarded as base, and materialists are considered as profane. The members of this cult are encouraged to set aside their material qualities and seek refuge in the spiritual.
The Type 2’s on the other hand know that spirit and matter are coincidental, and that separating them leads to certain psychosis. They were the nature venerating pagans and gnostokoi that existed before the Christian invasion of their lands and of their collective psyche. While the evidence suggests the Church ultimately lost the war with the State, the reality is that the psychosis still persists in the minds of the neo-atheists with their technology peddling, transhumanist ethos.